Guest Bill in Co. Posted July 21, 2008 Posted July 21, 2008 Re: Restore Because some of the multimedia trial software applications that I try out to see if I want to purchase them are quite extensive, and often change lots of things on my system, some of which are sometimes not reversible by a simple uninstall. I'm talking about some relatively large audio and video apps - multimedia apps, for example. And just uninstalling the program is often not enough. To explain: For example, if you install something (e.g.) like a trial version of Adobe Audition, it makes some pretty extensive changes to your system, and since I do a fair amount of audio restoration work (for myself), with various audio and sometimes video applications, the last thing I need is any added hiccups to my system (such as with codec modifications, codec or DLL removals or replacements, or anything that affects any of my other related multimedia software). (BTDT, on several occasions, so, thanks but no thanks) As I said, I've been around the block on this one. (One has to have really walked the walk, to know the talk, here. :-) And the ONLY sure and safe way to get it back *perfectly as it was* is to do a restore operation, should you wish (I mean, a guaranteed clean "uninstall" of the app AND whatever collateral system, codec, DLLs, etc, "damage" it had the potential to do, and sometimes has, in the past. As I said, BTDT. (But does this mean I never just use uninstall? Of course not. It all depends, and experience is the best lesson, to really know this one). Daave wrote: > I'm pretty sure that Unknown wants to know why you feel there is a need > to restore a disk image when uninstalling the program you are testing > and performing a System Restore (if necessary) should be adequate. It's > great that you image your drive as often as you do, but the idea is you > restore the image *only* if you run into actual problems that can only > be reversed by restoring the image. > > > "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message > news:ujQbacr6IHA.3856@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... >> Maybe once a week. Sometimes more often, sometimes less often, >> depending on how much I'm messin with my system. :-) >> >> Unknown wrote: >>> Good grief! How many times do you restore????????? >>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message >>> news:ev4%23Kyd6IHA.1420@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... >>>> Nope. It is EVERY time I *restore*. It *always* takes about an >>>> hour >>>> to *restore* the system partition. (The backup time is much >>>> less, as >>>> I've pointed out) >>>> >>>> Unknown wrote: >>>>> Geeeeze! That's only the first time you back-up. Other times are >>>>> fast so >>>>> it IS insignificant.. >>>>> >>>>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message >>>>> news:uyYpAbd6IHA.1200@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... >>>>>> I don't think an hour of waiting around for it to complete is >>>>>> "completely >>>>>> insignificant". >>>>>> >>>>>> Unknown wrote: >>>>>>> Completely insignificant. >>>>>>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message >>>>>>> news:uD5UjCS6IHA.4988@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... >>>>>>>> Of course there is, in what I've been addressing: namely, the >>>>>>>> time it >>>>>>>> takes to backup and restore the whole C: partition, and NOT just >>>>>>>> for >>>>>>>> HD >>>>>>>> damage purposes, but for some awry software installations and/or >>>>>>>> tests, >>>>>>>> and what have you. Obviously if you don't install anything or >>>>>>>> test >>>>>>>> anything very often, it's not an issue. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Unknown wrote: >>>>>>>>> But what speed penalty?? You back up periodically and restore >>>>>>>>> when >>>>>>>>> something >>>>>>>>> is damaged. >>>>>>>>> There is no speed difference whatsoever in normal operations. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message >>>>>>>>> news:O$0Lj%23Q6IHA.2240@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... >>>>>>>>>> Using USB external hard drives for image backup and restore >>>>>>>>>> operations, >>>>>>>>>> VS >>>>>>>>>> using either another internal drive OR using an external eSATA >>>>>>>>>> drive. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Unknown wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> What speed penalty? There isn't any. >>>>>>>>>>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in >>>>>>>>>>> message >>>>>>>>>>> news:%23GZ64ZH6IHA.2220@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... >>>>>>>>>>>> Yeah, I've heard about that, but I've been putting it off. >>>>>>>>>>>> But >>>>>>>>>>>> maybe >>>>>>>>>>>> it's getting close to that time to take a look. :-) >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Daave wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in >>>>>>>>>>>>> message >>>>>>>>>>>>> news:%23EBff6F6IHA.300@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Normally, yes. However, for just doing a quick backup >>>>>>>>>>>>>> and >>>>>>>>>>>>>> restore >>>>>>>>>>>>>> for some software testing, there is a significant speed >>>>>>>>>>>>>> penalty >>>>>>>>>>>>>> in >>>>>>>>>>>>>> doing that (I'm talking about using the external USB >>>>>>>>>>>>>> enclosure >>>>>>>>>>>>>> drives). >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Fortunately, eSATA drives are affordable: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822161044 >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> No speed penalty whatsoever. :-)
