|
Home > Archive > Backup Software > May 2005 > All the Crap backup programs
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
All the Crap backup programs
|
|
| Privado 2005-05-22, 5:46 pm |
| They all suck basically.
Tried Ghost 2001-installed about 100 autoupdate (spyware)
different entries into my registry that would not uninstall clean
(had to do manually), ignored it's own command line parameters.
True Image-tons of complaints from users on the usenet-google True
image + problems. UDF format only, not universal, may need
separate cr creation program to format UDF disks which cannot be
read on older machines.
Image for Dos/Windows (bootitng). 10 different programs that seem
to do one thing. Manual is a tech nerds wetdream, almost take a
class just to learn how to operate the program.
Can no one come up with one simple program that backs up an win OS
to cd-rw that is will work on most all machines; that isn't
bloatware and doesn't crash systems,that is easy to use? I guess
not, answered my own question.
Repetitions of this post necessitated by usenet censorship and
crappy remailer operations.
| |
| David Arnstein 2005-05-23, 5:50 pm |
| <rant elided>
The root of the problem is that almost all Windows software is crap.
When the software in question is a word processor, you just shrug your
shoulders and reload whenever it misbehaves. But when the software is
a backup program, and it misbehaves, your XXX is in a sling.
My approach is as follows.
First, forget about backup to CDR, CDRW, DVD-R, and DVD-RW. It isn't
reliable. I don't know if this is a vendor problem or a Microsoft problem.
But the volume of complaints from users cannot be denied. Stick to tape
drives and external disk drives. These seem to work, mostly.
Second, find yourself some backup software that is sold to both enterprise
customers and small-timers. If you find a bug in the software, wait
for one of the big enterprise customers to find it too. They have the
influence to get the bug fixed. You don't. In the mean time, go back
to the previous releas of the backup software.
The backup programs that fit the above description that I know of are
Ultrabac and Retrospect. I switched from Ultrabac to Retrospect about
a year ago. I'm not sure if the latest Retrospect 7.0 is ready for
prime time, but Retrospect 6.5 is reliable.
Third, once you have chosen your backup hardware and software, test it
occasionally. Choose a backup set at random, choose a few files from
it, and restore them to a scratch area of your disk drive. Verify that
the files restored successfully.
Finally, consider redundant backup sets. Use one tape or disk on
Monday/Wednesday/Friday and another one on
Tuesday/Thursday/Saturday/Sunday. Or use a similar strategy. You are
defending against media failure, and (to a lesser extent) against software
failure.
--
David Arnstein
arnstein+usenet@pobox.com
| |
| Howard Kaikow 2005-05-23, 5:50 pm |
| "David Arnstein" <arnstein@panix.com> wrote in message
news:d6t28h$ae2$1@reader1.panix.com...
> First, forget about backup to CDR, CDRW, DVD-R, and DVD-RW. It isn't
> reliable. I don't know if this is a vendor problem or a Microsoft problem.
> But the volume of complaints from users cannot be denied. Stick to tape
> drives and external disk drives. These seem to work, mostly.
The problem with optical media is the inept implementations of the CD/DVD
recording software.
Not directly a media problem, not directly a MSFT priblem.
One can hope that once MSFT makes such writing software native to the OS, as
I've heard they will be doing in Longhorn, many of the problems will go
away.
Of course, we could blame MSFT for not having already included native
support for recording CD/DVD media.
Also, by its nature, optical media just are not as reliable as hard drives.
IMNSOHO, tape drives are not even cost effective for typical desktop system.
--
http://www.standards.com/; See Howard Kaikow's web site.
| |
| old jon 2005-05-23, 5:50 pm |
|
"David Arnstein" <arnstein@panix.com> wrote in message
news:d6t28h$ae2$1@reader1.panix.com...
> <rant elided>
>
Without a doubt the best and safest backup solution is to another hard drive
(or two if your rich). USB drives are become very popular now, and that is
the option I`ve chosen. best wishes..J
| |
| Privado 2005-05-25, 5:47 pm |
| Thanks to David, Howard, et al for their good replies. You are correct
of course that I need an external USB 2.0 drive for proper backups. But
since I bought a nice Dell system for only $12, I am trying to keep my
good deal intact. Also this computer only has a 1.0 or 1.1 (haven't
checked yet) USB port, so copies I am told would be amazingly slow over
such an interface (anyone know per GB times about?), so I am stuck with
CD-RW for the moment (a fast one). Sorry for the late reply, due to
as*sholes at newserver trying to block me by IP, ha,ha (didn't work for
long).
Mazzo di fornicators dumb che non sanno fare funzionare un newserver.
Ha,Ha, Vi ho milione IPS affinchè ostruisca
arnstein@panix.com (David Arnstein) wrote in
news:d6t28h$ae2$1@reader1.panix.com:
> <rant elided>
>
> The root of the problem is that almost all Windows software is crap.
> When the software in question is a word processor, you just shrug your
> shoulders and reload whenever it misbehaves. But when the software is
> a backup program, and it misbehaves, your XXX is in a sling.
>
> My approach is as follows.
>
<snip for brevity>
| |
| Howard Kaikow 2005-05-27, 5:47 pm |
| my computer also had only 1.0 or 1.1 USB, I added an Adaptec USB 2 card.
They are not very expensive.
--
http://www.standards.com/; See Howard Kaikow's web site.
"Privado" <Privado@horseshitWOPserver.com> wrote in message
news:GNU966172EE4BFE6PrivadohorseshitWOP
s@213.155.197.138...
> Thanks to David, Howard, et al for their good replies. You are correct
> of course that I need an external USB 2.0 drive for proper backups. But
> since I bought a nice Dell system for only $12, I am trying to keep my
> good deal intact. Also this computer only has a 1.0 or 1.1 (haven't
> checked yet) USB port, so copies I am told would be amazingly slow over
> such an interface (anyone know per GB times about?), so I am stuck with
> CD-RW for the moment (a fast one). Sorry for the late reply, due to
> as*sholes at newserver trying to block me by IP, ha,ha (didn't work for
> long).
>
> Mazzo di fornicators dumb che non sanno fare funzionare un newserver.
> Ha,Ha, Vi ho milione IPS affinchè ostruisca
>
> arnstein@panix.com (David Arnstein) wrote in
> news:d6t28h$ae2$1@reader1.panix.com:
>
> <snip for brevity>
|
|
|
|
|