I've been running Retrospect 6.0 for a few years now and I'm getting fed up.

Bought it because I remembered the old Mac version - whose UI I'd give a sol
id
A+.     But I'd only give the version I have now a C- in the UI department.

It's also buggy and Dantz does not offer bug fix releases.


Can somebody recommend an alternative?   I wouldn't want another version of
Retro because of the no-bug-fix thing.

My requirements are:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
1) Point-in-time recovery.   I want to be able to see all backup copies of a
given file along with dates/times and choose the one I want to restore.

2) Incremental backups (obviously...)

3) Ability to recover files on another computer.    i.e. no BS about linking
 the
CPU's serial number to the license to install.   If my home PC gets fried, I
want to be able to take my backup files to work and recover them there and/o
r go
out and buy a new box without any hassles with the backup utility install.

4) Scripts.   I want to be able to create scripts that tell the utility what
 to
back up.

5) Multiple script execution.    I want the ability to fire off several scri
pts,
walk away from the PC, and have them all execute.

6) Error notification.    If one of several scripts failed, I want to know a
bout
it even though the others ran.

7) Error logging.   Errors should be written to a log that can be reviewed a
t
will.

8) Ability To Back Up To Disk:  I do backups to disk drives.   Tape, CD, DVD
would be nice, I guess, but what I really use is disk drives.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
--
PeteCresswell

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

"(PeteCresswell)" <x@y.Invalid> wrote in message
 news:kc96p1t3un6l1q4jn2pvvcj8jsg551qcl3@
4ax.com...
> I've been running Retrospect 6.0 for a few years now and I'm getting fed
up.
>
> Bought it because I remembered the old Mac version - whose UI I'd give a
solid
> A+.     But I'd only give the version I have now a C- in the UI
department.
>
> It's also buggy and Dantz does not offer bug fix releases.
>
>
> Can somebody recommend an alternative?   I wouldn't want another version
of
> Retro because of the no-bug-fix thing.

I too would like to use something other than Retrospect, tho I've not run
into any bugs YET that are showstoppers.

I've been looking at Ghost 10 and Acronis True Image 9.

Last week I  installed the retail Ghost 10 ($0 after rebates)/
Yesterday, I violated a tenet of my religioom, i.e., to NEVER install demo
software, and installed the demo of Acronis True Image 9.

I have a multiboot system, on which te OS on the J drive is my main system,
an dit happens to have Net Framework 1.1, so I installed Gjost 10 there.

I am not pleased with the Ghost 10 interface and I found a number of bugs.
I, hopefully today, will be posting to
http://radified.com/cgi-bin/YaBB/YaBB.cgi?board=general to see whether there
are solutions.

As the Acronis software is a demo version, I decided to install it on one of
the other OS, so my main OS would not be affected and I could easily restore
te OS from a Retrospect backup.

I find the Acronis True Image 9 interface to be superior to that of Ghost
10, tho it does appear to excute more slowly. I was not able to restore
using the demo, and I encoountered what I believe to be a significant issue
when swapping USB drives. I, hopefully today, will be posting details at
http://www.wilderssecurity.com/forumdisplay.php?f=64.

With respecy to your requirements, based on my meager knowledge of both
products, I will comment below.


> 1) Point-in-time recovery.   I want to be able to see all backup copies of
a
> given file along with dates/times and choose the one I want to restore.

Both Ghost an TI allow you to Explore backuped up drives.
You choose the point in time you wish.
Does not seem to be an option to see all versions at once.

> 2) Incremental backups (obviously...)

Both do this, but it's an area in which I encountere dsignificant issues
with Ghost 10.

> 3) Ability to recover files on another computer.    i.e. no BS about
linking the
> CPU's serial number to the license to install.   If my home PC gets fried,
I
> want to be able to take my backup files to work and recover them there
and/or go
> out and buy a new box without any hassles with the backup utility install.

I would think that te licenses are tied to the installation of the app, not
the backup files themselves.
At worst, I expect that you have to re-activate to move the app to another
computer.
Heck, one of the purposes of a backup is to be able to restore/move files in
a disaster.

> 4) Scripts.   I want to be able to create scripts that tell the utility
what to
> back up.

Both G and TI allow you to create, what I'll call, tasks. This an area in
which I found a significant problem in Ghost.

TI has both imahe backups and file backups, but ypu do a bare metal restore
only from image backups.
Ghost seems to have only image backups.

> 5) Multiple script execution.    I want the ability to fire off several
scripts,
> walk away from the PC, and have them all execute.

Do not know.

> 6) Error notification.    If one of several scripts failed, I want to know
about
> it even though the others ran.

Both G and TI have error logs.
TI's appears to be more detailed.

> 7) Error logging.   Errors should be written to a log that can be reviewed
at
> will.

Both log errors, but I really do not like G's log.

> 8) Ability To Back Up To Disk:  I do backups to disk drives.   Tape, CD,
DVD
> would be nice, I guess, but what I really use is disk drives.

G and TI are intended for disk-like devices. doubt that they work with tape.

You can download TI's manual, and I belive you can download G's manual.

If your religion permits, TI has a demo version. I ferget wheter G has a
demo version.

One can often get G for 0$ after rebates at places like ww.buy.com, Staples,
CompUSA, Circuit City, Fry's, etc.
Sometimes, to get the rebate, you have to look for a package that both, say,
System Works and Ghost.
--
http://www.standards.com/; See Howard Kaikow's web site.

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

In article <kc96p1t3un6l1q4jn2pvvcj8jsg551qcl3@4ax.com>,
(PeteCresswell) <x@y.Invalid> wrote:
>My requirements are:
> ...