Guest Anna Posted July 21, 2008 Posted July 21, 2008 Re: Restore > Daave wrote: >> I'm pretty sure that Unknown wants to know why you feel there is a need >> to restore a disk image when uninstalling the program you are testing >> and performing a System Restore (if necessary) should be adequate. It's >> great that you image your drive as often as you do, but the idea is you >> restore the image *only* if you run into actual problems that can only >> be reversed by restoring the image. "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:uSa$cxu6IHA.2348@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... > Because some of the multimedia trial software applications that I try out > to see if I want to purchase them are quite extensive, and often change > lots of things on my system, some of which are sometimes not reversible by > a simple uninstall. > > I'm talking about some relatively large audio and video apps - multimedia > apps, for example. And just uninstalling the program is often not > enough. To explain: > > For example, if you install something (e.g.) like a trial version of Adobe > Audition, it makes some pretty extensive changes to your system, and since > I do a fair amount of audio restoration work (for myself), with various > audio and sometimes video applications, the last thing I need is any added > hiccups to my system (such as with codec modifications, codec or DLL > removals or replacements, or anything that affects any of my other related > multimedia software). > > (BTDT, on several occasions, so, thanks but no thanks) > As I said, I've been around the block on this one. (One has to have > really walked the walk, to know the talk, here. :-) > > And the ONLY sure and safe way to get it back *perfectly as it was* is to > do a restore operation, should you wish (I mean, a guaranteed clean > "uninstall" of the app AND whatever collateral system, codec, DLLs, etc, > "damage" it had the potential to do, and sometimes has, in the past. As > I said, BTDT. > > (But does this mean I never just use uninstall? Of course not. It all > depends, and experience is the best lesson, to really know this one). Daave (& others)... Bill makes a good point as to a significant advantage in backing up one's system (either through the disk-imaging or disk-cloning process) as a security measure *prior* to installing new programs, modifying configurations, etc. on one's day-to-day working HDD. How many times have we all installed a program on our system or made this or that change to our OS configuration or modified some other aspect in our system - only to learn that the new program or change created havoc with our system and now we're faced with an onerous & time-consuming task of returning our system to a bootable functional state that we previously experienced. And even when we do presumably correct the situation - truth be told - in many instances the "debris" left behind by these "presumably" removed programs and our attempt to modify a changed configuration to its previous functional state will, in many instances, rise up to "bite" us at some future date. All one has to do is peruse this & similar newsgroups dealing with users' OS problems. How many times an hour - a day - a week - do we see a plaintive call for help because... "I just installed SP3 and now my computer doesn't even boot", or, "I made that registry change XYZ suggested and I'm getting weird messages from Windows", or, "I installed the latest update from Microsoft and now my anti-spyware program has been trashed", or "I installed that new Super-Duper Anti-Malware program and now all I get a black screen", or... the list goes on & on, does it not? In so many cases the problem would have been a non-problem had the user made a precise copy of his or her functional system *prior* to installing a major program on their machine or making some major change in their otherwise perfectly-working system. And, as Bill points out, this can be relatively easily achieved through the use of a disk-imaging (or disk-cloning) program. So that in the event of a catastrophe - minor or major - the system can be easily restored to its previous functional state. As you (and possibly others) may know from my previous posts on the subject of backup programs, we prefer the Casper 5 disk-cloning program to achieve this kind of relative security. Especially since that program does its disk-to-disk cloning work in a very speedy fashion so that the user is not constrained from using the program in the manner described above when circumstances warrant. Both the backup & restore operations (since both involve the same disk-cloning process) are simple & quick. I'm not, of course, suggesting that the user needs to carry out a disk-cloning (or disk-imaging) operation every time a change is made to their system when such change is obviously trivial in nature. But in my view the user should be prudent in exercising caution whenever a relatively major (or significant) change in their system is contemplated, and backup their system *prior* to the intended change. Anna
