Rollback RX v10.x (Home & Professional)

I asked how the statement was true. But instead you sidestepped that question and proceeded to answer as if I asked why the marketing dept. doesn't change the wording.

I just want to know how "ANY" can come to mean not all-inclusive. I'm trying to reconcile how certain instances can be excluded from "any". In this RBRX advertising scenario, "any" appears to mean "some".

By your logic, then, is it to be understood the RBRX can recover from ANY disaster, say, maybe, 50% of the time?

Or phrase it this way. RBRX can recover from [some, most] disasters..

 

But this is not true either, see Froggies Rollback RX™ - The “unOfishul” FAQ for a number of software related potential disasters that Rx cannot recover from.

You can find it here https://www.wilderssecurity.com/threads/rollback-rx-the-unofishul-faq.374977/

 

This guy is completely out to lunch. He is the most evasive customer support person I have ever experienced.

 

I would point out also, that Kurtis stated

In other words,

The advertising statements are partially false.
When people have an issue or problem, it’s not always because of their configuration.
Sometimes, it is the product itself.

I would ask if this is the case Kurtis, why the advertising does not say this,,,,or why, at least somewhere in the documentation, folks are not warned of this. This is the problem Kurtis, its not the software, it the claims made for the software.

An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure, so asking for folks to use the software blind and then ask you for help via the ticketing system when they have a problem is not the best course of action. Preventing the problem from ever happening by having informed clients is the correct way to proceed.

 

As a heads up everyone, I will be at a trade show next week from June 28th until July 2nd, with July 3rd being an observed holiday in our office. So I will be reachable only by email during that week. My email for those who don't have it is kurtis[at]horizondatasys.com

Cheers,

 

As a follow-up to the thread titled "Rollback RX vs TRIM - revisited"...

Well... I've waited one full month since clearly demonstrating to Horizon DataSys (HDS) SENIOR TECHNICAL SUPPORT on June 1st that the Windows TRIM function required to properly manage Solid State Disks DOES NOT WORK while running on a Rollback RX-enabled SSD partition. I provided a clear concise demonstration, with complete description of each step to insure no misunderstandings, and the whole process took approximately twenty minutes. At that time, Senior Tech Support agreed that TRIM was not being performed on the SSD. Since then, they have chosen not to respond as of this date.

I offered all the necessary tools needed to demonstrate this bug/anomaly/design deficiency/lack of engineering (your choice). The tool list consists of nothing more than Rollback RX (HDS supplied), Windows 8.1 OPTIMIZATION function (supplied by Microsoft), TRIMcheck (a tool for checking active TRIM on a non-Rollback enabled system), BOOTice (a tool for examining the contents of a PHYSICAL disk block) and FillDisk (a simple BATCH file used to fill the disk with a known DATA pattern). With these tools alone, non-TRIM functionality can be easily demonstrated on any TRIM capable Microsoft operating system (Windows 7sp1, all Windows 8.x systems).

I have no personal knowledge of why Horizon DataSys Senior Tech Support and/or their Rollback RX developers have failed to respond to this important need... I can only surmise at this point, and I'm really not in the business of making guesses. HDS failure to respond to this inquiry shows either a lack of interest (internal scheduling, viewed importance to the user), lack of will or lack of ability in dealing with this important issue... I don't know which of the three are applicable here but I do know that all are considered serious in relation to this product and its overall capability.

I have offered HDS all my help during this process but I feel at this point I can do no more to assist them in this investigation. They must determine what this is all about and do what's necessary to finally fix this issue, especially after almost four years of user non-functionality claims and basically non-answers (intellectual property excuses and very "colorful" answers as to why a user wouldn't really understand) from HDS in relation to those claims.

As I stated at the beginning of the referenced thread above, I am convinced that users of Solid State Disks should not be using Rollback RX to protect those volumes. Lack of a functional operating system SSD TRIM command coupled with carrying around tons of old, useless data by the SSD's Garbage Collection system is definitely detrimental to the inherent fixed lifespan of SSDs.

