Introducing AX64 Time Machine - hybrid imaging/snapshot software

This issue is widely known, do a google search and you will find confirmation of this and no doubt an explanation.

 

Yes, RX is indeed faster but AX64 avoids many if not all of the issues that Rx is subject to. The few min difference in a hot restore is, IMO, well worth not having to deal/worry about those Rx & HDS related issues.

 

Without being overly techincal (which I'm not capable of, anyway),

a. For the same spec USB "hole" (e.g. front USB 2 and back USB 2): back is more reliable. Why? I don't know. Maybe because the back is directly from the motherboard itself?

b. Between USB 2 and USB 3, USB 3 should has a faster data rate (otherwise, what's the point? ), however, some software and/or hardware configurations might have trouble recognizing things connected to a USB 3 port.

I have one old desktop computer with 4 USB 2 ports at the front, and sometimes those 4 ports behave differently (i.e. a flashdisc isn't detected in port A, but it is in port B; etc.).
Back ports don't have this amazing "feature."

For laptops, older machines might have different outcomes between ports (probably because of the old age). The same with newer but crappier machines.

Probably has to do with electrical voltage?

 

Mr. Goodman, you beat me to it.

Must be because of interdimensional distance...

 

Re: Which Issue?

Which issue is widely known?

 

Re: Which Issue?

USB's, particularly USB 3

 

Re: Which Issue?

As in... it is unreliable?

 

Re: Which Issue?

Why don't you just do what Mr. Goodman has suggested?
Then you can have your own conclusion

 

Re: Which Issue?

Yes, USB3 is unreliable for image restoring.

Here is a link for this issue

https://www.google.ca/search?num=10...B3 port unreliable image restoration&safe=off

An easy way to test this issue when the storage drive is internal is to (if you have one) take a USB 3 external drive Plug it into the USB 2 port and use it for the storage media. Then, if you can do restores reliably you know that there is a problem with the internal drive.

 

I am trying to catch up here, can somebody please say whether the Recovery Media (CD) issue is in fact solved providing the images are stored on a USB2 drive and not USB3?
I ask because mine are stored on USB3 external drive and I do not have a USB2 drive to test, the plugs are different; or is it the case that the test can be done by plugging the USB3 drive into a USB2 socket?
So, is it the socket or the drive that is the issue, I don't want to mess anything up?
Thanks

 

Actually, they're both connected directly to a mainboard interface... the front ones need a cable to get from the mainboard to the front receptacles (could be flakier, I guess).

BINGO, ImpMan! The big issue here usually lies with drivers. These interfaces are fairly new and all kinds of people (usually mainboard manufactures) have different drivers to use their specific hardware. This is the main reason most external BOOT media is having problems with these types of interfaces... where do they get the drivers they need for that specific hardware configuration.

Microsloth has some generic drivers it tries to use, but even those don't work on all hardware configurations. It'll take a while for all this to settle. USB3 under the built OS usually works well, mainly due to the fact that either the Microsloth driver works or supplied manufacturer drivers are used during the build. Since BOOT media is not built with all this knowledge, its failure rate is pretty high (depending on the application).

 

I hope this is relevant to the latest issue if I am understanding things correctly. Please see my post number 6344 here: https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?p=2321824&highlight=supported#post2321824

Acadia

 

I am surprised how ridiculous this whole USB3 thing is going. There is problem with USB3 simply because the recovery media does not contain the proper USB3 driver, or PE4/5 is not properly implemented.

MS added native and full USB3 support ever since PE4.0 (please note not just in the full windows 8 OS but also PE4) back in 2012. So if a recovery media can properly implement PE4 or PE5, then there is no issue with USB3 - it's just a data transfer interface, no magic here. If there is problems, it's just an indication of lousy programming skills. It's 2014 now, not 2011, so blaming lack of driver for the 2 years old "new" interface does not make any sense.