Guest JS Posted July 21, 2008 Posted July 21, 2008 Re: Restore Too bad you don't live next door, I've got an old tape of some sheet music I wrote and performed by Duane Eddy some years back. The tape has the typical 60Hz hum and other noise. JS "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:uSa$cxu6IHA.2348@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... > Because some of the multimedia trial software applications that I try out > to see if I want to purchase them are quite extensive, and often change > lots of things on my system, some of which are sometimes not reversible by > a simple uninstall. > > I'm talking about some relatively large audio and video apps - multimedia > apps, for example. And just uninstalling the program is often not > enough. To explain: > > For example, if you install something (e.g.) like a trial version of Adobe > Audition, it makes some pretty extensive changes to your system, and since > I do a fair amount of audio restoration work (for myself), with various > audio and sometimes video applications, the last thing I need is any added > hiccups to my system (such as with codec modifications, codec or DLL > removals or replacements, or anything that affects any of my other related > multimedia software). > > (BTDT, on several occasions, so, thanks but no thanks) > As I said, I've been around the block on this one. (One has to have > really walked the walk, to know the talk, here. :-) > > And the ONLY sure and safe way to get it back *perfectly as it was* is to > do a restore operation, should you wish (I mean, a guaranteed clean > "uninstall" of the app AND whatever collateral system, codec, DLLs, etc, > "damage" it had the potential to do, and sometimes has, in the past. As > I said, BTDT. > > (But does this mean I never just use uninstall? Of course not. It all > depends, and experience is the best lesson, to really know this one). > > Daave wrote: >> I'm pretty sure that Unknown wants to know why you feel there is a need >> to restore a disk image when uninstalling the program you are testing >> and performing a System Restore (if necessary) should be adequate. It's >> great that you image your drive as often as you do, but the idea is you >> restore the image *only* if you run into actual problems that can only >> be reversed by restoring the image. >> >> >> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message >> news:ujQbacr6IHA.3856@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... >>> Maybe once a week. Sometimes more often, sometimes less often, >>> depending on how much I'm messin with my system. :-) >>> >>> Unknown wrote: >>>> Good grief! How many times do you restore????????? >>>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message >>>> news:ev4%23Kyd6IHA.1420@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... >>>>> Nope. It is EVERY time I *restore*. It *always* takes about an >>>>> hour >>>>> to *restore* the system partition. (The backup time is much >>>>> less, as >>>>> I've pointed out) >>>>> >>>>> Unknown wrote: >>>>>> Geeeeze! That's only the first time you back-up. Other times are >>>>>> fast so >>>>>> it IS insignificant.. >>>>>> >>>>>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message >>>>>> news:uyYpAbd6IHA.1200@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... >>>>>>> I don't think an hour of waiting around for it to complete is >>>>>>> "completely >>>>>>> insignificant". >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Unknown wrote: >>>>>>>> Completely insignificant. >>>>>>>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message >>>>>>>> news:uD5UjCS6IHA.4988@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... >>>>>>>>> Of course there is, in what I've been addressing: namely, the >>>>>>>>> time it >>>>>>>>> takes to backup and restore the whole C: partition, and NOT just >>>>>>>>> for >>>>>>>>> HD >>>>>>>>> damage purposes, but for some awry software installations and/or >>>>>>>>> tests, >>>>>>>>> and what have you. Obviously if you don't install anything or >>>>>>>>> test >>>>>>>>> anything very often, it's not an issue. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Unknown wrote: >>>>>>>>>> But what speed penalty?? You back up periodically and restore >>>>>>>>>> when >>>>>>>>>> something >>>>>>>>>> is damaged. >>>>>>>>>> There is no speed difference whatsoever in normal operations. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message >>>>>>>>>> news:O$0Lj%23Q6IHA.2240@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... >>>>>>>>>>> Using USB external hard drives for image backup and restore >>>>>>>>>>> operations, >>>>>>>>>>> VS >>>>>>>>>>> using either another internal drive OR using an external eSATA >>>>>>>>>>> drive. