Rollback Home Free Help

FD-ISR/ Instantrecovery are impervious of such problems.

By the way HorizonDatasys was a reseller/distributor of its predecessor FD-ISR and actually it's little brother FD-Rescue (now called InstantRescue) was created on demand for HorizonDatasys.
Strange that you did not know of it's existence.

Panagiotis

 

Don't. FD-ISR and Rollback-RX can coexist but is like playing with fire inside a store with explosives.

Panagiotis

 

Hi pandlouk,

You are the guru on 'instant system recovery' software.... I will follow your advice, and not tempt fate.

 

In broad terms we (I hope) agree that we need to back up 1) our OS and 2) our Data.

The OS
1) changes infrequently for most people, i.e. only when they install/update/uninstall programs.
Some people have their programs 'auto update', others ask for reminders/notices and update manually.

The Data:
1) some changes frequently, such as spreadsheets, access or sql databases, e-mail, etc. or
2) some is 'fixed', such as photos, movies.

(It's good practice to keep a spreadsheet of installed programs, in chronological sequence recording when they were installed or updated. That will allow going back to the 'right point in time' if it's neccessary to restore a back up of the OS.

It's also good practice to only update programs manually, so that a backup can be made before the update and the spreadsheet can be accurately maintained.

===========================================

'Imaging' the OS is necessary:
1) to allow an image (and MBR/EFI stuff) to completely recover the OS in case of physical drive failure or to new hardware, or
2) to roll back any installs/updates i.e. uninstall cleanly. In this case, Imaging should be done just before any installs/updates, it doesn't need to be done 'all the time' IMHO.

Macrium Reflect and AX64 are very good for the first option, Raxco's IR on it's own is not quite as good but can be used, Rollback can't do this.

Raxco's IR (and it's predecessor FD-ISR), Reflect, AX64 and Rollback are all good for the second option and all take very little time.

Differences between IR vs. AX64 vs. Reflect vs. Rollback:
(This assumes that Data is kept on in a separate partition)

IR uses 'Snapshots' and 'Archives'.

A Snapshot in the IR context is a complete, bootable, copy of the OS. There should be at least two of these on the system drive (C generally named Primary and Secondary but they can be named any way you like. This takes up 'twice' the disk space needed for AX64/Reflect/Rollback. Normally the Primary is used to update the Secondary just before an install/update. Then the install/update is done in the Primary. If the results are acceptable, continue to boot to the Primary. If the results are not acceptable, boot to the Secondary and use it to restore the Primary from the Secondary, returning it to it's previous state and effectively uninstalling the unacceptable install/update.

The time to perform the update of a Snapshot is from seconds to a couple of minutes. Add a few extra minutes to do two boots when restoring a Snapshot.

An Archive in the IR context is a copy of a single Snapshot that can be used in a similar way except that it(they) must reside in a different partition(s) than the OS Snapshots, preferably on a different physical drive(s), they are non-bootable and must be restored to a Snapshot (new or old). These are useful to keep multiple version/configurations of the OS and programs at different points in time -plus- if the system drive fails physically, the OS can be fresh installed on a new drive, IR can be installed and an Archive restored to both Snapshots, but only if the Archive was on a different physical drive. This obviously takes more time, beyond installing the OS and IR, the full Archive needs to be restored and the time depends on the size of the Archive and could take tens of minutes.

AX64 and Reflect use Full (baseline- the whole C: drive at the time it's created, and would include both IR Snapshots if IR is also used) and may also use Differentials and/or Incrementals. Some people refer to these as Snapshots as well but they are not the same as the IR Snapshots. They are similar to the differences that you'd find between the IR Snapshots and Archives used by IR depending on when they were run. Depending on the frequency of creating/maintaining the Differentials/Incrementals as well as Full backups (baselines), the time to restore to a previous point may/should take from seconds to minutes. In addition, they can be used to recover a FULL image and any Differentials/Incrementals for that base line should the system drive fail physically but only if they were on a separate physical drive and the time will depend on the size of the OS/programs and could take tens of minutes. However it may be difficult to select the correct recovery point if Incrementals are used and scheduled frequently through the day at the same time as you install/update something.

Rollback can roll back programs and data to multiple points in time but cannot, on it's own, restore to a new disk if the original failed (or it gets 'confused').

========================================

Data - if it is in the same partition as the OS, then:

you need to have a separate data backup program that automatically backs up the data to a different partition, preferably with Versioning

-or-

IR, AX64, Reflect need to be (scheduled to) run (more) frequently and the size of the Full, Differential and Incrementals will therefore be larger and take longer to restore. Rollback does this automatically.

This would not be an acceptable solution to use with IR, it would require too many archives or, if you use data anchoring and an update includes modifying a Data format, Anchoring will likely cause errors when booting to an alternate snapshot which doesn't know about those changes (so don't use Anchoring!). Plus, if you don't like a new program/update and want to restore to an earlier point in time, you will/may lose changes made to your data (unless you can restore the data from a separate back up location).

