|
Home > Archive > Backup Software > January 2007 > Dantz Retrospect's future?
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 |
Dantz Retrospect's future?
|
|
|
|
| (PeteCresswell) 2007-01-19, 1:13 pm |
| Per Claudiu Spulber:
>http://www.channelregister.co.uk/20...trospect_eight/
>interesting article for Retrospect users (or future users).
"Everyone had such high hopes for the product. It had a polished interface, and
I think it would have been a success."
As a 6.0 user/sufferer, my reaction is to wonder what they consider "polished".
--
PeteCresswell
| |
| Howard Kaikow 2007-01-19, 7:23 pm |
| "Claudiu Spulber" <nospam@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:45b0717e$1_2@x-privat.org...
> http://www.channelregister.co.uk/20...trospect_eight/
> interesting article for Retrospect users (or future users).
I cannot think of a significant reason to use a file based backup over an
image based backup.
| |
|
| In article <eorave$b9g$1@pyrite.mv.net>, kaikow@standards.com says...
> "Claudiu Spulber" <nospam@privacy.net> wrote in message
> news:45b0717e$1_2@x-privat.org...
>
> I cannot think of a significant reason to use a file based backup over an
> image based backup.
>
>
>
One reason (for Windows XP home users at least) is that a free backup
program, NTBACKUP, is included with the operating system. What image-
based products are there for home users? I've banned all Symantec
products from my PC and I'm trying to get some answers from Acronis
concerning ATI Home 10 trial, but it looks like they've got only one
support person who is overworked, so that company isn't looking too
promising.
I wrote a simple script to run NTBACKUP to back-up the data I care about
and it works, and I figure I saved myself about $50.
Rob
| |
| (PeteCresswell) 2007-01-19, 7:23 pm |
| Per Rob:
>I wrote a simple script to run NTBACKUP to back-up the data I care about
>and it works, and I figure I saved myself about $50.
Can NTBACKUP retrieve a file from a given incremental backup - or is it always
just the last version of the file backed up?
--
PeteCresswell
| |
| David Arnstein 2007-01-19, 7:23 pm |
| In article <eorave$b9g$1@pyrite.mv.net>,
Howard Kaikow <kaikow@standards.com> wrote:
>I cannot think of a significant reason to use a file based backup over an
>image based backup.
I recently switched from using mainly tape backups to using mainly disk
backups. Now, I can make use of two features of Retrospect 7.5:
progressive backup and pruning.
The combination of these two features is simply outstanding. Each of my
backup disks contains a "rolling" history of my data, going back over
the last two monthes. I do a backup every night, and it requires no
intervention on my part. Retrospect automatically deletes old backup
data from my media ("pruning"), to prevent filling it up. Retrospect
also avoids writing duplicate data to the backup media ("progressive
backup"), thus extending the useful capacity of my backup disks.
The sophistication of this backup scheme motivates me to use multiple
backup disks. All of my backup jobs are interdependent, so if there is
ever a problem with one of them, all subsequent jobs are at risk. In my
opinion, anyway.
So I alternate between two backup disks day by day. Each of these two
backup disks contains a history of the state of my computer, going back
60 days, in increments of one day. The latest version of Retrospect is
rock-solid, the way backup software should be.
This is the backup system that I have dreamed about since I started
buying my own computers. Can any image-based backup product do this?
--
David Arnstein (00)
arnstein+usenet@pobox.com {{ }}
^^
| |
| louise 2007-01-20, 1:15 am |
| David Arnstein wrote:
> In article <eorave$b9g$1@pyrite.mv.net>,
> Howard Kaikow <kaikow@standards.com> wrote:
>
> I recently switched from using mainly tape backups to using mainly disk
> backups. Now, I can make use of two features of Retrospect 7.5:
> progressive backup and pruning.
>
> The combination of these two features is simply outstanding. Each of my
> backup disks contains a "rolling" history of my data, going back over
> the last two monthes. I do a backup every night, and it requires no
> intervention on my part. Retrospect automatically deletes old backup
> data from my media ("pruning"), to prevent filling it up. Retrospect
> also avoids writing duplicate data to the backup media ("progressive
> backup"), thus extending the useful capacity of my backup disks.
>
> The sophistication of this backup scheme motivates me to use multiple
> backup disks. All of my backup jobs are interdependent, so if there is
> ever a problem with one of them, all subsequent jobs are at risk. In my
> opinion, anyway.
>
> So I alternate between two backup disks day by day. Each of these two
> backup disks contains a history of the state of my computer, going back
> 60 days, in increments of one day. The latest version of Retrospect is
> rock-solid, the way backup software should be.
>
> This is the backup system that I have dreamed about since I started
> buying my own computers. Can any image-based backup product do this?
I agree - and I go a step further..
I backup to a usb hard drive using Retrospect every night.
I backup to a different usb hard drive using Ghost every few
weeks
I backup to yet another usb hard drive using Ghost and I
leave it at a friend's house every time I think of it.
I backup my crucial files to free MozyBackup.com for more
frequent offsite coverage.
I know this sounds a bit over the top, but I've lost disks
twice and both times I got approxiately 98% of everything back.
Louise
| |
|
| In article <9ri2r293frmeaakpp384586phaeqfjtg6e@4ax.com>, x@y.Invalid
says...
> Per Rob:
>
> Can NTBACKUP retrieve a file from a given incremental backup - or is it always
> just the last version of the file backed up?
>
NTBACKUP can do incremental backups. It' doesn't do a great job of
managing them (actually, it doesn't really manage them at all) so you
need to know which incremental backup has the file you want to restore.
Commercial products like Norton Ghost and Acronis True Image do a better
job of managing incrementals. I always do a full backup; it doesn't
take that long and I always know where my latest backed-up files are.