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Unknown wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> What speed penalty? There isn't any. >>>>>>>>>>>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in >>>>>>>>>>>> message >>>>>>>>>>>> news:%23GZ64ZH6IHA.2220@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... >>>>>>>>>>>>> Yeah, I've heard about that, but I've been putting it off. >>>>>>>>>>>>> But >>>>>>>>>>>>> maybe >>>>>>>>>>>>> it's getting close to that time to take a look. :-) >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Daave wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in >>>>>>>>>>>>>> message >>>>>>>>>>>>>> news:%23EBff6F6IHA.300@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Normally, yes. However, for just doing a quick backup >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> restore >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for some software testing, there is a significant speed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> penalty >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> doing that (I'm talking about using the external USB >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> enclosure >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> drives). >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Fortunately, eSATA drives are affordable: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822161044 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> No speed penalty whatsoever. :-) > >
Guest JS Posted July 21, 2008 Posted July 21, 2008 Re: Restore I've have an old software package I used years ago to document the changes made to a system when installing an application and the changes made after uninstalling the same application. Let me tell you their are so many pieces left behind by some apps that unless you want to spend all day to get rid of them an Image restore can put you back to exactly the way the system was before the application was installed is short order. For testing purposes that Image backup becomes a reference point that you can always go back to. JS "Anna" <myname@myisp.net> wrote in message news:eu18jbz6IHA.2336@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... > >> Daave wrote: >>> I'm pretty sure that Unknown wants to know why you feel there is a need >>> to restore a disk image when uninstalling the program you are testing >>> and performing a System Restore (if necessary) should be adequate. It's >>> great that you image your drive as often as you do, but the idea is you >>> restore the image *only* if you run into actual problems that can only >>> be reversed by restoring the image. > > > "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message > news:uSa$cxu6IHA.2348@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... >> Because some of the multimedia trial software applications that I try out >> to see if I want to purchase them are quite extensive, and often change >> lots of things on my system, some of which are sometimes not reversible >> by a simple uninstall. >> >> I'm talking about some relatively large audio and video apps - multimedia >> apps, for example. And just uninstalling the program is often not >> enough. To explain: >> >> For example, if you install something (e.g.) like a trial version of >> Adobe Audition, it makes some pretty extensive changes to your system, >> and since I do a fair amount of audio restoration work (for myself), with >> various audio and sometimes video applications, the last thing I need is >> any added hiccups to my system (such as with codec modifications, codec >> or DLL removals or replacements, or anything that affects any of my other >> related multimedia software). >> >> (BTDT, on several occasions, so, thanks but no thanks) >> As I said, I've been around the block on this one. (One has to have >> really walked the walk, to know the talk, here. :-) >> >> And the ONLY sure and safe way to get it back *perfectly as it was* is to >> do a restore operation, should you wish (I mean, a guaranteed clean >> "uninstall" of the app AND whatever collateral system, codec, DLLs, etc, >> "damage" it had the potential to do, and sometimes has, in the past. As >> I said, BTDT. >> >> (But does this mean I never just use uninstall? Of course not. It >> all depends, and experience is the best lesson, to really know this one). > > > Daave (& others)... > Bill makes a good point as to a significant advantage in backing up one's > system (either through the disk-imaging or disk-cloning process) as a > security measure *prior* to installing new programs, modifying > configurations, etc. on one's day-to-day working HDD. How many times have > we all installed a program on our system or made this or that change to > our OS configuration or modified some other aspect in our system - only to > learn that the new program or change created havoc with our system and now > we're faced with an onerous & time-consuming task of returning our system > to a bootable functional state that we previously experienced. And even > when we do presumably correct the situation - truth be told - in many > instances the "debris" left behind by these "presumably" removed programs > and our attempt to modify a changed configuration to its previous > functional state will, in many instances, rise up to "bite" us at some > future date. > > All one has to do is peruse this & similar