Discussion in 'backup, imaging & disk mgmt' started by Stigg, Nov 23, 2013.
At the moment it says no updates available for me.
Same here. Did they pull this one too?
... you folks are amazing! If it's real, I'm sure it will propagate to the proper sources in due time.
I never had any issues getting an update before that was published on the site, that's why I mentioned it.
If you have a 'check for updates' link on a paid version... well... you expect to get the listed update
...and from what "ofishul" place did @aldist get the "listed" RELEASE NOTES update? You need to know the Build # to get the release notes... what official place was that information gotten from?
I have. It happens when they release an update and then pull it.
Before speculating about a release having been pulled, maybe ask if anybody actually GOT that 7387 release in the first place?
I've seen a report on another forum of someone using Reflect v8.1.7387 with no issues.
So have I
Nothing on my side...
Per the dictionary I don't need evidence to speculate. It's also likely that if I asked here it would not make it to anyone that is not here so that would not be a definite truth in any case. No reason to get defensive, stuff happens. I have worked in the software industry for 25 years and have had to pull software myself. Sometimes you can't find a bug until it hits someone else's machine. It was not my intention to badmouth the company, it was just a possible explanation for something I had seen happen before.
I just got prompted for it.
Installed it and done the obligatory reboot.
Updated here, no issues.
Umm, yes that’s true. But that doesn’t mean that jumping to speculation is a superior approach to gathering evidence, or at least making an attempt to do so. My reply wasn’t suggesting that you needed evidence to speculate, since that would be a contradiction in terms. It was suggesting that speculation MIGHT not be the best way forward. But to each his own, of course.
And obviously the users of this forum do not represent 100% of the Reflect user base, but that doesn’t mean that it wouldn’t be worthwhile to ask. People here ask if anyone has seen issues with X, knowing they’re not asking everyone who has ever used Reflect. And yet somehow they find value in doing so.
Update available today. No issues with incremental backup and restore.
Lately Windows Defender kicks in whenever I start Mcrium Reflect.
Defender then wants to send J:\Images\HD\BOOT-00-00.mrimg (an old old image) to Microsoft for further inspection
How can I stop this?
(the pop-up is annoying)
I would set the entire drive as an exclusion (I assume by the drive letter it is an external).
Are you able to inspect the image and perhaps see what WD finds so interesting?
Hey all. I have a Lenovo laptop which I'm thinking about replacing with a Dell desktop. The laptop is up-to-date and runs Windows 10. I'd like to restore a Macrium backup from the Lenovo onto the new Dell so I don't have to reinstall everything and uninstall all the junk I don't want on the Dell. Anyone know if this is at least theoretically possible? Thanks.
Macrium Reflect Home in the paid version should also be able to restore a backup on a dissimilar hardware.
Thank you. I should've worded my question differently. I'm wondering if anyone has done this successfully with the free version. Several years ago I restored a Macrium image made from one hard drive on a desktop to a second hard drive I installed on the same machine. Never tried it from one machine to another though.
Normally you would use the reDeploy feature for this task, BUT it's unavailable in both the FREE edition and the new TRIAL edition. This makes the System driver mgmt between the two dissimilar Systems difficult at best.
You can try it but don't get your hopes up... and image that new DeskTop before you try this so you have something to go back to.
LOL Yeah, good advice. Thanks.
Can WD even read that file? Hard telling what it finds interesting if it can. I once had it scanning a Windows 10 ISO for hours. Not sure why Microsoft would want to spend so much time looking at a file they created. I assume it just likes to keep itself busy.
Separate names with a comma.