Shadow Protect problems

After all the glowing reports here of SP I requested a download.

All went well until it rebooted after install and got a BSOD. The culprit was named as ousb2hub.sys. This is produced by "OrangeWare Corporation". Don't remember when or where this installed.

If I disconnect my USB drive it will then boot up, but immediately crashes as soon as I plug it in again.

I thought it might be ATI interferring so uninstalled it but it made no difference

I am running this in 2k SP4

Anyone any ideas on this please?

 

Thanks Peter

I will have a search and see if I can find an update for that file. Seems it is quite a common problem in other instances. Could not see any reference to problems on the SP forum but will post if I cannot find anything.

 

I went through the Asus site and managed to find an updated USB driver and that seems to have solved the problem.

I did an image restore and was surprised it was not quicker. Although it wrote reasonably quickly, the process of getting into the restore took at least as long as ATI.

 

The problem may be the USB drive.

Is there any other way you can connect up-ideally the fastest is eSATA-check your disk-or even straight IDE would be better than USB.

Using eSATA,my backup speed can go as high as 75mb/s(astounding) with the rescue disk,but the restore is slower,from memory about 45mb/s.
This is with a fast computer,so its all relative,but everything should be fast.

 

Thats right, in my case to get to the first recovery screen take almost as long as to do a backup or restore.

Boot to recovery takes 2.59 min. Backup takes 3.10 min. data 14 gig.

 

Yes-tried that yesterday-the Linux disc wouldnt function effectively-quoting a backup time of 2 hours-the WinPE based disk took 15 minutes-so sooner or later its going to be similar to the SP disk.
BTW my time is 2 minutes for B to R.

 

When i tried it last time, on my system imaging was marginally quicker than ATI( I imaged system partition to non-OS partition, so no external drive was involved).

 

You are talking about what? ATI?

 

Yes-even though I am/was a long time ATI user,I find a BartPE disk or similar essential,as for some unkown reason the Linux recovery disk will just not work or give incredibly slow results,at times.

I would say the boot time of the SP disk and the WinPE are similar,probably the SP one is faster, especially compared to ones like Ultimate etc which are loaded with apps.

 

When I tried Eaz Fix I did seem a lot quicker to get into its program but unfortunately then crashed so I don't know the true outcome.

In a way ATI is quicker. Although is uses Linux, all the selection is done within Windows so you can then leave it to get on with it and do something else. The others, SP as well, you have to wait around to boot to CD, wait for it to load, do its stuff, then remove the CD before booting again.

 

No it is not the writing speed I am querying, although I know using a USB drive is slower. It was getting the program loaded so that you can select the image to restore that I was commenting on.

 

Peter is right.
You can indeed restore a system HDD, using ATI under Windows, I've done this myself many times as an ex-ATI-user.
But when your system HDD is so corrupted and you can't even get to Windows, your ATI under Windows is useless and you will need your ATI Recovery CD to restore your system.
You always must have the worst scenarios in mind, when you design a backup plan, even when it happens very rare like a HDD crash.

What happens when your Recovery CD doesn't work anymore, when you need it the most ? This means that you need at least one double of your Recovery CD, that has been tested. I have such extra CD's because I have only ONE computer. It's difficult to create such CD's when your system is down completely.

I also have all my basic images on DVD, in case my external backup HDD crashes.

 

We are looking from different perspectives Pete. You have FD to use as your baseline. I can use ATI for the same thing but takes longer. In both ATI and SP if you have a trashed system you have to use the rescue disk and there is very little differnce in perceived time between the two taking the loading of the program into account.

Very simple to reset MBR in ATI and can be set at the same time if needed but find it better to reset first, but that is seconds.

Since I keep my data separately that is not an issue with me. In both programs that can be restored within Win.

I am really going round in circles with these ISR programs. All have good and bad points. Then I wonder if I have already got the system that works for me

 

Image Backup is a MUST have. ISR-software is pure LUXURY, you don't need it.
If I ever have to choose between ShadowProtect and FDISR, I ditch FDISR immediately without hesitation and keep SP, although FDISR does alot more for me than SP.

 

Totally agree with you Eric. Don't know enough about SP at the moment but at first look it doesn't look much more that ATI bearing in mind that ATI so far has not let me down. Had to uninstall SP for the moment as it conflicts with another program which we are hoping for a fix.

 

I worked with ATI more than a year, it never let me down. If it works for you, keep it. Image Backup in general is more reliable than ISR-softwares, because backup/restore needs only 3 things : Recovery CD, an external HDD and an Image and those are constantly off-line. Nothing can go wrong.
ISR-softwares are more vulnerable, because they are always on-line and confronted with new softwares, malware, etc.
My FDISR failed 4 times, ATI and SP never failed.

 

Have you downloaded the latest update, version 3.1?

I also yse Windoze 2000 SP4.

I was able to install the original SP 3.0, but th GUI would not load.

I downloaded SP 3.1 a week or so ago, but have not yet had a chance to try the critter.

Do not install on an OS that already has an image backup program.
I saw conflicts between Ghost 10 and TI 9.
Suspect that there would also be conflicts with other critters of that ilk.

 

Thanks

The initial problem was an out of date USB driver. The update fixed that particular problem

 

You are right but this feature gives home user a lot of liberty. I restore my system partition about once in a month and don,t like to look for the recovery CD. I don,t need to carry the CD even if I am outside. I really like this feature. I have my iamges even on non-OS drive, so don,t need an external disk as well.

It,s rare that my system is trashed to the extent that I can,t restore from within windows. Hardware failure is far too rare.( Sure for that scenario, I will need recovery CD and/ or external disk).

 

It was very much possible to develop FDISR with built-in imaging support and recovery CD etc etc. Alaas, they never cared about these features, otherwise one will not need two software, FDISR would have been sufficient for both imaging and instant recovery.

 

You are right about that, but FDISR's development was already frozen since I bought it in March 2006, except a few changes, like winVISTA compatibility and PBR instead of MBR, but never new features or improving of features, although the wishlist was big enough and now it's terminated. Pffft.

 

FDISR of course is handicapped by not having a recovery CD,but if an archive is stored on another disk,it should theoretically be possible to use that as a recovery image,once you are able to access it and set up a base for FDISR.