newsgroups dealing with users' > OS problems. How many times an hour - a day - a week - do we see a > plaintive call for help because... > "I just installed SP3 and now my computer doesn't even boot", or, > "I made that registry change XYZ suggested and I'm getting weird messages > from Windows", or, > "I installed the latest update from Microsoft and now my anti-spyware > program has been trashed", or > "I installed that new Super-Duper Anti-Malware program and now all I get a > black screen", or... > the list goes on & on, does it not? > > In so many cases the problem would have been a non-problem had the user > made a precise copy of his or her functional system *prior* to installing > a major program on their machine or making some major change in their > otherwise perfectly-working system. And, as Bill points out, this can be > relatively easily achieved through the use of a disk-imaging (or > disk-cloning) program. So that in the event of a catastrophe - minor or > major - the system can be easily restored to its previous functional > state. > > As you (and possibly others) may know from my previous posts on the > subject of backup programs, we prefer the Casper 5 disk-cloning program to > achieve this kind of relative security. Especially since that program does > its disk-to-disk cloning work in a very speedy fashion so that the user is > not constrained from using the program in the manner described above when > circumstances warrant. Both the backup & restore operations (since both > involve the same disk-cloning process) are simple & quick. > > I'm not, of course, suggesting that the user needs to carry out a > disk-cloning (or disk-imaging) operation every time a change is made to > their system when such change is obviously trivial in nature. But in my > view the user should be prudent in exercising caution whenever a > relatively major (or significant) change in their system is contemplated, > and backup their system *prior* to the intended change. > Anna > >
Guest Unknown Posted July 21, 2008 Posted July 21, 2008 Re: Restore The original point Bill was trying to make was the amount of time needed to restore his system. Is it earth shattering if it takes 20 minutes instead of 18 minutes? I think not. "Anna" <myname@myisp.net> wrote in message news:eu18jbz6IHA.2336@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... > >> Daave wrote: >>> I'm pretty sure that Unknown wants to know why you feel there is a need >>> to restore a disk image when uninstalling the program you are testing >>> and performing a System Restore (if necessary) should be adequate. It's >>> great that you image your drive as often as you do, but the idea is you >>> restore the image *only* if you run into actual problems that can only >>> be reversed by restoring the image. > > > "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message > news:uSa$cxu6IHA.2348@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... >> Because some of the multimedia trial software applications that I try out >> to see if I want to purchase them are quite extensive, and often change >> lots of things on my system, some of which are sometimes not reversible >> by a simple uninstall. >> >> I'm talking about some relatively large audio and video apps - multimedia >> apps, for example. And just uninstalling the program is often not >> enough. To explain: >> >> For example, if you install something (e.g.) like a trial version of >> Adobe Audition, it makes some pretty extensive changes to your system, >> and since I do a fair amount of audio restoration work (for myself), with >> various audio and sometimes video applications, the last thing I need is >> any added hiccups to my system (such as with codec modifications, codec >> or DLL removals or replacements, or anything that affects any of my other >> related multimedia software). >> >> (BTDT, on several occasions, so, thanks but no thanks) >> As I said, I've been around the block on this one. (One has to have >> really walked the walk, to know the talk, here. :-) >> >> And the ONLY sure and safe way to get it back *perfectly as it was* is to >> do a restore operation, should you wish (I mean, a guaranteed clean >> "uninstall" of the app AND whatever collateral system, codec, DLLs, etc, >> "damage" it had the potential to do, and sometimes has, in the past. As >> I said, BTDT. >> >> (But does this mean I never just use uninstall? Of course not. It >> all depends, and experience is the best lesson, to really know this one). > > > Daave (& others)... > Bill makes a good point as to a significant advantage in backing up one's > system (either through the disk-imaging or disk-cloning process) as a > security measure *prior* to installing new programs, modifying > configurations, etc. on one's day-to-day working HDD. How many times have > we all installed a program on our system or made this or that change to > our OS configuration or modified some other aspect in our system - only to > learn that the new program or change created havoc with our system and now > we're faced with an onerous & time-consuming task of returning our system > to a bootable functional state that we previously experienced. And even > when