Discussion in 'backup, imaging & disk mgmt' started by TheRollbackFrog, Jul 5, 2018.
It's called UNINSTALL.EXE
But, is that good enough?
You might need a third party uninstaller.
@TheRollbackFrog the takedown of their forums is typical of that company. They always did this when they released a new version or when the reported problems were a clear evidence that the RollbackRX was/is more hazardous than beneficial.
Nah, you just wait a few months and windows 10 update will fix it...
The best thing that happened for their customers is Windows 10 (although I hate it) and Microsoft's forced update update policy.
I am certainly not the one to defend the HDS company, but some of the accusations against this company are not really justified...
I agree that for Rollback RX versions prior to v. 10.xx the uninstaller did a lousy job. Lots of remnants in the registry which needed to be removed manually. But starting with v. 10.xx this has changed. The RB RX uninstaller is now pretty good compared to other uninstallers. Just delete the "Shield" entry in the "program files" folder, and in Regedit search for "\shield". Not a lot of stuff which needs manual removal.
Of course this is different if you expect that after uninstall the trial counter will be reset. It will not, and to do this you will need a third party uninstaller, preferably one which uses an install tracker. But this is a different story...
Otherwise I tested the current (now discontinued) Home version of RB RX 11, and it really is not that bad...
It protects all partitions by default, no way to change this. Installing it with "Hybrid=0" is not recommended. It will bring back the old baseline manager, but it does not work. Trying to reset the baseline to the current system will result in a software hangup (on two different machines).
But otherwise it worked just fine. No file sytem corruption during my tests.If you can live with the restrictions then this free version is not that bad.
Next thing I did was comparing it with the v. 10.7 Home version. This version only protects the system partition, no way to change this. But I do prefer this behavior. Otherwise I did not see any major difference to the latest 11.3 Home version. No corruption issues...
For me the main issue with all RB RX versions after v. 9.1 is that Hot image backups will not restore properly unless the MBR is repaired before rebooting. Of course it can be done (BootICE or similar, Win Install DVD, Macrium Rescue Disk), but it remains a major hassle. For me the oldfashioned RB RX v. 9.1 is the best solution. No file system corruption whatever you do, and Hot image backups can be restored without boot problems. Right now I have a RB RX 9.1 installation on this machine which is almost 4 months old, and it did not cause any problems so far.
OK, I forgot to mention that all the above only applies to a system using Win7-64 or below. No UEFI (just Legacy BIOS), no GPT partitions (just standard MBR partitions).
I wonder if you would be willing to try the test I apply to all imaging programs I use. What I do is this:
I take an image(or snapshot), and then start a restore. Once into the restore I hit the power reset, which trashes the drive. I then do another restore, and expect and get full drive recovery. Would Rollback survive this test.
I think you and perhaps even others have made this argument many times and you are all right....RB would probably not survive this test. However, it has also been argued many times that RB is not a backup solution. Its an Instant System Restore (in the true sense of the word). You literally restore you system within a boot cycle plus 10sec (or less) snapshot load time. No imager can come close to this because we're talking 2 completely different technologies. It's true that IRS tech is unpredictable and therefore a much more reliable tech (a 3rd party imager) is a wise decision. Some would argue why have 2 solutions when one (the imager) is the safer choice. Well, personal preference. Im my case, i dont care how much an Imager has improved their product speed, they will never be RB fast! This is something i choose to live with as you all know, i am well prepared for disaster as are others on this forum that use RB regularly.
It's true that HDS have claimed that all you need is RB and that is a shame on them. I think lately they have acknowledged that a 3rd party Imager is required for proper protection but they dont spell it out. Because of this behavior they have justly been harshly judged. No arguments there.
There should be more posts like yours where practical advice and solutions are offered. Thankyou
Thanks carfal for your kind words... Like you I am a "snapshot addict", no imager comes close to its performance. But also like you I do not use it as a backup software, I always have 3 generations of Acronis image backup chains.
After thinking about your proposed tests for a while, I do not think that it is useful. After a forced Power-Off of course your drive will be trashed, and if the data from which you want to restore will survive depends on the phase of the moon, or if today is your lucky day.
But the same is true when you restore an image from an external HDD. A hard Power-Off of this external drive will also trash this drive, and if you are not lucky then the image you want to restore from will be unreadable. In most cases you will not be able to repair this image file with ChkDsk /F or other repair tools. Having some salvaged file fragments in a "FOUND000" folder will not cut it.
