RollbackRx Is Unstable

You may previously read about my woes with RollbackRx. Link here

After Uninstalling the product, and reinstalling (hence fixing problems i had before). I used rollback for a month or two an now today I get a bsod.

Rollbackrx causes more problems than it solves. It causes the disasters on my otherwise rock solid machines. Now I have to reinstall windows thanks to rollback.

I reckon rollback is too complicated for its own good. To good to be true. So after many frustrated months of trying to use it i am ditching this product that i paid for. So in a nutshell: RollbackRx is crap. Its rubbish.

I hopped that i could say otherwise (like it has some issues) but in this case i have to be blunt about my dissatisfaction with an expensive product and equally poor support.

 

Each time I think the troubles of RBRx are over, I see another problem or disaster post of RBRx.
RBRx was nothing but trouble from the beginning, Wilders has spent more than 600 posts about the troubles of RBRx.
The worst is, the same company terminated FDISR as well, the only alternative for multiple snapshots.
In other words we have nothing anymore, except simple boot-to-restore softwares with much less possibilities.

 

It is base on a unstable technology.

 

This is all a little worrying for me as I currently use Symantec's GoBack which is not available with Vista and so when I move from XP I was planning to use RollbackRX as its replacement.

Given what has been said so far I must now question my approach.

GoBack has been a joy to use; has been rock solid and has saved my bacon too many times then I would care to remember over the 4 years that I have been using it (Roxio sold it when I first bought v3), and it is a shame that it is not being continued under Vista as it looks like it has no peer in terms of what it does.

Shame...IHMO.

 

Sigh The Only Unstable feature about Rollback is the Users Inability to not read the Do's and Don'ts of the Users Manual, but instead they just Dick around with this and that, then bleet like sheep when it suddenly fails My Office Machine has had Rollback for 2 years starting with Version 7,and infact still has version 7 and has been Rolled back about a dozen or maybe 2 dozen times in those 2 years, without any Hiccup whatsoever. My Vista Machine has version 8.1, no need to Rollback as yet (touch wood) but no Blue Screen on either Machine. Continuing on My Notebook has 8.1 Also and has Rolled Back 3 times with Consumate ease My Alienware Rig (3TB HD and 8GB RAM) however has FD-ISR,and thats another story

 

Yes, I would like to know this too.
If I recommend RBRx, I can give the user advices how to run RBRx WITHOUT problems, like avoiding chkdsk, rules for defragmentation, how to safe your data files without losing them, rules for backup, ... anything else that can corrupt RBRx.

 

That is amazing!! What do you think that you are doing that other sophisticated computer users are not doing?

RollbackRx is a disaster. It WILL cause BSOD's and loss of data sooner or later.

 

Another bad experience, using a clone of RBRx :

I'm using FDISR since 2006.06.01, I still use it. That's the difference between stability and instability.
FDISR replaces my system partition during each reboot, that's more than 1000 times a year without problems. That is robust.

 

Not necessarily. There are specific steps that have to happen to corrupt the system. Unfortunately, I think that there are a lot of people who don't fully appreciate that.

Since this product remaps the drive, effectively creating and using it's own file system outside of Windows, disk writes that occur outside of the RollbackRx environment present a particularly problematic situation. Basically, the state viewed by RollbackRx is subject to either severe, problematic, or benign corruption depending upon the specific operations that occur, whether the occur on used or genuinely free space, and, if the change involves "used" space, whether the change involves a key OS or application file. This is why problems don't necessarily emerge immediately on creation of the destructive situation. I don't use this product, so these are inferred from my past reads of their documentation, support comments, FAQ, and patent applications.

If you wish to use the product, you really do need to understand it and understand whether your current system configuration is compatible with these intrinsic constraints. If you system is compatible, you'll be fine. If it's not, you will eventually experience system failure. If you're not sure, you must get about understanding the information that is required to validate compatibility.

Blue

 

MKN Enterprises is no lomger selling EAZ-FIX.
http://www.mknenterprises.com/

 

Total rubbish! Software isnt sold to the public to cause BSOD, if it was every software company in the world would be liquidated,and we would be back to the stone age as computers go.

Thats the question isnt it? Maybe the same thing people do with FD-ISR, and use Reg Cleaners, I dont know, if they said what they were doing at the time, maybe it could be figured out, but they dont they just blame the program because it didnt do what they wanted it to do. reading the FAQ's usually helps,and thats what they're there for.

the chkdsk thing you talk about is nothing that windows wouldnt do anyway Windows runs chkdsk if you inadvertantly shutdown your pc, and so does Rollback, So whats your issue here? As for your files being safe, they are as safe as you make them to be.

