Introducing AX64 Time Machine - hybrid imaging/snapshot software

Chris,

Thank you very much indeed for detailed description. We'll work on correcting this.

Isso

 

Crusher,

I'll add a little to what the others already said (thank you guys!). Basically AX64 is indeed an imaging program internally. But there are some unique features as follows:

- Ability to do both incremental backups and incremental restores
- Ability to do a restore while OS is running
- Snapshot (ISR)-like workflow. I.e. no need to select the destination files, the parent files, etc. Everything is automatic and very much resembles the Snapshot programs.
- Virtual mount of all backups at once, via Backup browser. This allows to very easily find any file or folder back in time.

The first three features are making the program very fast and similar in operation to Snapshot programs. So it looks and behaves like a snapshot program, while internally it's an imaging program.

Isso

PS: you are welcome to ask any questions, I'll try to explain how the program works internally.

 

Thank you andyman, I'm happy to hear it.

Isso

 

Hi Function, Please read BGoodman's post #2496 above which outlines everything about AX64. Bare in mind that RBRx snapshots are on the same disk as your operating system, so if you can't boot you're SOL. AX64 allows you to store your snapshots on a external HD and your Recovery media can get you back in business in a few minutes. (I know)

 

Hi Function,

The size of AX64 snapshots will be approximately the same, or smaller than Rollback RX snapshots. For speed - AX64 takes more time compared to Rollback. The reason is that the data is copied and transferred to a separate drive. This is slower, but has a great advantage - the backup can be used to recover the system in case of HDD failure or rootkit infection. I.e. you are actually making a backup each time you take a snapshot.


Isso

 

A bit of clarification here I think. Rxs snaps may appear smaller but used space is the same size, or more, as with an AX64 snap. The reason for this is that Rx will see to it that the location on the drive that the data Rx has recorded in its snap will be protected from being overwritten. That is, the space is not available to Windows until the snap has been deleted and the snapshot set defragged (and possibly a new baseline is set). AX64 on the other hand records the data that it is protecting to another drive. The space used is same as the space the data originally occupied on the protected drive. Rxs snaps are very small in themselves as they are just the hooks for the data so that if a restore is nec Rx knows where to find and read the data. However the protection of the space by Rx means that going forward, there will be less free space on the protected drive available to Windows.

What I am trying to get at here but am fumbling with, is the following. With Ax64 and Rx the space used for, or, reserved for, the snapshot is in effect, more or less, the same. It is just held differently. Rx makes the data's space UNAVAILABLE and AX64 RE-RECORDS THE DATA to another location. This of course is why Rx takes a bit less time to create a snap than AX64. All Rx is doing is locking the data's space and making a record of the data's hooks. AX64 takes a bit longer because it is actually recording the data to another location.

Where AX64 really trumps Rx in this regard is that there is no loss of free space on the protected drive as is the case with Rx. This is because the snapshot created by AX64 is on an external drive (or partition). If you delete data from the AX64 protected drive that space becomes immediately available to Windows. In Rxs case this does not happen.

I hope this makes some sense and if someone could put it in proper computer terminology that would be great.

 

Ah, I forgot that. But that's OK, the size of the full backup + incrementals was already very big.

Oh, BTW, when AX64TM was uninstalled, it solved another issue I had on my XP Pro SP3 PC : I couldn't eject properly the external HDD on which snapshot were taken. It was always locked by the system, even if AX64TM GUI was not running. When uninstalled, the ejection mechanism works again.

 

Hello, I consider buying this software, but let me get this straight

so, if my boot brokes (virus or anything else), I can recover only the baseline? What if after the baseline I took 5 snapshots? I won't be able to recover 5th snapshot then? Only the baseline?

To be clear, let me put it this way, say it is my structure of usage AX64:

baseline_1
--snap1_1
--snap1_2
--snap1_3
baseline_2
--snap2_1
--snap2_2
--snap2_3
--snap2_4
--snap2_5

Will I be able to recover baseline_2 and then --snap2_5?

 

You can recover to anywhere you want (baseline or snapshot). Afterwards it will continue to work as normal.

Panagiotis

 

Thanks you

 

I am a previous long time user of RRX (since 7) and current registered user of AX64.
My first impression of AX64 was I did not like the boot disc idea over RRX’s boot-time console.
The more I thought about that, the more I changed my mind.
My biggest issue with RRX was the need to modify the MBR to allow the RRX’s boot-time console to load before the OS. When this goes bad, it is catastrophic.
Now that I have used AX64 and thought more about the differences between these programs, I have done a 180.
With AX64, if the OS refuses to boot, all I have to do is pop in the disc, boot to the backup menu, and install the backup.
Previously, I added my name to the list of those who want to add “boot-time console to take and restore shapshots before windows launches” as a future option.
The more I think about this, the more I do not like that idea.
Wouldn’t this require messing with the MBR? If it does, I think it is foolish to include this in AX64.
AX64 is so simple and safe compared to RRX. I would not recommend changing that just to get a boot-time console.
Am I missing something?