My personal recommendation at this time would be to avoid the use of RollBack Rx™ as a protection mechanism for any part of a Solid State Disk until such time as Horizon DataSys designs the proper method for management of Solid State Disks. In the past, Horizon DataSys has proven to have been incapable of the discovery process needed to deal with this serious SSD management issue. As a result, they have always stated that RollBack Rx™ was properly engineered to provide that important management function. This statement has been proven to be in error.

It's time for me to move on from this issue... there's lots of other much "funner" things to do (you were right, BG)

 

Not surprised re HDS but am surprised that you recommended that the TRIM thread be closed,,,,,now for sure it and its content will be lost in the archives, I am pretty sure HDS will be glad of this. Too bad as you have provided detailed test methodology and info in the now closed thread.

 

One less thorn for HDS to worry about.

 

The original thread is there and although it's closed, people following it are directed over to this existing open thread where my final post sits (and any further discussion on the issue)... it should be fine.

Well... you can only beat a dead horse for so long, and I'm really not in the business of being cruel to deceased animals.

People will eventually judge the company by their forthrightness or lack thereof and their response to issues just as you and I have... for me, anyway, it's really time to move on.

 

First tenant of a company is to admit no mistakes. Second is damage control.

 

The ignore and deny approach has worked for HDS for many years and I see no reason for them to feel a need to change given how well it has worked for them in the past.

 

hi,

just for infos; anyone observed any issues with Shadow Defender installed after RX on HDDs?

 

It should work just fine although it should create some pretty large RX snapshots if you're in protection mode for a while...

 

I never noticed any conflict between RB and SD. I used RB (along with SD for protection when on internet) for 2 years until the morning my system would not startup and I was even unable to get RB's boot-console (I'm positive I had not used SD the day before that incident when my system was working very well). In any case, that was the day I 'said goodbye' to RB but continued using SD (which has not given me any problems in the 4 years that I've been using it).

Cruise

 

yes i am aware of that , i used to use both when SD didn't protect the MBR , now that it does, i am quite suspicious , i want to obliterate the potential risks of RX "malfunctions"

happened to me once, i had to reformat all the disks and lost valuable datas... i want avoid it lol

 

HI Froggie

I have been waiting for you conclusion! I will now distance myself from HDS: but applaud your hard work for which HDS ignored,

 

I'm gone for a week and everything gets so serious

Froggie, you were told explicitly that we were testing this, and now you assume that we just stopped testing? We have not reached a definitive conclusion. So calm your horses, and rest assured, when we have something to say on the matter, we will.

Shadow Defender creates a virtual environment that's seperate from Windows itself. As RollBack is outside of Windows, if you try to take a snapshot within that virtual environment, it's likely that it wouldn't be recognized by RollBack Rx as it's within Shadow Mode (or whatever it's called).

You mean this?

Froggie may believe he's being ignored but our development team has lots to do these days, on top of testing Froggies theories. We aren't ignorant in the slightest, simply cautious. We'd rather know with 100% certainty rather than simply regurgitate what Froggie says as our own.

Ahhh good to be back

 

It's right there on our blog...

 

Following this kind of exchange for a while now, it is really getting annoying...

Obviously HDS is unable (or unwilling) to verify if the test procedure offered by Froggie to determine if Trim works or not under RBRx within one whole month. This is a test which anyone can conduct within a few hours.

Kurtis offers his usual lame excuses, can't even blame him because he gets paid to do just this.

I would really like to see Kurtis retreat from this forum because he is a marketing person and not a tech person. I believe that Wilders should have a policy to prevent companies like HDS to use (misuse) this forum as a marketing platform. Please HDS, assign a developer to answer questions on this forum. (won't happen because they only have one developer as I see it).


Cheers
manolito

 

Nope.

I get paid for a few things, but to BS is not one of my job duties.

I don't need to be here. I'm here because people were noticing that Horizon Data Sys wasn't being open and discussing issues with people on here. So for as much as people may not like what I have to say, at least I'm here communicating instead of people guessing and making wrong assumptions. I don't know which you prefer, but having the truth at least equips you with better knowledge to determine if our software is for you. If it's not, that's cool. At least you know. As Harold Innis once said, "Knowledge is Power"