RollbackRx8.1 do it all or stay with Returnil1.7+RollbackRx8.1

i'm planning to do maintenance of my laptop ....after almost 7mos. of trying Returnil 1.7, i'm thinking of removing it since i have RollbackRx8.1 which i can configure to rollback to previous snapshot after restarting the pc.


my question is, is it really ok to say goodbye to Returnil and let RolbackRx8.1 do the cleaning after the restart?

thanks in advance!

 

This thread doesn't really belong in this subforum and will probably be moved.

Returnil has a few shortcomings :
1. it doesn't allow to test reboot-softwares and you can't get rid of them either.
2. it has no multiple snapshots/archives.
If you put that aside you have a good boot-to-restore solution.

RollbackRx doesn't have these shortcomings, so RBRx is in theory better than Returnil regarding possibilities.
I'm not going to recommend RBRx, I leave that up to happy RBRx-users.

 

thanks erik....

 

I think it depends on what you like to do on your computer. If you live a bit dangerously then it might be best to leave returnil on. Rollback rx isn't bulletproof and can easily be corrupted by malware.

 

AFAIK only 4 ISR-software can handle reboot-softwares : FDISR (terminated), FDISR Rescue, RollbackRx+clones and ShadowUser.

Since most users like to try new stuff, you have to find a solution to restore your system immediately, when something goes wrong and there are several complete solutions to do this, but Returnil is certainly not a complete solution.

Installing and uninstalling softwares without a decent solution, creates garbage on your computer and after six months your system is a complete mess, especially Windows folders, its registry and certain folders under C:\Documents and Settings.

 

I think no. there are not only 4, in fact, there are many indeed

Holding changes after reboot is a very very old technology as I know, you even can find it in 1993 since DOS time.

It needs to modufy the MBR to load their engine as early as the BIOS load the boot loader, then modify the BIOS interrupt such as Int 13, Int 15, int 20 to hold all the disk access operation.

That is becasue there are many chance to acces the changes that holded in the disk before the Windows drivers are loaded.

There are many limitations in this technology. Such as

the cache size, cache mode,
the MAX 4GB pointer in real mode issue.
the buffer overflow issue,
the checkdisk/defrag scheduler issue,
the compatibility with boot loader,
the compatibility with disk encryption ,
the int 13 problem in large disk and new disk.
the cd/dvd boot issue.
the multi-disk boot issue.
the driver load order issue.
the BSOD dump issue.
the pagefile attack issue.
the hiberation issue.

the most danger comes from the developing team I think. if there is a small point error in the code, there will be a disaster for the whole changes saved in the disk.

If you backup the system to an image with Ghost/ATI, I think you will trust the image very well. but if you hold the changes after a week with ISR. are you sure the data are safe enough? I think even the vendor also can not tell you a sure answer.

 

Returnil is a relatively inconspicuous app.which does no harm,doesnt seem to cause any conflicts and is lightweight,as long as the virtual drive isnt enabled.

Rollback is an ISR,whilst Returnil is a virtualizer,so there is no similarity between the two,their functions do not overlap.

As you obviously have happily used both,cant see any advantage in deleting either

 

Not all ISR-softwares need to modify the MBR, FDISR uses the PBR = Partition Boot Record (FDISR is brilliant, not like the rest)

BTW How many ISR-softwares do you know, that can handle reboot-softwares ?

 

personally I'd keep Returnil and ditch rollback. Rollback has proven very easy to corrupt in use for me.

 

The title says "Returnil1.7+RollbackRx8.1". Is that even possible ?

 

So why is this an advantage?

The MBR can be restored-not always the case with the PBR.

 

Dunno, I'm not the expert.
I never restore MBR or PBR. I restore an image, works every time.

 

Also all the ISRs I have tried can handle reboots,even Windows Systems Restore!!

As they are at that stage your current OS,this should be obvious.

Returnil IS NOT an ISR, neither is ShadowUser-they are virtualizers.

 

SP give options to restore MBR's.

 

Yes I know and I would never use it. It doesn't fit in my total recovery procedure.

 

ShadowUser can handle reboot-softwares, Returnil and DeepFreeze not.
Try to install the trial version of AE, while Returnil = ON and you will see what happen.
Is that so important to you, ISR or virtualization ? I look at the final result, functions, possibilities, whatever except the technical stuff.
The average user isn't interested either how a program works behind the screens.

 

I think most of us by now know which virtualizers are capable of handling software testing which requires rebooting,but this is not the issue.

It is important to try to be accurate and relevant,dont you agree?
Or can we say anything we like.
Nothing technical about that, is there?
And what is so wrong with "technical stuff"?

The purposes and usage ,or as you say "the final result, functions, possibilities"between virtualizers and ISRs are completely different.

A virtualizer allows you to "freeze" the OS partition .
Once in this frozen state any file changes made to the partition during this period will generally only be temporarily stored -a virtual curtain is thrown over the OS.

But once the virtualisation is removed,the original OS and system partition remains-it is impossible to change this original system partition using virtualization.

With ISRs, as you should know because you are constantly referring to FDISR,which is typical-the system partition can be changed on demand to a different state-even to an alternative OS.

Images or snapshots of the partition can be changed at will as required-can virtualizers do this? of course not.

ISRs are like backup tools of the first resort -to guard against general faults,corruptions, malware,hardware failures to some extent(A FDISR archive on another disk),or even for archiving images/snapshots of different partitions for specialised purposes,games etc.

Virtualizers cannot do any more than protect against web based malware.

Getting back to the OP,as I said Rollback and Returnil serve two different purposes,they complement each other,so unless there were some problems,why shouldnt both be kept?

 

Did you test this yourself or do you just assume ?
Not an issue ? That is one of the main reasons, why I don't use them.
If I would use them, I have to use an additional software on my computer to do that job.
You don't have to explain how these softwares work, I use them 2 years already.

 

I dont assume -have run everything we discussed,but not quite sure what you are talking about

But as I said this is not the issue -its all about accuracy and lack of it !!

 

Just install AE with Returnil on board and you will know about what I'm talking. A good exercise for you.

 

Cant quite see the relevance of the compatability of AE and Returnil to either the OPs question or the broad issues we are discussing.

Whats that got to do with a discussion about the differences between ISRs and Virtualizers one one hand and Returnil and Rollback on the other-absolutely nothing at all.

Can we keep on topic.

 

Just don't tell the OP, that Returnil can handle reboot-softwares, because it isn't true.
After all he has to make a choice between Returnil and RollbackRx.

 

Why would I make a statement like that when we all know it isnt true,as you put it-really dont understand what you are talking about

 

Does the OP know or do you assume he knows ? That's why I told him in my first post.

 

Erik,

You are the only one raising and harping on this point in this thread and elsewhere and you haven't even taken the time to verify that it is a relevant point. Since the original question focused on "do the cleaning after the restart?", there's a good chance that this particular feature is not even relevant, but if you are going to raise unmentioned points, at least take the time to verify that they are germane to the thread.

Furthermore, don't you believe that a user contemplating a change after 7 months of usage has at least a passing clue of the basic feature set of the products involved?

Blue