Rollback Rx 9.1 - New Build (July 18, 2011)

This is incorrect, most of the Rx installation is not backed up when doing a hot image, it is only backed up if a cold, all sector image is done and even then only if the image is created using Image For Windows. Most of the Rx installation and functions (such as snapshots) is hidden from Windows so any program that is backing up only what Windows sees as used space will def not pick this up.

As noted above the only program that seems to be able to get everything and then be able to restore with a fully functional Rx along with all existing snaps at the time of the image is Image For Windows. There is an extensive discussion on using IFW to do this as a sticky on the Horizon DataSys RollBack Rx forum. By the way, Horizon does not sanction the use of IFW to do this but users have explored this subject in great detail and have found it works well.

Here is the link to the discussion if you are interested http://horizondatasys-forum.com/rollback-rx/2491-rollback-rx-image-windows-perfect-together.html

 

Bgoodman4, Yeah, thanks for suggesting I go for it and get RB.
P.S. I just got a Tweet on Twitter from Horizon saying that V10 will work more closely with Drive Cloner Rx, when I asked if V10 will work closer with image apps. I then asked about other image apps and am waiting for a possible answer.

 

It would be nice if RB could support its own backup-to-external-drive functionality. All these byzantine procedures and dependencies and things that need to be in place to make a disk image is simply way too much.

RB could have another option in it to backup the current snapshot to an external drive. Or do all the snapshots or specific ones. Each one could then be restored if necessary.

This needs to be greatly simplified IMHO.

 

+1
Byzantine procedures, I liked that

 

I don't own RB (I keep going back and forth on it), but enjoy following this thread. From what I know after all these months of monitoring this tool, there is a definite need to simplify a few things, especially around how it works with imaging software. Having their own imaging solution work with it would be a great first step.

 

I have no idea what you folks are referring to in terms of a need for simplification when imaging. Its as simple as can be now. Either you uninstall Rx and image with the software of your choice, or you do a hot image with Rx installed using a program that has been shown to do the job.

The only thing needed was a bit of clarification in terms of the MBR. Other than that its as simple as creating a folder to back up to on your external drive and then backing up to that. If you are unsure if your imaging app can handle the job then get DriveCloner and stop worrying about it. If you are avoiding buying Rx because of the imaging issue IMO you are making a huge mistake. Rx is just too valuable a program to allow a minor bit of confusion around what happens to the MBR when imaging to interfere with its employment on your PC.

Imaging is strictly an extra layer of protection, the sort of thing that would be used if your HD fried or you PC was lost due to theft or fire (for example). Over the past 3 or so years I have done a large number of rollbacks, some due to PC problems which Rx dealt with in short order, and others because I wanted to test software or settings, again, all were carried out flawlessly. So ask yourself how many times have you had a drive go belly up or has your PC been stollen? Not often I bet (I only had one drive die on me over the last 20 years). Prior to Rx I had to restore using images numerous times but not once have I had to do so since loading Rx on my PC. IMHO no PC should be without RX or some equivalent (if there is such a thing) rollback software.

In regards to Rx version 10 it appears that it will not be released until Windows 8 has been released. At that time, we are told, the new version of DriveCloner will (supposedly) be able to image the entire Rx installation including all snaps. This will be a very welcome event but it will be some time in the future before we are able to see it on our computers.

 

DriveCloner or our esteemed member Keriver, which is better?

Best regards,

KOR!

 

Do you call it simple? Losing all snapshots, settings, schedulings...

Which requires a bizantine process to run.
Which is an unique program that allow this.
And it is not a freeware.

If you lose the MBR, or something happens... well, you lose the hability to boot, the snapshots, whatever. It's not a minor issue to concern imho.

Peace of mind, security (not only protection), backup.

 

I definitely recall reading a post earlier this year by Aaron Here reporting that other than the 'branding' they are one and the same (much like Rollback Rx and EAZ-Fix).

Scott

 

Dear Scott,

Very true. And, the Keriver version is 40% cheaper than DriveCloner, plus one can install it on all the computers owned in a home environment.

I bought Keriver 1-Clk restore for $10 and am allowed to use it on all my 9 computers at home. The same is sold by HDS for $300.

Best regards,

KOR!

 

I'm pretty sure that Drive Cloner is a clone of Keriver Image. Which product does HDS sell for $300 that is the same as K1CR?

Scott

 

Getting back on topic, after re-reading the posts in this thread by Jo Ann, TheRollbackFrog and Pandlouk, I'm rather confused as to the necessary of restoring the MBR when restoring a hot-image.

I guess the only way I'll know for sure is to conduct a hot-imaging test of my RB system and try restoring with and without restoring the MBR. I hope to get around to doing that this weekend.

Scott

 

Dear Scott,

Very true. And, HDS RollBack Rx™Server Edition which sell for $300 is a clone of Keriver 1-Clk Restore.

http://www.horizondatasys.com/608785.ihtml

Thinking of it, it was Pandlouk who pointed this out and not Aaron Here.

Best regards,

KOR!

 

Hi bg,

You are quoting my remark out of context - or perhaps you simply misunderstood where I'm coming from...

I do not consider RB's snapshots to be part of the RB installation. I was just referring to the RB programs installed in the ...\Shield folder, its registry entries and its MBR modifications.