we do presumably correct the situation - truth be told - in many > instances the "debris" left behind by these "presumably" removed programs > and our attempt to modify a changed configuration to its previous > functional state will, in many instances, rise up to "bite" us at some > future date. > > All one has to do is peruse this & similar newsgroups dealing with users' > OS problems. How many times an hour - a day - a week - do we see a > plaintive call for help because... > "I just installed SP3 and now my computer doesn't even boot", or, > "I made that registry change XYZ suggested and I'm getting weird messages > from Windows", or, > "I installed the latest update from Microsoft and now my anti-spyware > program has been trashed", or > "I installed that new Super-Duper Anti-Malware program and now all I get a > black screen", or... > the list goes on & on, does it not? > > In so many cases the problem would have been a non-problem had the user > made a precise copy of his or her functional system *prior* to installing > a major program on their machine or making some major change in their > otherwise perfectly-working system. And, as Bill points out, this can be > relatively easily achieved through the use of a disk-imaging (or > disk-cloning) program. So that in the event of a catastrophe - minor or > major - the system can be easily restored to its previous functional > state. > > As you (and possibly others) may know from my previous posts on the > subject of backup programs, we prefer the Casper 5 disk-cloning program to > achieve this kind of relative security. Especially since that program does > its disk-to-disk cloning work in a very speedy fashion so that the user is > not constrained from using the program in the manner described above when > circumstances warrant. Both the backup & restore operations (since both > involve the same disk-cloning process) are simple & quick. > > I'm not, of course, suggesting that the user needs to carry out a > disk-cloning (or disk-imaging) operation every time a change is made to > their system when such change is obviously trivial in nature. But in my > view the user should be prudent in exercising caution whenever a > relatively major (or significant) change in their system is contemplated, > and backup their system *prior* to the intended change. > Anna > >
Guest Bill in Co. Posted July 22, 2008 Posted July 22, 2008 Re: Restore Unknown wrote: > The original point Bill was trying to make was the amount of time needed > to > restore his system. > Is it earth shattering if it takes 20 minutes instead of 18 minutes? I > think > not. Well you think wrong, as it takes *one hour* to do the restore operation. :-) And I do it often enough, that it matters to me (if I have a choice, and I do). But it ain't gonna take an hour for too much longer, once the new ship comes in to harbor, with some new goodies (like an eSATA external drive), on board. I hope. :-) > "Anna" <myname@myisp.net> wrote in message > news:eu18jbz6IHA.2336@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... >> >>> Daave wrote: >>>> I'm pretty sure that Unknown wants to know why you feel there is a need >>>> to restore a disk image when uninstalling the program you are testing >>>> and performing a System Restore (if necessary) should be adequate. It's >>>> great that you image your drive as often as you do, but the idea is you >>>> restore the image *only* if you run into actual problems that can only >>>> be reversed by restoring the image. >> >> >> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message >> news:uSa$cxu6IHA.2348@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... >>> Because some of the multimedia trial software applications that I try >>> out >>> to see if I want to purchase them are quite extensive, and often change >>> lots of things on my system, some of which are sometimes not reversible >>> by a simple uninstall. >>> >>> I'm talking about some relatively large audio and video apps - >>> multimedia >>> apps, for example. And just uninstalling the program is often not >>> enough. To explain: >>> >>> For example, if you install something (e.g.) like a trial version of >>> Adobe Audition, it makes some pretty extensive changes to your system, >>> and since I do a fair amount of audio restoration work (for myself), >>> with >>> various audio and sometimes video applications, the last thing I need is >>> any added hiccups to my system (such as with codec modifications, codec >>> or DLL removals or replacements, or anything that affects any of my >>> other >>> related multimedia software). >>> >>> (BTDT, on several occasions, so, thanks but no thanks) >>> As I said, I've been around the block on this one. (One has to have >>> really walked the walk, to know the talk, here. :-) >>> >>> And the ONLY sure and safe way to get it back *perfectly as it was* is >>> to >>> do a restore operation, should you wish (I mean, a guaranteed clean >>> "uninstall" of the app AND whatever collateral system, codec, DLLs, etc, >>> "damage" it had the potential to do, and sometimes has, in the past. >>> As >>> I said, BTDT. >>> >>> (But does this mean I never just use uninstall? Of course not. It >>> all