![]() And I have installs for my favorite applications and OS, so no problems there. Thus if one computer either has a hardware or software failure, I just hit the power switch on another computer and I am back up running again. And I continue believing this to this very day. As since '81, I believed if one computer was good, then more is even better. I still believe (probably wrongly) that this is the best that one can do as far as reliable backups.Īlthough I don't do this anymore either. This is pretty much where I left my experience with backup software. And if it was another partition, Windows was locked out from accessing them until it was finished. This was also time consuming though and if you cloned the OS partition, you had to shutdown Windows. As you would end up with another hard drive you could just swap out. Later the best reliable backups was using partition cloners, like Partition Magic. This seemed to work well for me for a time. And you could boot this second copy to copy files to another source and avoiding any files in use problem. The trick I used back then was to install another copy of a barebones version of Windows 95. Sometimes it worked, sometimes you had to try 10 times and just settle for the one with the least amount of errors. But everything was backed up right? WRONG! The tapes had a nasty habit of stretching and recovery became a game of chance. Worse it crashed a lot and it had taken all day and you had to keep changing tapes. What a disaster! Slow and very time consuming. ![]() So I bought one of those QIC tape backup. As starting with Windows 95, you couldn't very easy and drop back to DOS to use copy to make backups anymore. PIP/Copy was all you needed to make backups. ![]() Back in the DOS and CP/M days, it was really simple. I will take the time now to explain my experiences with them. But why should you listen to a dummy like me?Īnd secondly, I am sorry I didn't explain my past experiences with backup software. Now, you allege your information came from experiences several years ago (without citing any specific programs).įor starters, I said from the very beginning that people believing that rocket scientists are very smart, is highly overrated. You claim to be an electrical engineer, former rocket scientist, and computer expert yet you posted absurd, inaccurate statements regarding imaging backup software. But for us dummies, it makes a lot of sense. Maybe to you smart people feel this spells inconsistent. Sometimes older versions are better and sometimes newer versions are better. I am just a dummy who doesn't believe things are just black and white. What’s up with that? Why aren’t you complaining about not receiving an older version replete with bugs? Yet you accuse other people of not being consistent. When GOTD offers the “latest, greatest version,” you’re strangely silent. Could you imagine what would have happened if the whiners here got there way and ended up with the buggier 1.9.3x version of Aston? And that Aston themselves had made 1.9.2 available once again for those that wanted to go back. Yet later I learned, that many in the Aston forum also thought 1.9.2 was also the best stable version. You know-it-alls attacked me for even thinking this. And when I mentioned that this 1.9.2 might be a good thing. But you smart people can do whatever you want too, don't let dummies like me make you change your mind.Īnd you completely glossed over about the whiners that were complaining that they didn't get Aston 1.9.3x, but the 7 month older 1.9.2. When they had enough time to work out most of the bugs and the hardware by then should be able to run it just fine. ![]() ![]() And I don't see me running Vista until around 2010 or 2011. I waited till 2006 just to upgrade to Windows XP SP2 from Windows 2000. I suppose all of you smart people have already upgraded to Vista. There are some whom like me don't trust v1 of anything very much. Windows XP SP2 (upgrading caused problems with many) As you people ignore many problems in the past with newer versions. You smart people sure have strange logic, I must say. When people point out certain GOTD offerings are for older versions with known bugs, you attack them and claim older versions are the best. Have you documented your claims? If so, can we see them? Or are we supposed to just take your word for it? Really? I only recall only one in the last week. The fact he isn’t a blatant shill such as yourself is to his credit. Why take it elsewhere?Ĭontrary to your latest false assertion, BladedThoth frequently praises software offered on GOTD. Why? That is what this comment section is for. There’s nothing stopping you from starting a website consisting of your exhaustive 6-hour reviews of software offered here. Part of this comment was deleted for using a personal insult against another commenter. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |