Rollback RX - PROPOSED KnowledgeBase article

It's better to bring it out into the open where everyone sees it. No one need worry, however. Soon enough this topic will shrink into obscurity.

 

For those of you experimenting around with RBRX, and still trying to get a grip there is a graphical tree-view of the snapshots that helps simplify all your snapshots.

I also want to point out that "Defragging Snapshots" doesn't really defrag the data on the disk platters. It simply defrags RBRX' sector map. To properly defrag a disk you need to remove RBRX, do it, then re-install.

 

It could be. What's worth to keep in mind, and I've said this before, is that majority of our users don't report the sort of issues that are reported on here. I'm not saying they don't happen, but that they aren't as widespread as people think.

If all these users on here have problems with this program, this document could be of use. I don't think it'll change much with a majority of our clients, but for that minority we now have a crowd sourced article. Many will likely complain that we aren't doing enough but hey, resources are there.

I agree this won't attract much attention, and no offence meant, but this is for the minority of users.

True. Once we have this on our site (once it gets approved) this thread won't serve a purpose.

Great point, it helps to do what you do, but I'd read this article. It's a valuable resource!

 

Now that comes as quite a shock to me.

 

Yes, I know Pete, and you are almost 100% correct except that the advertising is not simply deceptive, its outright false.

Its like saying a product is peanut free when its not. The majority of consumers who eat the product will be fine since the majority will not have a peanut allergy. But those that do have the allergy will be in big trouble. Simply because the majority of users of Rx do not have an issue does not excuse HDS from warning users and prospective users of potential problems. If the snack manufacture/distributor says the product is peanut free it darn well better be peanut free. If HDS says that there are no conceivable problems that Rx cannot recover from then it darn well should be true or they should not be saying it.

I understand your position but feel that there is a big difference between not recommending Rx and warning folks about the dangers of using it, hopefully Froggies report will help accomplish that.

HOWEVER

Contrary to Kurtis's statement that the marketing will not change I bet it will. If it does not then why would anyone bother to buy the new version of DC. According to Kurtis the majority of Rx users do not need DC,,,,so where is the market for this product. I have no doubt that HDS is looking at the bottom line and will do whatever it takes to increase that bottom line. Urging Rx users to buy DC so they are protected from Rx is the only way to have DC sell to a broader audience. HDSs audience for DC is primarily folks who are using Rx, or considering using it. Without Rx there is no pressing reason for DC to exist at all.

 

After reading your comments Barry, first, I agree with you, and then I'd have to say that the apps shouldn't be sold separately (marketing).
RBRX and DC should sell together as a package. (But of course only if/when DC V6 is proven to function properly.)
And only if/when, as discussed thoroughly here, the documentation is made clear and simple enough for the average retail user to understand and apply properly (ref: Keatah's comments in post 75 above about users and documentation).
J

 

Great idea, Kurtis. Just keep lying to your customers.

 

We're not lying.

I've said this before, and I feel sorry for the users on here that have to re-read this but we aren't going to change our marketing when it's a small minority of users who are reporting issues.

If you have a problem; submit a ticket. I've said this plenty of times. It's complete nonsense to tell a company to change it's marketing when you have a problem. It makes more sense for us to resolve the issue. I've had multiple users report an issue to us and it be resolved, so I don't buy into this nonsense.

 

Dang.. I've used RollbackRX off and on for years on specific machines (more times off, then on), and never had any major issues, or never lacked understanding of how it worked. I never, EVER considered RollbackRX to be a true image/backup solution. More like a fast way to recover from flawed installations, broken drives, bad updates, or malware infections. Although I will admit I do not use it much anymore as I don't fully trust it, or the methodology behind it.

Also, since most of my stuff is NAS and/Cloud Redundant, and I can format a Windows 8.1x machine in 15 minutes, what's the point? I just start fresh if it needs to be done, rather than pay $$ for RX. Rollback was cool on Win7 or previous, but Win8X have proven to be more stable, less vulnerable to drive errors and/or update corruptions, and faster to reinstall. I just don't see the need to pay for such tools anymore. Besides, a machine in my home getting infected would be like an act of God with my IT infrastructure here.

Why all of the fuss?

 

No. That's twisting of words what I said is that we're not changing our marketing based off of a few users with issues. We're going to resolve the issue. I mean, who asks companies to do that? Competition?

Hardware failure, if you take a hammer to your computer no software is going to protect that! Also, Drive Cloner Version 6 fixes the issue of taking an image including snapshots, so that's a mute point.

I'm wondering the same thing. If a handful of users are having issues, we'll deal with them hands on. We're not going to NOT resolve them but change our marketing. That's just ridiculous.

 

Seems silly. Like I said - used it off and on for years, and have friends that use it. Nobody ever really had any serious issues, or a fundamental lack of understanding of how it works, or how to merging of snapshots works.

It's always been.. "Oh, you installed a crappy program that broke your Win7?"... "Let me click, and roll back to the hour before you installed it"..

No need to over complicate it.

