Introducing AX64 Time Machine - hybrid imaging/snapshot software

Discussion in 'backup, imaging & disk mgmt' started by Isso, Jan 18, 2013.

  1. wajamus

    wajamus Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2013
    Posts:
    321
    Location:
    Australia
    @all

    Thanks for all the testing. We're working hard to iron out the various bugs in the latest FlashBack build. We humbly ask that you send your bug reports to info@ax64.com as its far easier to track and keep up with.

    Cheers!
     
  2. Kit1cat

    Kit1cat Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2013
    Posts:
    148
    Location:
    Plymouth, UK
    I think a lot of users that have moved to v2 have forgotten how fast and easy to use v1 was/is. So what if you have the odd hiccup with a hot restore, just do a cold restore. If that fails you have your second backup program, don't you? IMP v1 is one of the best programs I have used over the last couple of years, for me v2/flashback moving away from hot restore makes it just another image program. If v1 version works with minimum problems on your system I would use, if not try v2/flashback.

    Windows 7 Home system.
     
    Last edited: Nov 3, 2015
  3. wajamus

    wajamus Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2013
    Posts:
    321
    Location:
    Australia
    Thanks Kit1cat for the comments. V2's native restore is about equal in speed to v1's hot restore if you time it from the moment the restore begins. A commercial release with native restore is yet to be released, however. Coming soon.


     
  4. TheRollbackFrog

    TheRollbackFrog Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2011
    Posts:
    4,384
    Location:
    The Pond - USA
    Unless you're using SATA III-based SSDs for both your SOURCE and TARGET volumes, I find that statement just a bit unfair.

    I know of no other imaging programs ('cept the recent release of Macrium REFLECT with its new RAPID DATA RESTORE feature) that do image DIFFERENCE restorations like AXTM/Time Machine/FlashBack. All other imagers I've "played" with can only do FULL restorations (basically COLD restores) which are very time consuming and take a significantly longer period of time to perform. The time to perform these FULL restorations is what keeps them from being suitable for "snapshot" restoration operations. IFW is capable of doing a DIFFERENCE restoration but requires the scanning of the entire surface of the used disk to do so... also extremely time consuming.

    Based on this I really don't consider TM/FlashBack v2 "just another imaging program."
     
  5. Peter2150

    Peter2150 Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2003
    Posts:
    20,590
    Have to agree with that but...... after last night.....

    First let me say, when I first started looking at the new hot restore, I was both impressed, and concerned. Now I have to ask why after spending all that effort on the "hot" restore, they've made the warm restore the default. Makes the impressed part drop way down and the concerned part jump way up. That is why I decided to have another play at V1. After I posted last, I was feeling pretty darn comfortable. Took a couple of incrementals to test,(backing them up with Macrium Incrementals. Then went into a work mode where I would normally use Shadowdefender, but didn't instead figuring I restore the last incremental and accomplish the same thing.

    When done, I restored the v1 incremental which went fine, and the system rebooted. I found my self staring at the no bootmanager found, use Ctl_alt_delete. Not good. So I popped in my Macrium Recovery USB, and restored the last macrium incremental. Same thing. Double Not good. So I booted back and did a full macrium restore. Again same failure. Now a bit concerned, I restored an IFW image from the previous day. Perfect restore. I then did a restore of my lastest macrium incremental. Again failure.

    Puzzled I started working my way back thru the macrium incrementals, and found they were all bad until I got to one before installing v1. That one worked. Conclusion is that somehow all the macrium incrementals taken with AX64 v1 installed were bad.

    Bottom line: I am thru with this software. I simply don't trust either v1 or v2. When I look at the date this thread started, and when the Real Copy thread started and here we are today without any quality released product, I am afraid my trust and faith are gone.
     
  6. Kit1cat

    Kit1cat Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2013
    Posts:
    148
    Location:
    Plymouth, UK
    Unfortunetly, I have not found this to be the case on my system, but I have not tried the latest beta's. My main use for AX64 is as a rollback replacment, make a image, if not happy with changes a quick restore, normally about 45 sec's on my setup, last time I tried using v2 over 4 min's for a warm restore, not a great differance but can mount up if you have number of things you want to try.

    Looking forward to trying the commercial release.
     
  7. dagrev

    dagrev Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2012
    Posts:
    214
    Location:
    USA
    I don't know if this would be your culprit Peter, but I was told by MR support that AXTM causes problems with the VSS that Reflect uses. There is even a small program I was sent to repair the VSS. Someone with more knowledge may shed more intelligent light on this. Flashback not working is a problem for me as I was really wanting to use one of these programs as primary and the other as secondary. Possibly I can if I can ever get Flashback to work.
     
  8. Kit1cat

    Kit1cat Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2013
    Posts:
    148
    Location:
    Plymouth, UK
    May be, I am using a sata II SSD for both my SOURCE and TARGET volumes for TM v1 and v2, my second backup is SSD to Harddrive (AOMEI Backupper) and a full restore takes a little longer then a TM v2 warm restore, BUT that is on my system.
     
    Last edited: Nov 3, 2015
  9. TheRollbackFrog

    TheRollbackFrog Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2011
    Posts:
    4,384
    Location:
    The Pond - USA
    Pete, my friend... it's a BETA, not a production release. They clearly stated in their private release to you that WARM, in that version, was the DEFAULT. If you wanna test NATIVE, you have to select it (Advanced Options).

    You should give it another chance.
    That was your second mistake :D... following your abandoned test of NATIVE restore.
    I don't know how many times I have to mention this fact... but v1 is UNDEVELOPED at the moment, and has been that way for quite some time (since May 18, 2014). None of the issues discovered since then have been dealt with in v1, only in v2, to my knowledge.