In my post (#124) I was questioning the necessity of having to restore the MBR (when restoring a normal hot-image) as TheRollbackFrog had indicated. I was saying that if the MBR is not restored I don't see why the system shouldn't boot-up because the RB-modified MBR is still in place, as are the RB programs. So even though all snapshots older than the current one are gone I would think that the RB sub-console should still work and the system should boot. Then all that I would need to do is uninstall RB and re-install it 'in order to get it back in sync.' I've yet to try this though.

Hopefully this clarifies what I meant...

Wendi

PS. Fwiw, I see that Scott (#137 above) understands and agrees with my viewpoint.

 

Wendi, you've got that right - I agree with you 100%

Regards,
Scott

 

Thats pretty funny,

If you want to do nothing yourself,,,or rather as little as possible,,,,you should not have gotten into computing. I mean some stuff you just have to do if you want to run certain programs,,,,,at least until the developers catch up with what you consider essential (but others, like the many Rx users and myself have no major problem with). The thing is you decide if a program is A) one you want to run/use, B) are you willing to learn to do what you need to do in order to run it?

If the ans to either is no then don't use it. It really is as simple as that. Its obvious if you consider a program too dangerous to use, or too onerous to use with comfort, then you DEF SHOULD NOT USE IT. No one here is saying anything different. What we are trying to do here as a group/community is understand what the program does, how well it does it, and what do users and prospective users need to understand about using it properly.

Information shared by folks who have spent considerable time working with a program so as to understand it more fully is invaluable and crapping on a program you know little about is rather rather like crapping on these folk by extension, thats just rude IMO.

 

As I understand it much of the RX program, or at least key parts of it, are not visible to windows (you will note that I said AS I UNDERSTAND IT). If they were visible to Windows then they would be copied when you made an image and restored when you restored that image. This does not happen if you do a hot image so it follows that these files cannot be seen by Windows. Why this is specifically the case I have no idea. I suspect only a horizon tech could ans your question if its "Why" not "What", I am just stating "what".

Sorry I could not be of more assistance with this question but I am only recently comfortable with the whole MBR thing myself (even though I don't really understand it). For me its enough that people who I respect and trust have said X, Y, and Z and I am good with that. I more or less understand the issue but thats about it.

 

That would be good to hear about as a sort of confirmation of what those you have mention have stated is the case.

I trust Jo Ann, TheRollbackFrog and Pandlouk, they have all be very frequent contributors on these forums and I have never had issue with any of their posts, suggestions, or comments, so what they say is good enough for me. I am however a tad paranoid by nature so besides doing hot images with DC weekly, once a month I uninstall Rx and image using a Paragon product. When it comes to my data I take little to nothing for granted.

Rx & DC are are layers of defence, or protection if you prefer, not the entire game. There are layers below them as well as above.

 

I could bet I have more years in computing than you

Sure. Although I believe in software development and improvement. I believe companies should listen to their users.

I'm not crapping anybody or any program.
Seems you're overreacting to my opinions.
I'm just saying Rollback could do better. I do believe they can improve.
Besides, I do understand very well the technology behind RX and imaging. I also respect - a lot - the users and programmers work

 

Hi Bgoodman,
As I see that you are recently comfortable with MBR after using RB for a few years, you can imagine how confusing it can be for a non techie like myself who is just now venturing into the imaging and restore thing. If it was something I could locate and see on my computer, and totally understand how I can interact with it when doing an image without screwing something up and not being able to boot, I would be comfortable too. I have learned over time, that even though you learn to do something, you have to learn what to do if it screws up your computer too. If for example I lose the MBR and can't boot, what do I do. It's like learning Greek without knowing how they construct a sentence. As I read through these posts, folks will say one thing and just as I think I get it, someone else will say something to the contrary. I totally know that at some point I will understand it all but I don't want to shoot myself in the foot in the mean time. With respect to using RB itself, I totally understand it and it's great. It's just the imaging and MBR that I have to understand. Maybe when V10 comes out and is more compatible with their imaging app, it will eliminate all questions. Thanks for your posts which are a big help, along with the other folks you mention as well.

 

twl845,

I posted this some time ago and it may be helpful.....

This is what I noticed when I looked at the First Track (LBAs 0 to 62) with Disk Editor from DOS and with Roadkil’s SectEdit from BartPE. LBA–0 (the MBR) was special Rollback code. The standard MBR had been replaced. LBA-22 was a backup of the original MBR. LBA–23 was special Rollback code. Before installing Rollback I checked the First Track and noted all sectors beyond the MBR were zeroed.

But when you look at the First Track with Roadkil’s SectEdit from Windows, LBA–0 is a standard MBR and LBA–22 and LBA–23 are zeroed. So when the Windows/Rollback partition is imaged from Windows you are not imaging the special First Track that Rollback needs to boot before the OS boots. Rollback uses two First Tracks. One in Windows and one when Windows is offline.

 

Thanks for the response Brian. As I mentioned I am not a techie so please tell me what LBA means. I think I understand from your response that without the first track windows won't boot. I am not familiar with the rest.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logical_block_addressing

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master_boot_record

 

Thank! Big help! I'll study these.

 

I am confused with your above statement, and especially what I have highlighted in red. I thought it was HOT imaging with IFW rather than COLD imaging, which preserve all the snapshots including the baseline.

http://horizondatasys-forum.com/rollback-rx/2491-rollback-rx-image-windows-perfect-together.html

Please see OWL post # 2 in the above link.

Please confirm?

Best regards,

KOR!