 

I've become wary of any advertising for anything (especially consumer tech products). And software more than ever. I suppose that's one benefit you gain from weeding out crapware and shovelware over the years and conducting seemingly endless beta testing.. And I try to explain that to the people that hire me. Allow me to use a freeware/payware example right here:

http://www.piriform.com/recuva/download
This is the download page for Recuva, a low-end file "undeleter". Most of us know about it. It does what it says it does, within the hundred and one constraints encountered when undeleting files from an NTFS system. That's fine and good. Now.. In looking at the page you have the option to get the free version with no support. Fair enough. Or the paid version with support. Fair enough too. But the page implies (by omission) you cannot undelete anything, that you cannot use the program's core function without a $29.95 payment. They just don't tell you the free version is essentially the same as the paid version, minus one or two other features. They don't tell you the free version tries just as hard to undelete your stuff as paid version.

In a panic of trying to get lost files back, people will go straight to the paid version. Marketing departments capitalize on your fear and ignorance. Marketing departments from all companies stretch the truth and conveniently omit the uglies. Even my favorite "fanboi" organizations are at fault. Of which Piriform is not a favorite of mine. It just is.

With any new software I install I always ask what are the benefits, risks, conveniences, and caveats. Something you learn to do in time.

 

With risk of becoming more long winded (had a Monster drink) let me say that user education is primarily at fault when RBRX (or something else) bombs your only copy of data.

In comparing today’s consumer-level documentation to yesterday’s manuals.
Years ago it was the Apple DOS manual that taught me many computer concepts.
ftp://ftp.apple.asimov.com/pub/apple_II/documentation/os/dos/DOS%20Manual.pdf

Being a kid in school at the time, reading all of it made me feel like I was conducting a Postdoc. Disk drives were still new to me, the idea of random access was new and a godsend; for I had been using sequential cassette storage since diaper days.

Anyways it only took me a few months to work through the material in this 200+ page manual. It is the type of manual we need to have supplied with computers today. The concepts presented in the opening chapters are invaluable and saved me hundreds of thousands of dollars over the years of using computers and conducting business. Well.. I was an impressionable youngster and the material well described.

In fact I learned all about backups and frequently saving my work. Pages 37-40. It was here I learned about how to safeguard data on floppy disks. And safeguard them I did! They were delicate, unlike the hefty man-paw videogame cartridges for the Atari VCS that we could skate around on. Yep! I even used the lid of the Apple II as a surfboard. We’d get running, then dive onto it, and surf across the 70’s shag carpet in the wood-paneled living room. Sometimes bursting into the harvest-gold kitchen that had a green dinette set..

Manuals of yesterday:
Ahem, the manuals of yesterday actually taught you something. And they really took the time to present material in a fashion that demonstrated the author/company cared that you actually learned something. They gave you the underlying theory of ops and the why’s and how’s things are done. They gave you concrete examples and scenarios and exercises. They gave you an understanding of the framework and problem at hand - thoroughly enough that you could figure things out yourself. You knew enough that you could approach a problem from several angles and usually arrive at a very workable solution. They created a real thought process in your head. And it was your own. And it was likely to be creative. You were not resigned to copy/pasting ideas.

Kudos to the author (and the philosophies of those days) for being able to instruct a grade school kid on such advanced ideas and ways of thinking. I was no special super smart kid either. The manual handheld us (me and my BMX buddies) through all the steps.

Manuals of today:
The manuals of today use cryptic hieroglyphs to show you how to plug something in. They tell you how to press a button and what that button does, when it already is labeled as to what its function is. And no more elaboration on how that function interacts with other controls.

They contain stupid statements like: “Press the power button to turn the device on or off.” And that’s it! A document of yesterday might say the exact same thing, but also include extra comments on the power-up sequence of events or what do if it isn’t working. Or something goes wrong.

And they totally omit and avoid any content that you might have to *think* about, even for a moment. Instead they direct you to the internet where everything is gonna be fine and where you have to pay money and sign up for things. And while that’s going on you’re bombarded with advertisements of all kinds. You go online and get loads of conflicting information. When you’re done you’re so damned confused you need to hire a consultant! And in the end you’re no better off because someone else just did all the work.

In short, companies of yore made sure you were happy and understood the product.
Today they make sure you use it in a way that brings the company more revenue.

 

To be fair, while that illustrates that marketing > evil, it's not the same thing as claiming a product does something that it does not.

 

And that is the difference between deceptive advertising and false advertising. One does not give you all the facts the other is an outright lie.

 

It's the China Syndrome which affects manuals for just about everything you buy today. And with some things, the internet version is exactly the same as what you get in tiny print on the tiny piece of paper that comes with the product, it's just bigger and easier to read.

I love your posts(well, where 'love' means that I'm very impressed).

J

 

As Froggie has demonstrated its far more than simply hardware failure (something all of us here knew prior to his creation of the guide, well possibly excepting you),,,,,and DC6 does not fix anything as it is not available at this time. Even if we allow that DC6 will fix these problems that still leaves many years where the problems that DC6 will supposedly fix were denied to have existed by HDS.

Just out of curiosity Kurtis what is HDS paying you for? If its to somehow reverse the dislike and mistrust of HDS you are failing miserably.

 

Well I gave up on you a long time ago

 

You are too funny.