Introducing AX64 Time Machine - hybrid imaging/snapshot software

I think many computers (particularly notebooks) nowadays come with more than 1 partition (commonly there are 2 partitions, for example my 2 Asus laptops). Even its factory recovery defaulted at 2 partitions (system & data).
So for a complete "foolproof" backup solution, especially for normal ordinary folks, a software may need to identify how many partitions are there, and back all them up.

And don't forget the latest (and the 2nd latest ) Windows support, which is still officially uncertain (sometimes their web says that 8.1 isn't supported, then other times it says supported, and yet people who tried it says that it might be supported, but not for creating its bootable media; and then others said that you just need to copy & paste some Windows files )
Definitely not good for ordinary folks

 

As to the first part of your comment I bow to your position as I only know what I have experienced (my own laptop - 1 year old and on the high end - and the various desktops and older laptops my friends have).

As to the 2nd part thats exactly why the latest version of AX64 is a beta. Its not quite ready for prime time because of the issue with 8.1. Froggie has suggested that a fix for this problem is a couple of weeks away. Prior to the surprise thrown at developers by MS with 8.1 (in this case the elimination of files needed to create the recovery media) AX64 media creation worked like a charm.

Anyway all I intended was to point out that AX64 has a huge potential market. I have no desire to debate the merits of the program. I like it and so do many others. It would be surprising if everyone loved it and there are some posting that are in that last category. I have no issue with that,,,,they certainly are entitled to their opinions.

 

Well, I've already had the OS and programs installed and set up according to my habit, so basically it's totally ready for use, no setting up and data transfer needed once restored, because my docs and others files are in separate partition. It's like a snapshot at its bast state, so why not go back to it if problems occur?

Yes AX64 is easy to use, but I don't need the extra unique feature - I do not need to restore my system that often until somehow I broke it, which rarely happened.

Yes ppl reported many problems with Acronis, however I think its because of the huge market share. Think about this, every ppl who bought a WD or Seagate drive will get a copy of Acronis for free and that's most likely the first imaging software they ever met, therefore they most likely will use it. Because of this, more problems will be reported and fixed, and overtime the product is just getting more and more reliable.

I only use the boot USB of Acronis TI to do cold imaging and restore, which gets the job done every time I need it. I don't like an imaging software sitting in my system all the time. Plus the additional "fine-tune-restore" seen in AX64 is not necessary for me.

Anyway, you are certainly entitled to your opinion. Let's come back this thread one or two years later and see how it develops.

 

Opinions indeed, but I don't see how you can justify AX64 being harder to use than traditional disk imaging for average users. It is logically simpler to use, just leave it running in the background and restore whenever you want.

It's simply more efficient and timesaving than setting up the complex options of traditional disk imaging and waiting for them to finish. Plus, the learning curve is minimal. I just don't see your arguments backed up by anything worthy other than AX64's late beta quality for its hot restore (not cold).

 

LOL

did you even read my post? where did I say AX64 is hard to use? I said "Yes AX64 is easy to use, but I don't need the extra unique feature". The main point for me is not everyone need to take a snapshot of the system every one or a few hours. That sounds crazy to me .

I want a system that are running clean and efficient, without an imaging program running in the background constantly taking snapshots. I prefer to use a boot CD/USB to make a clean image and only restore it when necessary. What I want is that I can control when and how to restore, not being controlled by a program.

 

It is not mandatory that the program be running in the background and that snaps be taken hourly. All you need to do to prevent this is not put a tick in the auto snap box. You now can take quick snaps at your discretion (manually) be it daily, weekly or just before doing a Windows update. Seems to me that the best of both worlds is present in AX64.......with the limiting factor, it would appear, being the multi-partition thing. It will be interesting to see how AX64 & RealCopy develop over the next few years, I for one am optimistic (and hopeful).

 

Yeah fair enough, I see your points - they are good points.

However I still prefer offline cold imaging from a boot media, which AX64 could not currently do; Also as you mentioned, it could not do multiple partitions yet, which is a big concern for me, since all my computers are now UEFI with secure boot, therefore for my OS, there are at least 4 partitions including C drive. I know only C drive is essential, however I still backup all 4 partitions just in case something goes wrong.

 

So your argument has drifted from average computer users to simply users like yourself. Most people in my opinion would not want the latest backup to be out-of-date and are too lazy to do it manually.

When and how to restore aren't being controlled by the program at all, nor is backup outside of your control. The point is, you were speaking a bit out of line when you claimed AX64 won't be successful based on your own usage as someone who's not an average computer user.

 

let's see what will happen in 1-2 years.

The point is, the OS is the cleanest when it was just installed and immediately updated. It's the best time to make an image because you know it's clean and working, with no virus/trojans (not absolute, but the most likely as compared a OS after half a year of usage). When something went wrong, for example, you suspect your OS was infected, which image do you want to restore? With AX64, you are not sure, because AX64 take more images over time and its very hard to find out when the virus infection happened.

The point of restore with previous image is to make sure it's clean and working. With traditional imaging app I can achieve this easily because that's what these type of apps were designed for. Most OEM image (restore to factory state) was taken right after OS installation/deployment.

Anyway, like I said, we both have different opinions, time will tell who is more accurate in predicting. Yes AX64 is simple to use, powerful but it appears to have missed an important point of imaging/restoring of OS - preventing virus infection by wiping out the old bits with known good bits.