Therefore Data should be in a partition separate from the OS. It can be on the same physical drive as the OS, but preferably, it's kept on a second physical drive, just in case of a primary drive failure. It should be backed up prior to an update in case there's a format change and you need to revert data as well, which is why you should only do manual updates. A separate Data backup program with Versioning is good for this situation.

================================================

My preferred configuration is:

C: a small SSD containing only the OS (a bit bigger for multiple IR snapshots if using IR)
E: a small SSD containing only actively maintained data (changes, frequently)
F: a larger SSD/HDD containing back up images of the OS and back up copies of the actively maintained data.
and
G: a very big HDD for data that 'never' changes, such as movies, and is normally offline.
H: a very big HDD which is a backup copy of G: and is normally offline.

I use Reflect for drive failure or different hardware, I run it manually, FULL only, infrequently.
I use IR(FD-ISR) for program installs/updates/testing and removal, I run it manually, when appropriate.
I use FreeFileSync to back up my data, manually, when I feel it needs to be done, it doesn't have Versioning but I have 2 online backup discs and 2 offline backup disks to make up for that.
I'm protected from a physical drive failure, I can uninstall a program that I don't like, I can recover data that might have been corrupted by a new version of my document/spreadsheet/database/'other' program.

I don't use AX64 or Rollback because I don't want the hassle of trying it/them and finding that it's not reliable on my system.

J

 

After your post I did repeat my tests, this time with a very basic Win7 64bit installation. Just added Chrome, ImgBurn and VLC to the core Win7 installation. Total size is 18.7 GB

Hardware specs:
MSI notebook bought in 2010
CPU AMD Turion x64 Dual Core 2x1.8 GHz
2 GB RAM
160 GB WD SATA HDD

Backing up the complete drive using Acronis True Image 11 (medium compression) took 10 minutes.

Creating the secondary snapshot upon installing InstantRecovery (no AV software present) took 55 minutes, IR indicated a rate of 6.4 MB/sec.


My computer setup does not have any problems, I am quite sure that it is InstantRecovery which has problems. My notebook may be slow by today's standards, but it certainly is not hopelessly outdated. It even handles the latest Win 10 builds flawlessly.

So I stand by my conclusion that InstantRecovery is slow and clumsy...


Cheers
manolito

 

I did research and we are separate companies, so all this talk of product being developed by another company and sold by us is simply a conspiracy. Facts are facts.

 

It has nothing to do with how powerfull the system is. It is related with the sata controller or the disk or the drivers. Check your bios if your disk is in IDE or ACHI mode and also update your AMD sata drivers (some versions performed very poor compared to the microsoft ones).

And I agree with you; I would never install it on a system if its speed was similar to your results.

Panagiotis

 

...and you still continue with the BS...

Conspiracy? Facts?
Here is my receipt of the FD-ISR license bought from HorizonDatasys and processed by Avangate.
~Private communication removed.~ Ron

ps. do your research better next time.

Panagiotis

 

There's no BS at all. Andrew (our developer) works for us. His software he produces, he produces for us. There is no BS, and if you could put your bias against HDS aside, you'd see that.

We are sister companies, that much has been said. Also, our products are completely independent with a different code, etc. Being that they are our sister company, and Andrew also develops for them, I can imagine some ideas make it through to the other software. However, by no means is this a 'Save As' situation and you'd best to get your facts straight first before you go ahead trashing me and the company.

Next time you want to make inflammatory remarks, find a better source.

 

... and the BS continues...

As I said/advised you previously, research better before before responding. FirstDefense-ISR Developer is Todd Lear and has nothing to do with Andrew Shen.

And slight modification/customisation, on demand signing with another certificate, do not make a product internally developed. Different code more than 99% of the code is exactly the same.

And since HorizonDatasys Employes use frequently the term sister companies, when referring to Eaz Solutions, can you please enlighten us who exactly is your parent company?
http://smallbusiness.chron.com/difference-between-subsidiary-sister-company-35043.html

As for the Bias and trashing remark. There is no such intention at least from my part; HorizonDatasys and its Employes are doing pretty good job in trashing it's name by themselves.

