Newbie ALMOST ready to commit... Q&A

[Owl]

Hi Folks, I'm new in town. Let me give you the back-story, then I'll come on to some comments, observations, and questions I would like to clear up before I grasp the nettle and sign up for your favourite (UK spelling!) roll-back utility. I've done a fair bit of reading up before getting this far, so please don't jump on me if I've missed something obvious.

About 4 months ago my previous XP PC died of terminal old age, and I needed to be up and running quickly so I had little choice but visit my local PC superstore with a wad of money and came home with a shiny new Win7 Home Premium 64-bit notebook. I spent some time getting used to Win7 and knocking it into the shape I wanted with the apps I need (handy getting rid of the dross I collected but stopped using over the years), user files I simply pulled in from the hard drive of the dead machine.

I got to thinking I would like to be able to back track if a software installation went wrong, or something I installed turned out to be a dog. Windows System Restore seems to be much better in Win7 in that it saves old versions of files etc and not just settings, but obviously would be of no help if a crash stopped Windows booting. Then along came a magazine with Comodo Time Machine on the cover DVD (two magazines in fact), and I thought that looked just the thing so I installed it.

Everything was fine - for a while. Windows boot was prefixed by a Time Machine boot screen with an option to enter the console, very comforting. When an update from Zone Alarm 9.1 to 9.2 shredded my Windows boot (RECOMMENDATION: don't take the upgrade option, uninstall and then clean install 9.2), I booted into the CTM console and picked an earlier snapshot and was pleased to have Win7 up again instantly.

Then the problems started. Win7 had become unstable, gave me "page error in non-paged area" faults at random (signs of faulty memory or corrupt drivers), and also app freezes, which required reboots (Task Manager couldn't help kill the app). CTM was persistently complaining of low snapshot memory, and nothing I did seemed to fix it. When I started searching the Web to find out where it stores its snapshots (I run a minimal C: partition for the OS and apps, and keep my user files on other partitions), I came across masses of user dissatisfaction with Comodo Time Machine having trashed their systems.

There was nothing for it but to save off my user partitions and run the BIOS "restore factory config" option, rebuilding the entire hard disc from the hidden recovery partition, and that's the state I am in now - ultra clean system unsullied by any app installs, and just admin and temp user accounts to browse the Web and a bit of housekeeping (don't panic, my router keeps outside nasties at bay).

My experience of CTM almost put me off completely, but while I was examining the corpse RollBack Rx seemed to be getting plaudits, and after a lot of soul-searching I've more-or-less decided to go with it on the following grounds:

1. Good to have a way of immediately withdrawing a disliked installation
2. Can't rely on Windows Restore if Windows is dead
3. Windows Restore takes up a lot of space
4. Can't use Windows Restore to create multiple environments

End of "story so far"; now for "story continues" with observations, comments, and questions...

Needless to say I've been looking carefully at what RBRx does and doesn't do. I don't think it can be as bad as one miffed poster makes out - in his case I think it was an instance of acting in panic and making a bad situation worse. When the worst happens you really do need to step back and do nothing until you understand what's going on (chess players "sit on their hands"). It helps to have another machine to be able to consult the Web. In my case it was the Zone Alarm failure which killed my machine, but CTM failed to restore it properly and I don't think any amount of thinking would have saved it.

Other posters are concerned about back-up, or being able to rescue data from a corrupt partition using an emergency Linux boot or whatever. There is an easy answer: don't keep your user data on the OS partition. By default Windows sets up "My Documents" etc on the system partition, but you don't have to leave it there. If I'm lazy I just have another My Documents folder on my data partition (and I use FAT so there are no issues with ownership etc), but I have been known to use TweakUI and actually move the official user directory structures.

Either way, by keeping data seperate from OS and apps, it is easy to back up the real value on your disc (your unique personal data set), or read it from a completely different OS if you want, or having removed the HD from a broken PC to read on another PC (I find a USB-to-HD adapter very handy).

In the worst case, do you really need a back-up of the OS partition? No. It can always be rebuilt from the original install files (I squirrel away all my app installation files in a library I call the "software vault"), but I have never rebuilt the OS partition as it was anyway. It is always time for a spring-clean, and the software vault acts more as a reminder and a fount of last resort (if the particular app is no longer available) than the preferred source, because there is usually a new version of each app out there for the taking.

Even so, it would seem to be prudent (and a time saver) to make a back-up of the RBRx-protected system partition (DO NOT RBRx-protect your data, there are far better ways of doing that), and as noted elsewhere that means a partition image and MBR (Master Boot Record) dump (and the means to restore it) rather than a copy of the file set (which, as noted, if done within Windows will only give you the current working environment and if done outside Windows will only give you the pre-RBRx baseline). The image will be quite big, but you only need one of them. If you can back up and restore a complete partition including all the RBRx database intact, then you only need a "latest" version (known working) and RBRx will handle all the back-tracking to previous versions.