 

It is very relevant, Acadia. If, indeed, W8.1 has the best USB3 support available, then using any WinPE (or derivative like WinRE) below v5 to build an external BOOT media will most likely be wrought with various USB3 issues. Since only W8.1 users have this derivative (WinRE), downloading the v5 WADK would be the only way a user can construct a reliable BOOT media that uses USB3 ports on other Microsloth OS releases.

Maybe the best approach for all these apps that require BOOT media but can't afford individual licensing fees for supplied WinPE media, is (and most people hate this) supply the needed WinPE program modules and let the users obtain the v5 WADK FREE from Microsloth and build their own media.
Until that happens, there will be nothing but RECOVERY MEDIA BOOT issues associated with USB3.

I, personally, don't mind going through that pain... mainly 'cause I can use the downloaded WADK to build many needed external BOOT media, only 1-download (and its appropriate updates) required.

 

Oliverjia, you are correct in you supposition but there's been a big change in the licensing of WinPE between application developers and Microsloth. The developers used to be able to issue PE-based BOOT media at will but that is no longer allowed. Now they must license each issued BOOT media with M$ and this can be very pricey, especially as far as the application users are concerned (the license cost will be passed on).

The individual user can still obtain the PE WADK (large download) for FREE (this doesn't make any sense to me) but then they must build their own BOOT media... this can be daunting for many users.

That's the quandry I mentioned earlier. PE should be free for all to use... then developers can supply the needed media without issue.

 

I was aware of the licensing restriction of MS PE for commercial developers. This problem can be easily solved by providing the users with a boot media builder, that allowed the users to build a proper PE4/5 based recovery media, just like Macrium reflect and Paragon are doing. All the users need to do is to download and install Windows ADK, which is not that hard to do.

 

Apparently I've been using a USB 3 to connect my External HD that Acronis backs up to, with never a problem (fortunately) for several years.

I'm not that computer savvy but I'm not seeing how this would be an issue with my backups which are on another internal HD on a HOT restore. I've removed a couple things and will test AXTM again to see how it does with HOT, this COLD restores if the former still doesn't work consistently.

 

AX64 has been really impressing me lately, I am so glad I bought it, well worth the money.

 

I am using a USB3 drive plugged into a USB 2 port. It works fine. The issue is not with the drives but with the ports.

BTW, I had problems with restoring images made with Windows own imaging program as well as with Drive Cloner and AX64 before I found out about the problem with using a USB3 port for this. Since switching to USB 2 ports I have not had any issues.

 

Thank you TyRidian for your kind words and your purchase

We're focusing only on AX64 and it'll keep improving as long as you guys keep supporting.

 

I use a USB3 drive in a USB3 port without any issues with Macrium Reflect. The AX64 boot media doesn't seem to support USB3, but I have no issues with other softwares.

 

A virtuous circle here ----- we will keep supporting as long as you keep developing/improving. Mind you at some point I expect the program will be perfect,,,,its not far from that now IMO,,,,so improvement will eventually be a challenge. As far as I am concerned Ax64 (and its developers), get

 

Relevant Honestly, I am not tracking the USB issue very well. My system is Win 7.

I have AX64 backing up to my USB 3.0 external drive plugged into a USB 3.0 external port. Backs up fine, hot restores fine. Cold restores fine from CD.

However, sometimes upon booting up, my PC tells me that my USB 3.0 drives would work faster if plugged in to USB 3.0 ports. What They are! So maybe there's some driver issue making the PC think these are USB 2.0 ports and that's why AX64 works?

 

Re: Which Issue?

With due respect - I think your answer is a bit misleading. I don't think there is anything indicating image restoring via USB3 is by any means "unreliable".

All the relevant google results are all related to PE3/3.1, when Microsoft had not yet implement USB 3.0 support in their PE4 yet. At that time, most of PE recovery media were based on PE3/3.1 which did not have native USB3 support, hence the various problems because every vender tried to implement their own USB3 driver into the PE3/3.1 recovery media.

After PE4, there is no issue for USB3 if you properly implement PE4/5, because the support for USB3 is full and NATIVE, just like support for USB2, there is no additional USB3 driver needed at all. if there are still problems with recovery media, USB3 is not the one to blame.