I believe that the only usable backup applications are those that are
deployed by commercial users (as well as home users). If you select a
"consumer grade" product, then you will get "consumer grade" reliablity.
The applications that are marketed exclusively to commercial users are
too expensive for home users, as far as I know.

This is acceptable for shit like Microsoft Word or Halo.  In these cases,
the application corrupts your document and you start over, losing between
1 hour and 1 week of your work, depending on the quality of your backup
strategy.

When your BACKUP application corrupts your data, the consequences are
much more severe. Don't go there!

I know of two backup packages that are used by enterprises and users
alike: Retrospect and Ultrabac. If anyone knows of others, please post.
Otherwise, you should restrict your choice to these two. When you find
a bug in one of these programs, you can hope that a commercial user will
find it too, and it will be fixed. If you mess around with junk like
Ghost, then you have no hope.
--
David Arnstein                    |
arnstein+usenet@pobox.com         |

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

You also have the choice of Backup Exec. Its great for small to medium sized
businesses and has been on the market for 10+ years. It has a reputation of
reliability and ease of use. http://www.backupexec.com

If you want enterprise functionality, then Netbackup will meet your needs.

Both are distributed by http://www.symantec.com

Thanks
Nick

"David Arnstein" <arnstein@panix.com> wrote in message
news:dmvg0v$qpv$1@reader2.panix.com...
> In article <kc96p1t3un6l1q4jn2pvvcj8jsg551qcl3@4ax.com>,
> (PeteCresswell) <x@y.Invalid> wrote: 
>
> I believe that the only usable backup applications are those that are
> deployed by commercial users (as well as home users). If you select a
> "consumer grade" product, then you will get "consumer grade" reliablity.
> The applications that are marketed exclusively to commercial users are
> too expensive for home users, as far as I know.
>
> This is acceptable for shit like Microsoft Word or Halo.  In these cases,
> the application corrupts your document and you start over, losing between
> 1 hour and 1 week of your work, depending on the quality of your backup
> strategy.
>
> When your BACKUP application corrupts your data, the consequences are
> much more severe. Don't go there!
>
> I know of two backup packages that are used by enterprises and users
> alike: Retrospect and Ultrabac. If anyone knows of others, please post.
> Otherwise, you should restrict your choice to these two. When you find
> a bug in one of these programs, you can hope that a commercial user will
> find it too, and it will be fixed. If you mess around with junk like
> Ghost, then you have no hope.
> --
> David Arnstein                    |
> arnstein+usenet@pobox.com         |

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

4Per Howard Kaikow:
>You choose the point in time you wish.
>Does not seem to be an option to see all versions at once.

That's a showstopper for me.   Typically, I realize I've messed up a file bu
t
can't figure out exactly when.  Mostly I want a pick-and-choose list of all
instances of that file - although restoring all instances with times/dates n
oted
somehow would work too...then I could just do my picking and choosing after 
the
restore.
--
PeteCresswell

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

"David Arnstein" <arnstein@panix.com> wrote in message
news:dmvg0v$qpv$1@reader2.panix.com...
> In article <kc96p1t3un6l1q4jn2pvvcj8jsg551qcl3@4ax.com>,
> (PeteCresswell) <x@y.Invalid> wrote: 
>
> I believe that the only usable backup applications are those that are
> deployed by commercial users (as well as home users). If you select a
> "consumer grade" product, then you will get "consumer grade" reliablity.
> The applications that are marketed exclusively to commercial users are
> too expensive for home users, as far as I know.
>
> This is acceptable for shit like Microsoft Word or Halo.  In these cases,
> the application corrupts your document and you start over, losing between
> 1 hour and 1 week of your work, depending on the quality of your backup
> strategy.
>
> When your BACKUP application corrupts your data, the consequences are
> much more severe. Don't go there!
>
> I know of two backup packages that are used by enterprises and users
> alike: Retrospect and Ultrabac. If anyone knows of others, please post.
> Otherwise, you should restrict your choice to these two. When you find
> a bug in one of these programs, you can hope that a commercial user will
> find it too, and it will be fixed. If you mess around with junk like
> Ghost, then you have no hope.

What is the URL for Ultrabac?

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

In article <dn1ils$2elf$1@pyrite.mv.net>,
Howard Kaikow <kaikow@standards.com> wrote:
>What is the URL for Ultrabac?

http://wwww.ultrabac.com
--
David Arnstein                    |
arnstein+usenet@pobox.com         |

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

Peter

Relative Rev Backup http://www.datamills.com comes close...

It takes a first full backup followed by incremental backups for ever.
At the same time you are able to restore any single file of folder to
any retained point in time as if it was from a full backup. You may
also schedule the number of daily/weekly monthly to keep before it
purges older ones.

Point 3,and 4 for are covered as well.

You can schedule multiple 'script executions' to the very same time and
it will queue them for execution. And it will keep a log for each of
the last backup, as well as send an email..

Joe Rom King
http://www.datamills.com

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

Per Joe Rom King:
>Relative Rev Backup http://www.datamills.com comes close...

Does it do anything more than looking at the "changed" bit to determine whet
her
a file has changed?
--
PeteCresswell

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

(PeteCresswell) wrote:
> Per Joe Rom King: 
>
> Does it do anything more than looking at the "changed" bit to determine wh
ether
> a file has changed?
> --
> PeteCresswell

I guess by the 'changed' bit you refer to what is commonly known as
the archive bit?

If that is what you mean, then Relative Rev backup can run in tandem
with any other backup software, (including incremental ones) as it does
not totally rely on, nor manipulate the "changed" bit. It has other
means to locate the changed files including time stamp, size,
signature, archive bit, and others properties managed in a separate
index.

Joe

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]