Now then, here's a challenge: Horizon might not like the idea because it is adding functionality to RBRx they could charge for in a separate app (and no doubt do), but it seems to me that it would be very little effort to add the means to back up and restore a complete RBRx volume from the RBRx boot console. Even better if the back-up image could be in a format that wasn't locked-in to RBRx so that in a real emergency data could be extracted in any way one chose. After all, the functionality to understand the data structure is already there, so what else would be needed? I view an RBRx volume as a spe******ed disc structure (why is this being changed to asterisks?? The word is "s p e c i a l i s e d"), and RBRx provides Windows with a driver to be able to access it - is that a good analogy?

It's a pity about Comodo Time Machine, it has some nice features. The snapshot history can be shown graphically (with branches where there are multiple paths through the snapshots), and as far as I can see RBRx doesn't do that (am I wrong?).

Further, if you want to retrieve data from a different snapshot you don't have to fire up that snapshot - you can go into the CTM console (from Windows) and mount a snapshot as a drive, do what you want in Explorer, then unmount it again. Handy for files that did end up on C: for whatever reason. Can RBRx do that??

However, CTM did fail in that it seemed to not image user files (particularly in the virtual store) except the Admin account, or at least not make them available in a mounted volume.

I've pretty much said my piece, and I look forward to feedback. To finish, a few random questions:

I assume RBRx can create non-linear snapshots, by which I mean Snapshot A can spawn Snapshot B, but then you can roll back to Snapshot A and then create snapshot C (different from B) and still have all three accessible to roll back (or roll forward)?

What would happen if I restored the original Windows MBR on an RBRx volume? I assume (from my reading) that the volume would effectively roll back to the pre-RBRx state and be fully functional in that state??

If I were to create a multi-boot environment, obviously it would be no good surplanting the RBRx MBR with the boot loader (eg XOSL) MBR because it would knock out RBRx. However, the RBRx MBR could be left in place with the XOSL MBR on a different partition, with the XOSL partition made the active boot, and then the Windows/RBRx partition boots from the XOSL menu. See any problems with that?

[HDS-Jacob]

Greetings Owl! Welcome to the Horizon DataSys forum!

For reference, support can be reached at http://support.horizondatasys.com and let's see if we can get some feedback here.

Best,
Jacob

[Owl]

Yep, thanks, I'll do the Support thing when I have a specific issue. In the mean time will be interested in what the Forum members have to say.

[Masterblaster]

Don't compare Rollback RX to CTM. CTM is trash. Rollback is finished and works very well.
Read this relating to that issue RB vs CTM

[carfal]

Owl, i read your post with great interest. Im a long time user of Rollback and have nothing but praise for the program as its saved me many times over.

Let me just correct you on a couple of things.


Firstly, I got the impression that you believe that CTM came before Rollback. Here is a direct quote from Nick10, one of Horizons' staff.

Originally Posted by Nick10

FYI. The Comodo Time Machine is compiled from an earlier versoin of Rollback Rx source code (v8.0) which was illegally sold to them by a partner.
We're going through legal process for this matter currently regarding this matter. What we can say is that Comodo does not own the IP and thus would mosty probably not be able to continue any constructive development on the product.

RollBack and EAZ FIX are now on V9.1 and will be developed well into the future.

So you see that CTM is indeed based on Rollback not the other way round and would appear that their days are numbered.

Therefore whatever CTM can do Rollback does better only its implemented differently. CTM dressed certain functions, i guess, to give the illusion of a different product but as you can see its all based on Rollback V8.0 code.

Just to answer some specific questions

It's a pity about Comodo Time Machine, it has some nice features. The snapshot history can be shown graphically (with branches where there are multiple paths through the snapshots), and as far as I can see RBRx doesn't do that (am I wrong?).

Yes, Rollback does show history in graphic form.

Further, if you want to retrieve data from a different snapshot you don't have to fire up that snapshot - you can go into the CTM console (from Windows) and mount a snapshot as a drive, do what you want in Explorer, then unmount it again. Handy for files that did end up on C: for whatever reason. Can RBRx do that??

Yes Rollback can do that. I've got to admit that i like the way CTM have implemented this better than Rollbacks way. But essentially you can access the mounted snapshot from Explorer the same as CTM.

I assume RBRx can create non-linear snapshots, by which I mean Snapshot A can spawn Snapshot B, but then you can roll back to Snapshot A and then create snapshot C (different from B) and still have all three accessible to roll back (or roll forward)?

A big YES. After all, this function is the root of the whole concept of Rollback.

[Owl]

Originally Posted by Masterblaster

Don't compare Rollback RX to CTM. CTM is trash. Rollback is finished and works very well.
Read this relating to that issue RB vs CTM

Many thanks for that, interesting. However I certainly did not intend to compare CTM with RBRx, merely comment on what I liked about it - and to note that it trashed my system.