depends, and experience is the best lesson, to really know this >>> one). >> >> >> Daave (& others)... >> Bill makes a good point as to a significant advantage in backing up one's >> system (either through the disk-imaging or disk-cloning process) as a >> security measure *prior* to installing new programs, modifying >> configurations, etc. on one's day-to-day working HDD. How many times have >> we all installed a program on our system or made this or that change to >> our OS configuration or modified some other aspect in our system - only >> to >> learn that the new program or change created havoc with our system and >> now >> we're faced with an onerous & time-consuming task of returning our system >> to a bootable functional state that we previously experienced. And even >> when we do presumably correct the situation - truth be told - in many >> instances the "debris" left behind by these "presumably" removed programs >> and our attempt to modify a changed configuration to its previous >> functional state will, in many instances, rise up to "bite" us at some >> future date. >> >> All one has to do is peruse this & similar newsgroups dealing with users' >> OS problems. How many times an hour - a day - a week - do we see a >> plaintive call for help because... >> "I just installed SP3 and now my computer doesn't even boot", or, >> "I made that registry change XYZ suggested and I'm getting weird messages >> from Windows", or, >> "I installed the latest update from Microsoft and now my anti-spyware >> program has been trashed", or >> "I installed that new Super-Duper Anti-Malware program and now all I get >> a >> black screen", or... >> the list goes on & on, does it not? >> >> In so many cases the problem would have been a non-problem had the user >> made a precise copy of his or her functional system *prior* to >> installing >> a major program on their machine or making some major change in their >> otherwise perfectly-working system. And, as Bill points out, this can be >> relatively easily achieved through the use of a disk-imaging (or >> disk-cloning) program. So that in the event of a catastrophe - minor or >> major - the system can be easily restored to its previous functional >> state. >> >> As you (and possibly others) may know from my previous posts on the >> subject of backup programs, we prefer the Casper 5 disk-cloning program >> to >> achieve this kind of relative security. Especially since that program >> does >> its disk-to-disk cloning work in a very speedy fashion so that the user >> is >> not constrained from using the program in the manner described above when >> circumstances warrant. Both the backup & restore operations (since both >> involve the same disk-cloning process) are simple & quick. >> >> I'm not, of course, suggesting that the user needs to carry out a >> disk-cloning (or disk-imaging) operation every time a change is made to >> their system when such change is obviously trivial in nature. But in my >> view the user should be prudent in exercising caution whenever a >> relatively major (or significant) change in their system is contemplated, >> and backup their system *prior* to the intended change. >> Anna
Guest Bill in Co. Posted July 22, 2008 Posted July 22, 2008 Re: Restore Yup, and that's likely correctible, to a large extent, anyways. Well, you can do it too, if you get into audio restoration. The software is out there, and most of it is pretty inexpensive (like in the $50 - $100 range). The one thing I've learned, which is so often true in life, is "less is more". So if you get into this, procede carefully, and don't go overboard in the restoration. :-) BTW, I wouldn't really recommend Adobe Audition (it's overkill), and I'm NOT going to try out the latest albatross, on further thought. But as I said, there are a LOT of inexpensive apps out there. You might try it, it's fun (but a bit time consuming). It's kinda like doing photo restoration work, only it's for audio, instead of images. JS wrote: > Too bad you don't live next door, I've got an old tape of some sheet music > I > wrote and performed by Duane Eddy some years back. > The tape has the typical 60Hz hum and other noise. > > JS > > "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message > news:uSa$cxu6IHA.2348@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... >> Because some of the multimedia trial software applications that I try out >> to see if I want to purchase them are quite extensive, and often change >> lots of things on my system, some of which are sometimes not reversible >> by >> a simple uninstall. >> >> I'm talking about some relatively large audio and video apps - multimedia >> apps, for example. And just uninstalling the program is often not >> enough. To explain: >> >> For example, if you install something (e.g.) like a trial version of >> Adobe >> Audition, it makes some pretty extensive changes to your system, and >> since >> I do a fair amount of audio restoration work (for myself), with various >> audio and sometimes video applications, the last thing I need is any >> added >> hiccups to my system (such as with codec modifications, codec or DLL >> removals or replacements, or anything that