Panagiotis

 

HorizonDatasys history and the products that "internally developed" over the years. (since Ron wan't allow me to post any private communication with the various developers is the only way to prove who is lying and who doesn't)

1 December 2002
Clean Slate
Fortres 101
Cooler
Central Control
FulProof Security (Mac)
Cyber Snoop
http://web.archive.org/web/20021201102630/http://horizondatasys.com/

4 December 2004
Drive Vaccine
Exe Vaccine
FulProof Security
Clean Slate
http://web.archive.org/web/20041204063854/http://www.horizondatasys.com/

26 December 2005
Rollback RX
Drive Vaccine (Mac & Windows)
Exe Lockdown
Registry Vaccine
LockDown RX
http://web.archive.org/web/20051226015303/http://www.horizondatasys.com/piece.html?piece=welcome

10 December 2006
Rollback RX
Drive Vaccine
Desktop Security RX
Optimizer RX
Remote Vaccine
Fool Proof
http://web.archive.org/web/20061210141140/http://www.horizondatasys.com/167306.ihtml

2 July 2007
Rollback RX
Drive Vaccine
FirstDefense-ISR
Desktop Security RX
Net Control2
http://web.archive.org/web/20070702050217/http://www.horizondatasys.com/167306.ihtml

10 December 2007
Rollback RX
Drive Vaccine
FirstDefense-ISR Rescue
Desktop Security RX
Net Control2
http://web.archive.org/web/20071210161521/http://www.horizondatasys.com/207064.ihtml

6 January 2010
Rollback RX
Drive Vaccine
Executable Lockdown
Desktop Security RX
Net Control2
Drive Cloner RX
Data Backup RX
http://web.archive.org/web/20100106073312/http://www.horizondatasys.com/167306.ihtml

20 Deccember 2013
Rollback RX
RollBack RX Server
Drive Vaccine
Net Control2
Drive Cloner RX
http://web.archive.org/web/20131220113958/http://horizondatasys.com/en/index.aspx

17 Deccember 2014
Rollback RX
RollBack RX Server
Drive Vaccine
Net Control2
Drive Cloner RX
Reboot Restore RX
http://web.archive.org/web/20141217072849/http://horizondatasys.com/

Panagiotis

 

Very interesting Panagiotis...thank you!

 

I'm not going to bother repeating myself. We're sister companies, we don't hide that. However all of our products are internally developed, we're not a re-seller of someone else's software.

 

You are welcome Jim.

Panagiotis

 

Thanks for confirming that.

 

Quite an impressive list of internally developed products,,,,,,,no wonder deployment of upgrades takes soooooo long.

Thanks from me too Panagoitis, much appreciated.

 

Then instead of repeating yourself, tell us who is the Parent Company? of Horizondatasys and EAZ Solutions (without a parent company that owns both of them they cannot be considered sister companies). As for the comment that all your products are internally developed, I am not surprised, since HorizonDatasys is the only company (that I know) that occasionally the support personnel impersonates developer staff when they respond to tickets....
Rollback RX = Eazy Fix (developer EAZ Solution)
Drive Vaccine = Baseline Shield (developer EAZ Solution)
Reboot Restore RX = Baseline Shield (developer EAZ Solution)
http://www.eazsolution.com/
RollBack RX Server = Keriver 1click Restore Pro (developer Keriver)
Drive Cloner RX = Keriver Image (developer Keriver)
http://www.keriver.com/
Net Control2 = Net Control 2 (developer Net Software PC, previously named VAP Software)
http://www.netcontrol2.com/

ps. I wonder when your CEO is going to realise that your answers are damaging further and further the image of his company.

Panagiotis

 

Its pretty clear they don't care Panagiotis, good thing they don't control this forum too or they would shut this one down like they did the old HDS Rx forum. Now thats how you deal with criticism and complaints (all of which are clearly made by a small group of malcontents, at least according to Kurtis).

 

You are welcome bgoodman4.

I agree. For the record they shut down/eliminate their forums in almost every major release of Rollback RX.
7 -> 8 forum deleted
8 -> 8.1 forum deleted (in that forum I had created a similar knowledge base/faq with froggie's https://www.wilderssecurity.com/threads/rollback-rx-the-unofishul-faq.374977/#post-2480400 )
8.1 -> 9.x forum deleted
9.x -> 10.x forum deleted
no wonder there are so little complaints in their forums.

Panagiotis

 

Ouch..

To be fair, many companies, big and small alike, ask underlings to sometimes impersonate managers or developers when doing tech support. Been asked to do it myself.

 

I've decided to install this and try it again myself...This who owns who is all very exciting, I'm on the edge of my seat...Presidential elections and world affairs pale into insignificance.

 

I've given you an explanation on many occasions, your bias against HDS is well apparent and quite frankly I don't think people are going to worry about someone making ficticious and non-existent connections.

Facts are this: EZ Solutions is where our developer started off with, he created the various software, but over time there was a merger. Some of the software still sees updates, but it's not as updated as Horizon Data Sys products. Our products is now his full attention.

It's very likely that many of these products appear similar, because they are being made by the same developer, but the products that are developed for us are independently developed. EZ Solutions is no longer really an entity. Their software is supported, but their software is more for an end user, not so much for the corporations/schools/libraries that use our software.

 

Then I am lucky because most companies that I had to contact for support use elevation system to treat support tickets.
1st level: general support
2nd level: specialised support
3rd level: developers support

Panagiotis