Carfal - thank you for your input.

I'm planning to install tonight, wish me luck (I know you don't think I need any).

.

[Owl]

All OK so far. The next step in my plan is to strip all the junk out of Windows to make it lean, then reset the rollback baseline once I'm happy with it before adding in apps.

I've thought of a snag though, and I wonder how you guys deal with it?

Say you have an anti-virus (for example); when it updates it will have to be updated across all your working snapshots, so that means lots of duplicate copies of identical files because I doubt RollBack Rx can tell that they are identical. Maybe there's some way to update the baseline and propogate that to the spawned snapshots?

This example leads me to another potential problem. Say the AV definition file is kept in non-RBRx space (to prevent the duplication). The registry or whatever in the various snapshots could end up with invalid links, the active snapshot would be OK but the other snapshots would get left behind. The example of the AV might be a bit fanciful because one would probably keep the support files on the system volume, but the same applies to other apps with user files being kept in non-RBRx space (for backup purposes) where the config in one snapshot loses sync when the user files are changed in another snapshot.

Clearly it's best to avoid using any particular app in multiple snapshots.

[Owl]

Originally Posted by Owl

Say you have an anti-virus (for example); when it updates it will have to be updated across all your working snapshots, so that means lots of duplicate copies of identical files because I doubt RollBack Rx can tell that they are identical. Maybe there's some way to update the baseline and propogate that to the spawned snapshots?

Ditto Windows updates.

[nexstar]

Originally Posted by Owl

What would happen if I restored the original Windows MBR on an RBRx volume? I assume (from my reading) that the volume would effectively roll back to the pre-RBRx state and be fully functional in that state??

Yes, the system would be as it was when RB was installed. RB itself would be non-functioning and would either have to be removed or re-installed.

Originally Posted by Owl

If I were to create a multi-boot environment, obviously it would be no good surplanting the RBRx MBR with the boot loader (eg XOSL) MBR because it would knock out RBRx. However, the RBRx MBR could be left in place with the XOSL MBR on a different partition, with the XOSL partition made the active boot, and then the Windows/RBRx partition boots from the XOSL menu. See any problems with that?

I don't do multi-boot but I seem to remember that RB has to be installed on all OS's on the protected drive (or something like that) so I suspect that this would not be possible in the way you describe. Someone else might be able to help out on this one.

Originally Posted by Owl

All OK so far. The next step in my plan is to strip all the junk out of Windows to make it lean, then reset the rollback baseline once I'm happy with it before adding in apps.

I've thought of a snag though, and I wonder how you guys deal with it?

Say you have an anti-virus (for example); when it updates it will have to be updated across all your working snapshots, so that means lots of duplicate copies of identical files because I doubt RollBack Rx can tell that they are identical. Maybe there's some way to update the baseline and propogate that to the spawned snapshots?

The contents of the snapshots are treated as sacrosanct which is one reason RB has to be uninstalled to update it. So updates have to be done on a per snapshot basis when they are loaded. In the past, I have set up systems where the antivirus software and its virus definitions are kept on a non-protected drive but I now tend to just leave them on the protected drive and let them update as required. With broadband speeds now it doesn't normally take long

Originally Posted by Owl

This example leads me to another potential problem. Say the AV definition file is kept in non-RBRx space (to prevent the duplication). The registry or whatever in the various snapshots could end up with invalid links, the active snapshot would be OK but the other snapshots would get left behind. The example of the AV might be a bit fanciful because one would probably keep the support files on the system volume, but the same applies to other apps with user files being kept in non-RBRx space (for backup purposes) where the config in one snapshot loses sync when the user files are changed in another snapshot.

Clearly it's best to avoid using any particular app in multiple snapshots.

Yes, as I've said above, it can be done but I now tend to think that the potential saving in time and storage doesn't really outweigh the risk of things getting out of sync.

Also, antivirus products and the like are very system oriented but I wouldn't have any hesitation in keeping pure data files, (documents, music, photos etc) on a non-protected drive as there's no danger of the system getting out of sync and it is much more convenient when reverting to multiple snapshots

HTH

Graham

[Froggie]

Greetings Owl! There is a feature under "Program Settings/Advanced Settings (last check box) that supposedly allows you to specify files ot folders that remain unchanged as you move between snapshots.

I just tried to activate this feature (for testing purposes on my XPsp3 Pro system)) 2-nights ago and have experienced a problem currently just opened under a different thread...

"File SYNCing error during file retention attempt"

If this feature really works, it may solve your AV propagation problem but will require much investigation to solve your Windoze Updates problem... they usually are massive and spead all over the place (even outside the Windoze folder). I hope to find out why it doesn't work and fix it accordingly...