-Rob
| |
| Howard Kaikow 2007-01-23, 7:18 pm |
|
"Rob" <nospam@for.me> wrote in message
news:MPG.201b009f646a9c97989682@unlimited.newshosting.com...
> In article <eorave$b9g$1@pyrite.mv.net>, kaikow@standards.com says...
an[vbcol=seagreen]
> One reason (for Windows XP home users at least) is that a free backup
> program, NTBACKUP, is included with the operating system. What image-
> based products are there for home users? I've banned all Symantec
> products from my PC and I'm trying to get some answers from Acronis
> concerning ATI Home 10 trial, but it looks like they've got only one
> support person who is overworked, so that company isn't looking too
> promising.
True Image is worth trying.
Support leaves something to be desired.
Best source of support is Acronis web forum.
Just do not get get sucked into their silly Secure Zone option.
> I wrote a simple script to run NTBACKUP to back-up the data I care about
> and it works, and I figure I saved myself about $50.
not if you find you need to restore a system.
I believe that TI costs less than $40 at various places on line.
It makes little sense to selectively back up files.
An image bckup, followed by incremental/differential backups is much faster
than any file based based backup.
| |
| Howard Kaikow 2007-01-23, 7:18 pm |
| "louise" <louise@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:51doa9F1ji62gU1@mid.individual.net...
> David Arnstein wrote:
an[vbcol=seagreen]
> I agree - and I go a step further..
>
> I backup to a usb hard drive using Retrospect every night.
>
> I backup to a different usb hard drive using Ghost every few
> weeks
>
> I backup to yet another usb hard drive using Ghost and I
> leave it at a friend's house every time I think of it.
>
> I backup my crucial files to free MozyBackup.com for more
> frequent offsite coverage.
>
> I know this sounds a bit over the top, but I've lost disks
> twice and both times I got approxiately 98% of everything back.
>
> Louise
I backup to 4 USB drives, never having all 4 connected at the same time.
I now only use TI 9,
Also, used Ghost 10 up to Nov 3, but no more.
Stopped using Retrospect about two years ago.
| |
| louise 2007-01-25, 1:15 am |
| Howard Kaikow wrote:
> "louise" <louise@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
> news:51doa9F1ji62gU1@mid.individual.net...
> an
>
> I backup to 4 USB drives, never having all 4 connected at the same time.
> I now only use TI 9,
> Also, used Ghost 10 up to Nov 3, but no more.
> Stopped using Retrospect about two years ago.
>
>
What made you decide to stop using Retrospect?
Louise
| |
| Howard Kaikow 2007-01-25, 7:16 pm |
| "louise" <louise@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:51qq7cF1kr762U2@mid.individual.net...
> What made you decide to stop using Retrospect?
1. file based backups are way too slow,
2. File based backups rely on the concept of a "system state", which can
make restoration needlessly complex, and does not help on a multiboot
system. I have 3 SCSI hard drives divided into 10 logical drives, with 4
OS. So restoring selected OS is very important.
3. An image based backup that allows the mounting of volumes from an archive
and retrieval of files is more flexible than a file based back up.
The above are the "religious" reasons.
However, the straw thgat broke the camel;s back was the following:
All along, al l 10 of the drives had been FAT32. I then decided to convert 9
of them to NTFS, including the main OS in which Retrospect is innstalled.
Reteospect suddenly started giving lots of errors.
I posted in the Retrospect forums. Got no help there.
I had been planning on moving to image based backup anyway.
So, I took the jump and am not at all sorry.
In retrospect, pun intended, I cannot think of any reason to use a file
based backup if one uses an image based backup that allows for:
1. Creation of multiple independent back ups. TI allows this. Some others
are subject to the criticism in
http://forums.hardwareguys.com/ikon...ST;f=13;t=4573.
2. Creation of incremental/differential back ups. TI allows this. Some
others are subject to the criticism in
http://forums.hardwareguys.com/ikon...ST;f=13;t=4573.
3. Restoration of selected/multiple OS on a multiboot system. TI allows
this. Some others are subject to the criticism in
http://forums.hardwareguys.com/ikon...ST;f=13;t=4573.
4. Ability to mount volumes in read or read-write mode from a backup
archive. I believe that only TI and ShadowProtect allow this.
'Nuf fer now.
Please note tht I am NOT a fan of TI, I'd really like to find a substitute.
| |
| David Arnstein 2007-01-25, 7:16 pm |
| In article <epbc1q$1iua$1@pyrite.mv.net>,
Howard Kaikow <kaikow@standards.com> wrote:
>In retrospect, pun intended, I cannot think of any reason to use a file
>based backup if one uses an image based backup that allows for:
>...
Hello Howard,
If one of your disk drives fails, and you replace it with a different
brand disk drive, will TI do a successful restore to the new drive?
--
David Arnstein (00)
arnstein+usenet@pobox.com {{ }}
^^
| |
| Howard Kaikow 2007-01-26, 1:18 am |
| "David Arnstein" <arnstein@panix.com> wrote in message
news:epbd2b$kur$1@reader2.panix.com...
> If one of your disk drives fails, and you replace it with a different
> brand disk drive, will TI do a successful restore to the new drive?
Only way to guarantee that TI supports a drive is to try TI with the drive.
| |
|
| On Fri, 26 Jan 2007 02:16:48 -0500, "Howard Kaikow"
<kaikow@standards.com> wrote:
>"David Arnstein" <arnstein@panix.com> wrote in message
>news:epbd2b$kur$1@reader2.panix.com...
>
>Only way to guarantee that TI supports a drive is to try TI with the drive.
>
I use Acronis 9 and when my hard drive crashed, I was able to to
restore the entire contents to the new hard drive...no problem.
|
|
|
|
|