However, there are 100's of posts in the FD-ISR Forum how people are having numerous issues wirh FD-ISR, So that Throws your beloved theory right out of the Window

Lets get one thing clear here, I use both FD-ISR and Rollback, and dont have the problems that some do, Maybe I'm Lucky, but screaming about it never did anyone any good, Software Tech support can Generally solve peoples problems, but do they Ask? No they just Yell the products Crap. Bassically these moaning and groaning, and sledging/flaming posts about Software are getting on My Tits, and frankly its all becoming boring.

 

A long while back, almost everytime I went to rollback I would get the chkdsk thing.
After figuring out that it always happened after Rollback Rx defraged its own snapshots.
I made sure I unchecked that in the settings and have not had thee problem since.

 

If there is a strict policy/instructions/warnings set forth ahead of or listed on the installer itself in how best to use Rollback and WHAT TO AVOID due to the different nature Rx manages it's functions, then perhaps that might eleviate a lot of confusion.

Aside from that, i've experienced no problems with my version of EAZ-FIX after i learned it's do's and don'ts.

It's been said their both of the same blueprint/programming code, but no one and nothing, including these ongoing complaints of Rx is convinced me of that yet.

I wouldn't be so hard on new users of RollbackRx though, it's not been the easiest ISR thats ever been conceived, and it can have serious implications on a customer's systems if not understood correctly, and there may even be some errors laden in it still yet.

EASTER

 

You are saying users wont trust the snapshots created by programs like rollback rx but in the same post you say they would trust ati? Please check ATI's forum and you'll see many complaints about it's workings too. No program is perfect.

Thanks,

Chris

 

Don't be too quick to judge rollback. I use both rollback rx and eaz-fix on two different systems and they both work really well. They've both saved me a number of times. Its not hard to use either, my mother ain't that great on a computer yet she has has no trouble using the basics of eaz-fix on her system.

 

lo all

thats goes for u DVD+R... ef/rb are realy working good , i test them for some times , also this amazing fdisr... the only bad thing i can say about ef/rb thats like someone else wrote ... it is indeed loosing prefomance in time to come.

other IMPORTANT isue with is that (read well) u cant realy implement it on PC that his c:\ drive store your downloads (mp3,Xvid....etc )
RB/EF got a big bug in this "monitor" isue (EF support said it will be fixed), it doesnt got the option to avoid monitor dirs !!! so if u have lets say 50 gigs totatl c:\ and u have 30 giga of download stuff (mp3,movies..) thats leave 20 gigs freee... and u try ROLLBACK back/forward u will see the pc will be boot and STUCK, even if u add the "c:\download" to exlude list...thats a damn major BUG which let ppl lost all the stuff!! , the only way to snap out of this is enter EF/RB subsystem and back to baseline , which lead to all c:\download to get wipe OUT!!!

this isue doesn happend in FDISR coz it got the ancore archive which build for such cases!!!

so now ppl will see the other side of EF/RB.... u cant put it on any pc !! FDISR u can.

ef/rb install must be plan like c:\ = 20 giga ONLY for os and basic appz (office,winrar,Divx player...etc)

so what do u do if u got like i said a 50 giga c:\ HD partition (or more) ,where user use it to store/download his stuff?? u start playin with partition programs? huh? risking your stuff? or u start moving data all around the hd + partition to smaller size (lol)

hope i help clear another bad and risky thing on this 2 progs

cheers

 

If I put all so called "problems" regarding RBRx aside, RBRx is still not good enough. FDISR beats all existing boot-to-restore solutions in possibilities and that is a fact.
While other users are blinded by RBRx's speed and less usage of space and even too much simplicity (Returnil), I'm looking at the functions, possibilities and above all limitations of boot-to-restore solutions.
So even when RBRx was working properly 1000 times a year, I still wouldn't use it as long I can use FDISR.
The same counts for any other boot-to-restore solution. I have the best and I keep the best.

Regarding the chkdsk :
The only chkdsk's I see running on my computer are requested by myself.
Any automatic chkdsk would make me feel very uncomfortable, because that means that something was wrong on my computer and that chkdsk is fixing that problem.
I never see any automatic chkdsk and I consider them as abnormal, never as normal.

 

I can't understand why this continues. Leapfrog make it clear that it was they that terminated it.

 

It continues because (a) some choose to ignore explicit factual statements made by those in a position to know and (b) feel compelled to pull any thread on almost any topic back to FD-ISR via direct or indirect reference.

Blue

 

So what ? Ignore it. I ignore so many remarks of other users, like "Norton is crap" to name one example.

 

I'm not the only one who repeats himself over and over again. I'm just more a target than anybody else. I must have stepped on somebody's feet.

 

Touche