    Feel free to criticize v1... it has always been an unfinished product. I keep warning people about System configuration dependencies with that version... it's just an incomplete product at this time.

    I know you're frustrated, but you should at least give the latest Flashback recently released BETA a good "roll in the hay," and do so using the ADVANCED OPTION of HOT restore rather than the DEFAULT of WARM restore. I think that's the only way your "Bottom Line" statement can really be brought to fruition.
     
  10. wajamus

    wajamus Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2013
    Posts:
    321
    Location:
    Australia
    Hey guys,

    Native restore will eventually be the default. v1 is an older version and we're applying fixes only to v2 and versions after. There's hundreds of under the hood fixes since v1 - and we will continue to to refine and improve the software for the foreseeable future.

    As far as our extensive testing goes, FlashBack is 100% compatible with Marcrium Reflect.

    Froggie, thank you so much for your clarifying statements and support. It does go a long way to explaining the situation clearly and objectively.

    Waj
     
  11. Peter2150

    Peter2150 Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2003
    Posts:
    20,590
    Hi Froggie

    I didn't test hot restore in the latest beta as I am leary of it since I do use Perfect Disk. But you are totally correct and I may protect myself and then give it a whirl. Stay Tuned.


    Pete
     
  12. wajamus

    wajamus Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2013
    Posts:
    321
    Location:
    Australia
    Hi Kit1cat,

    Indeed, the warm restore takes considerably longer than 'hot restore' due to:

    1. Need to boot into recovery environment and initiate the restore (~1-2 minutes)
    2. The changes to the disk and booting into RE extend the time further.

    The new hot restore using native app doesn't have these issues. You'll get to try this in the last two beta, or the soon-to-come commercial release.

    Thanks mate,

    Waj



     
  13. Peter2150

    Peter2150 Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2003
    Posts:
    20,590
    Hi Waj

    I hear you, and will give it another test. But what about Perfect Disk? I am not giving that up.

    Pete
     
  14. wajamus

    wajamus Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2013
    Posts:
    321
    Location:
    Australia
    Peter! Thanks for testing. As far as PerfectDisk is concerned, so long as you do not use the Boot defrag feature FlashBack should work just fine.

    Any issues, do shoot through logs and reports to info@ax64.com :)
     
  15. TheRollbackFrog

    TheRollbackFrog Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2011
    Posts:
    4,384
    Location:
    The Pond - USA
    Not to be confrontational here :cool:... but exactly what is it that the Perfect Disk BOOT Time defrag (the only one, I believe, you've ever mentioned as being an issue) does for your system that makes it appear to be indispensable for you? (ducking for cover at this time :ninja:)
     
  16. timmy

    timmy Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2005
    Posts:
    120
    Hello and rgds. I have e-mailed the co. to ask if they would send that most recent version, the one ending in 693, but have not heard back in several days. Not wanting to pester them, is there perhaps an easier way, some place I could go to find it? Thanks.
     
  17. TheRollbackFrog

    TheRollbackFrog Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2011
    Posts:
    4,384
    Location:
    The Pond - USA
    Tmmy, se your PM
     
  18. Peter2150

    Peter2150 Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2003
    Posts:
    20,590
    Hi Froggie

    It's not that I mentioned it, but when I install Perfect Disk it warns me that it is a conflict, and if I use it, I may not receive support. So why do I use it. Reason is I just like the way it organizes the disk. Not a problem for Shadowprotect, Drive Snapshot, IFW and Macrium. So Flashback has to really bring me something to make me want to give it up. So I will test, and see what happens.

    Pete
     
  19. TheRollbackFrog

    TheRollbackFrog Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2011
    Posts:
    4,384
    Location:
    The Pond - USA
    Is it PERFECT DISK that gives you the warning or FLASHBACK?
     
  20. rodneym

    rodneym Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2008
    Posts:
    271
    AMEN.... Thank God someone else sees it too.


     
  21. rodneym

    rodneym Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2008
    Posts:
    271
    I didn't find it to be the case either, and had problems with flashback, but not with version 1

    I am using AX64TM V1 with Macrium, going from SSD to WD Hard drive.




     
  22. Peter2150

    Peter2150 Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2003
    Posts:
    20,590
    Flashback. Timemachine did the same thing. It's a warning on install, and it says you may not receive support.
     
  23. manolito

    manolito Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2013
    Posts:
    407
    Found a little time to give the latest Beta a test run on my Win7-64bit notebook. The computer is about 6 years old, no UEFI, no GPT, no exotic hardware at all (no USB3 ports also).

    Warm restores work fine, but too slow for me (spoiled by RollBack). Trying to enable the new "Native Restore" results in an error -99967 . This is exactly the same behavior as the previous Beta. I do not have high hopes that the upcoming stable version will fix this.

    Just for fun I then uninstalled this Beta and installed the latest V.1 version. I was really amazed how much faster this version feels. It's not only the hot restores, the snapshots also are much faster than in V2. So I have to agree with the folks here who prefer V1 over V2: If your hardware supports V1 (mine sure does, I never had a single failed hot restore), then stick with it.


    Cheers
    manolito
     
  24. twl845

    twl845 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2005
    Posts:
    4,186
    Location:
    USA
     
  25. Peter2150

    Peter2150 Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2003
    Posts:
    20,590
    I gave 693 another whirl as promised. Did see evidence that PD boot time defrag might not play well. Moved forward, and got tangled up in the defaults as set. Namely remembering I have to turn on Hot restore every time. FB did on single events prove faster the MR, but all the interceding full restores and full images, blew the timing away. I am abandoning for now but will revisit if there is a beta with the defaults set as Waj indicated they would be.

    Pete
     
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.