The only advantage in such a situation is that with image backups on external drives you can rotate the drives or copy all image files to the cloud, i.e. have some redundancy. This is not possible with Rollback. But then again RB RX should never be used as a backup software which you absolutely need to rely on (because maybe your business depends on not loosing any data).
Admittedly I don't use external drives, but why would restoring an image from them cause damage to them when doing a restore. I do this restoring from internal drives and yes it destroys the target drive, but not the source drive.
Also using Macrium v6 with CBT active my imaging time when I use it as a snapshot solution is typically only 45 seconds and my restore time about 55 seconds. I can live with that.
Why would that be so? If you do a hard Power-Down while doing a restore both the source drive and the target drive do a file operation. So both the source file and the target file are open when they are shut down. On the target drive no file is being written, it's just sectors so of course the interrupted restore will result in an unreadable state of the target drive. But the the image file on the source drive may just as well get damaged by a hard shutdown.
I believe that when restoring a Rollback snapshot the situation is pretty much the same. The difference is that the source is not part of the "real" Windows file system, but if a hard shutdown normally does not damage your image file on another internal HDD then chances are that the Rollback data outside of the file system will survive the shutdown just as well.
OK, my curiosity took the upper hand, so I finally did take the challenge and executed Peter's tests...
Took me a couple of hours because I first did a cold sector-by-sector backup to make sure I could go back from where I started. But this turned out to be unnecessary.
I did the tests with Rollback RX 9.1, I had 20 snaps over a time period of over 3 months. I rolled back my system drive to more than 5 earlier snaps, and I shut down my laptop during the "loading snapshot" phase. Either by pressing the power switch for some seconds, or by pulling the power supply connector with no battery installed. In all cases upon restarting the computer the "loading snapshot" phase resumed without errors, the computer booted normally, and a "Chkdsk" confirmed that there was no file system corruption.
So I conclude that RB RX has passed Peter's challenge with flying colors. If the hard shutdown did not corrupt Peter's source drive, it also did not corrupt the Rollback data and vectors which are stored on the protected drive (but outside of the Windows file system).
Of course I cannot say if this is also true for later RB RX versions. But for my sytem using Rollback v. 9.1 and avoiding UEFI and GPT and also staying away from Win10 it is quite safe as long as you observe Froggie's tips in his “unOfishul” FAQ.
Excellent!! Thanks for the test.
Hi Manolito, that test does not affect v9.1. It will only affect it:
1) if you perform it during a baseline update (will corrupt the partition or the disk), or
2) if the power cut happens when Rollback RX defrags/optimizes the snapshots, which will leave you only with the baseline (rolback will recreate it's database and remove all the snapshots).
and the second can happen not only during a power surge but with a sudden bsod too.
and as you said, Rollback RX maybe is safe for your system, your OS and the programs that you install but that does not mean that the same is true for every pc.
ps. do not use IFW "live" all sectors backup. It can lead to a bizzare situation where your baseline is actually the active snapshot.
In my previous post I forgot to mention the easiest way to cripple a system protected by RollbackRx .... simply add files in the active snapshot until no free space is left. On the reboot you won't be able to change snapshot, to remove snapshots, to revert to the baseline or to uninstall it from the console. v9.1 was vulnareble to this and have reported it to them, but I don;t know if they fixed it in later versions.
Ok. The point I made of 2 different technologies seems to have not been considered here at all.
Panagiotis, both your points state an obvious conclusion. If RB is in the middle of doing operations that involve meddling with the file markers in its "database" then is it really a surprise that your system is kaput.
This is akin to MR doing a backup and you cut power or whatever. The current backup would also be kaput. But....the big difference is that MR's previous backup would still be perfectly intact and you'd still have a working system.
I'll say it again....2 different technologies, the latter clearly more reliable as i have stated before and a necessity when using RB.
I never compared with Macrium Reflect.
1) have you seen anywhere on their guide or their knowledge base, a warning that RollbackRX should not be used without a ups protecting the pc? I haven't.
2) this should never happen. People install it, for protecting themselves from bad updates, viruses, program testing and BSODs. No one explains to them, that if during an program installation or an update they encounter a BSOD, (and if rollbackrx optimizes it's database at the same time) they have a very high probability of lossing their snapshots and their data...
I agree but MR does not take down the entire system with it. And even if it did it allows you to restore to a previous backup.
RBrx on the other hand takes down the entire system and despite it's main purpose which is to protect and recover the system, does not protect, fails to recover and if that is not enough makes it impossible to retrieve any files from the disk. And people are buying it for that exact reason, where it fails miserably.
Separate names with a comma.