affects any of my other >> related >> multimedia software). >> >> (BTDT, on several occasions, so, thanks but no thanks) >> As I said, I've been around the block on this one. (One has to have >> really walked the walk, to know the talk, here. :-) >> >> And the ONLY sure and safe way to get it back *perfectly as it was* is to >> do a restore operation, should you wish (I mean, a guaranteed clean >> "uninstall" of the app AND whatever collateral system, codec, DLLs, etc, >> "damage" it had the potential to do, and sometimes has, in the past. As >> I said, BTDT. >> >> (But does this mean I never just use uninstall? Of course not. It >> all >> depends, and experience is the best lesson, to really know this one). >> >> Daave wrote: >>> I'm pretty sure that Unknown wants to know why you feel there is a need >>> to restore a disk image when uninstalling the program you are testing >>> and performing a System Restore (if necessary) should be adequate. It's >>> great that you image your drive as often as you do, but the idea is you >>> restore the image *only* if you run into actual problems that can only >>> be reversed by restoring the image. >>> >>> >>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message >>> news:ujQbacr6IHA.3856@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... >>>> Maybe once a week. Sometimes more often, sometimes less often, >>>> depending on how much I'm messin with my system. :-) >>>> >>>> Unknown wrote: >>>>> Good grief! How many times do you restore????????? >>>>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message >>>>> news:ev4%23Kyd6IHA.1420@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... >>>>>> Nope. It is EVERY time I *restore*. It *always* takes about an >>>>>> hour >>>>>> to *restore* the system partition. (The backup time is much >>>>>> less, as >>>>>> I've pointed out) >>>>>> >>>>>> Unknown wrote: >>>>>>> Geeeeze! That's only the first time you back-up. Other times are >>>>>>> fast so >>>>>>> it IS insignificant.. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message >>>>>>> news:uyYpAbd6IHA.1200@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... >>>>>>>> I don't think an hour of waiting around for it to complete is >>>>>>>> "completely >>>>>>>> insignificant". >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Unknown wrote: >>>>>>>>> Completely insignificant. >>>>>>>>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message >>>>>>>>> news:uD5UjCS6IHA.4988@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... >>>>>>>>>> Of course there is, in what I've been addressing: namely, the >>>>>>>>>> time it >>>>>>>>>> takes to backup and restore the whole C: partition, and NOT just >>>>>>>>>> for >>>>>>>>>> HD >>>>>>>>>> damage purposes, but for some awry software installations and/or >>>>>>>>>> tests, >>>>>>>>>> and what have you. Obviously if you don't install anything or >>>>>>>>>> test >>>>>>>>>> anything very often, it's not an issue. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Unknown wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> But what speed penalty?? You back up periodically and restore >>>>>>>>>>> when >>>>>>>>>>> something >>>>>>>>>>> is damaged. >>>>>>>>>>> There is no speed difference whatsoever in normal operations. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message >>>>>>>>>>> news:O$0Lj%23Q6IHA.2240@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... >>>>>>>>>>>> Using USB external hard drives for image backup and restore >>>>>>>>>>>> operations, >>>>>>>>>>>> VS >>>>>>>>>>>> using either another internal drive OR using an external eSATA >>>>>>>>>>>> drive. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Unknown wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> What speed penalty? There isn't any. >>>>>>>>>>>>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in >>>>>>>>>>>>> message >>>>>>>>>>>>> news:%23GZ64ZH6IHA.2220@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yeah, I've heard about that, but I've been putting it off. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> But >>>>>>>>>>>>>> maybe >>>>>>>>>>>>>> it's getting close to that time to take a look. :-) >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Daave wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> message >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> news:%23EBff6F6IHA.300@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Normally, yes. However, for just doing a quick backup >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> restore >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for some software testing, there is a significant speed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> penalty >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> doing that (I'm talking about using the external USB >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> enclosure >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> drives). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Fortunately, eSATA drives are affordable: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822161044 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No speed penalty whatsoever. :-)
Recommended Posts