 

Well said. I too originally wanted a boot time console until I realized it would mess with the MBR. I don't want another RBRx. Lets keep it simple.

 

I would like the possibility of taking a snap before rolling back. If you were not able to boot into Windows you could not do this as things stand now. I feel that the ability of a user to create a pre-revert snap in order to recover files made after the most recent regular snapshot would be important to many users.

Regarding the MBR thing this is not nec so. In Rxs case there was no external media so it had to be loaded from the PC before Windows. With the recovery disk this would not be nec. Many (most?) imaging programs allow you to do a cold image and I doubt they mess with the MBR. All that is needed is for the PC to recognize that a recovery disk is in place and to load that.

 

I came to the same conclusion. In my case, I have a cheap USB key acting as my recovery media. Boots much faster than a CD. I still have it on DVD stashed safely as backup, though.

The vast majority of the time, I restore from a snapshot straight from within Windows. It is very rare that I have to resort to the recovery media unless I want to do a complete full image recovery.

I can gladly live without a boot time recovery console.

 

That is certainly the biggest negative to using Rollback or it's clones.

I've really warmed to AX64 and the way that a recovery from hardware failure isn't a complete nightmare.

Did I read here that AX64 allows recovery to dis-similar hardware,or that feature is planned in future?

 

It's not in the product yet. However, I have done two restores to new hardware and both Win7 and Win8 just adapted fine to the new computers. I'm not sure if that feature is as critical today as it was before.

 

Masterblaster,

No worries, the boot console will not modify the MBR.

Isso

 

MerleOne,

Sournds a bit strange to me. Normally the drive would be busy only when a backup or merge takes place. Are you sure it was locked even when AX64 wasn't running? Please re-check as I really don't see any way AX64 can cause that if it's not working. Please let me know the results. Thank you

Isso

 

bgoodman,

We do have the plans to add "snapshot before restore" feature, I'm just not sure when it will be implemented, but it shouldn't take much time.
And you are right about the MBR - a lot of imaging programs do the restore without modifying the MBR, so will we.

Isso

 

Marc,

You are right, with Windows 7 and 8 it's not really needed (especially 8 seems to be really good to adapt to any hardware). Still we have plans to add it hardware independent restore.

Isso

 

I do not see the point of such feature, if you allow as to take a snapshot from external media. A user only has to perform an incremental backup and then proceed to restoring in another one.

That feature was/is very important for RollbackRX because of it's functionality and since a user cannot access RBRX snapshots, apart from the baseline, from outside RBRX they were forced to implement it, so that a user could boot to another snapshot and retrieve the missing files.

But in a normal situation where the OS cannot be started the only thing that a user has to do is to boot from external media and copy paste those files. A file explorer/browser in the wim is much more important for this than a backup before restore. For retrieving a few mbs or even gbs of files one would have to wait for a full offline incremental snapshot?

Panagiotis

 

Agreed that Win 7 (haven't used 8 ) does adapt very well,but it's a handy feature just in case.

 

I totally agree...


Cheers
manolito

 

For those still on the fence re AX64 its much faster than any other imaging program I have tried. I just installed it on a Win 7 64 bit PC and did a baseline. It took just under 30 min to backup 128 gigs (and I was using the PC during the process). Yesterday I did an image with Drive Cloner on the same PC and it took just under an hour to complete. I have used both DC & Paragon on this PC and backup times are close with Paragon being a bit faster but AX64 blows them both out of the water.

By the way the 128 gigs were backed up in 86 gigs of space.

 

Let me share with you my first expierience about AX64. I'm pretty sure it is nothing new for members who already use it but I'm so impressed that I feel I should spread it
Few hours ago I installed trial version on my laptop and took a first snapshot - baseline actually. It took ~15 minutes, 16,5 GB C drive - but please keep in mind it is an old laptop. Anyway it is not about the time. After this - while I was working with my computer, there was power failure (it really never happens, but this time it did). After restoring electricity my laptop booted, but there were some problems with loading files I guess - neither in normal, nor safe mode Windows could start. So I booted from CD (made just after I've installed AX64) and restored my working OS. What can I say - WELL DONE! You do very good job!

And now, on another note. We assume, that we have baseline, snapshot1, snapshot2, snapshot3... can we delete snapshot2, and will it be possible to restore OS from snapshot3?