 

Not at all, there is nothing stopping you from creating a snap right after you install your OS and saving it either as part of a chain or as a separate file that can be accessed at some indeterminate date in the future.

AS I said above AX64 has (almost) the best of both worlds and its very simple to use. When you stop to think about it Isso has created an amazingly powerful program that is extremely simple to use (and lets not forget fast). Thats why it is/will be attractive for noobs, geeks and many of those in between.

 

Yeah I did realize that I can also create a snapshot right after OS installation. However, it's then the same as traditional imaging programs because the first snapshot is almost certainly the cleanest of all. So If I were to restore an image after some sort of virus infection, even only a possible infection, I'd rather go back to the first image. Of course the first image was OS + all installed programs and all the setup and customization had been done before imaging.

In this case, as I mentioned in my earlier posts, the unique ability of AX64 taking new snapshots won't be meaningful to me, so I'd rather stick with what I am already used to.

Yeah I agree, newbies will find AX64 to be easier to use. Only time will tell if AX64 will be well received by the market.

 

I agree this is quite a big concern, particularly for common folks with new Windows machine.

As Mr Goodman mentioned, you can disable auto-backup.
On the other hand, if you selectively & carefully do manual backups, with detailed description, then AX64 offers you the ability to restore to more recent backups (you may call it educated & informed guesses), if you wish to.

AX64 doesn't do partial recovery, it does full recovery but with "differential flavor"
(unless it's a cold recovery)

 

This is ok if your computer never change's, but most user's keep their system up to date with windows's updates, change settting's and try various programs over time. Going back to the first image in my case would be a nightmare, much prefer to revert to the daily backup I take with time machine.

 

What you quoted is just a tiny part of my points. I am afraid you don't see other important points me and others contributed during the discussion (i.e., pros and cons of AX64 vs other traditional imaging programs), which in my opinion is informative and beneficial for forum members. They would make more informed choice.

If you don't like my criticism of AX64, it's not professional at all for you as a moderator of this forum to ask me to leave, considering I did not post anything against the rules of this forum. Regular members can ask me to leave this thread if they don't like my opinion, but not you as a moderator.

I know you are pro AX64. If you are so narrow-minded that you can not stand a different opinion with valid arguments, sure I can leave this forum. It's your call.

 

I'm sure Peter was in fact replying to you in his capacity as a regular member.

Otherwise his 'reply' might have taken a different form ;-)

 

I agree that your posts are of value in that they enable various points, pro & con, to be addressed and I thought each of your concerns had been addressed with the important exception of multi-partition support for which you raise a valid concern.

I also do not see Peters post as anything other than a member saying that if you don't like the program forget about it. I don't see anything remotely resembling a mod telling a member to leave the forum.

 

Thanks taotoo and bgoodman4!
I am not a native English speaker so I might have misunderstood Peter. Anyway if I misunderstood him please forgive me.

 

I would like to know more about the program (not much info, like a help file). If I have it set to do hourly backups, wont they grow to the point of no more room on my external hard-drive? I thought I read some where it gets rid or merges old back-ups after a certain time.

If I backup manually do I have to delete the excess manually, or will AX64 take care of this?

 

Seven64, here's their description of Automatic Merging.

If you backup MANUALLY and want to eliminate irrelevant manual snapshots (incrementals), just use the DELETE function from their Backup Browser window (not from Windows Explorer). This function performs the MERGE for you. The Automatic Merging mode will not affect manual snapshots.

 

In the context of AX64, a user could install that program and take the first snapshot of the 'clean' system. Each month they could boot into that and update the OS then create a new snap with the new updates included, and so on each time, thereby always having a clean, updated OS to fall back on if need be. It's not in the bounds of impossibility to achieve, but you have to start with a clean, fresh install of Windows first.

 

Thanks, that was what I was looking for.

Does that use a lot of resources, leaving it on all the time?

Could a virus or male-ware infect past snap-shots (entire external drive)? My fear of leaving the drive plugged in all the time.

 

I have auto snap enabled and have not found any impact from this on resources or performance.

I you are concerned about malware I would recommend a program called AppGuard. You can find out more about it here http://www.blueridge.com/index.php/products/appguard/consumer and here http://download.cnet.com/AppGuard/3000-2239_4-10912598.html I have been using it for a number of years (and in conjunction with AX64) and I find it to be excellent. Just remember to lower the protection level from high to medium if you are doing a hot restore with AX64. Failing to do so will, on occasion, cause the hot restore to fail. If this happens you will need to use the recovery media and do a cold restore (which has never failed me).

 

I'm not answering your questions, since I don't use auto-snap (for my own various considerations).
However, if you are worry about those things, you can discipline yourself to remember to make a manual backup regularly (once a day or twice a week etc., depends on your circumstances) & after making important changes to your system.
This is what I'm doing, and so far this suits me well. Of course, by doing this then I missed the more thorough security of having hourly snaps.

Additional edit:
I backup my data partition (where my documents & personal files are) using another file-level backup method, automatically.
I'm still loking forward to multi-partition capability of AX64 (or its brother/sister ).

 

At the risk of cluttering up this thread even more I must say that I too would love it if AX64 would turn into a multi-partition backup tool. It's a great tool as it is but it would be fantastic with multiple partitions capability which I think could be implemented in a way to still maintain its simplicity.

I just want to add another vote for multiple partitions for Isso to see.