No, I like their product.
Then you're likely so stupid that you cant manage to work
out why they had to take the approach you dont like initially.
Maybe you will eventually notice that its a worthwhile improvement,
just like you did with 2002 and that previous rant too.
I was one of the first pioneers at my company to use this.
OK, in that case we will be forced to give you this funky
leather medal, and if you promise not to chuck another silly
little tantrum, we might even spray it with gold paint or sumfin.
Their strengths outweigh their weaknesses, but there's always
just something that makes it less than a perfect upgrade for me.
There might just be a message there.
In spades with your previous mindless rant
about what you claimed were downsides with
2002 which even you did eventually use anyway.
You said the key word here: repair[ing]. Agreed.
Using what I suspect is Microsoft's WinPE engine,
Yep, so Win drivers can be used for
other than very bog standard hardware.
Just like booting the CD is the most viable approach when
repairing any of the higher performance versions of Win too.
it is quite handy to have when troubleshooting a boot issue.
For example, third-party driver file on NTFS partition got
corrupted and there's no copy of it in DLLCache and it's
screwing the boot process. Bad example, I know, since
Safe Mode will effectively bypass that, but you get the idea.
But my post never said anything about repairing; I'm just referring
to the issue of booting off a CD to do Restore operations.
Same considerations apply when you want to support other than
very bog standard hardware which doesnt have DOS drivers.
Thats why DI7 has gone that route, and why it requires 2K or
XP for the image creation as well. In spades with V2i Protector.
If you dont like that approach, you're always
welcome to keep using 2002 for as long as you like.
So that brings up an interesting question, then:
Can I backup the %windir% partition with DI7, and then
do a Restore using DI2002? Have my cake and eat it, too?
Dunno, havent tried that. They do have a trial version available
for download, so you are welcome to try that yourself.
I would answer my own question and actually try this,
but I already restored my system back to an earlier image.
Any one with any sense trys that stuff on a test system.
Sort of off topic, but I read that some company has just created a
real-mode USB2.0 driver. Dunno how solidly it works, tho. If they can
make a 1394 driver as well, then I guess DOS will truly never die.
Completely silly in my opinion. Makes a hell of a lot more
sense to not bother with stupid DOS drivers anymore.
Even you must have noticed how long USB drives have been
available for. Hopeless waiting for a DOS driver for stuff like that.
So are you saying that it does multiple increment passes
Yep. And in that area it leaves its main competitor, Ghost, for dead.
in the same backup session?
Not sure what this is about. By definition incremental
must be with different backup sessions. Thats an
alternative to mindlessly crude full image backups.
How's it getting around the lock on
pagefile.sys and hiberfil.sys anyway?
No point in saving those to the image file.
Even ghost doesnt.
Actually if you want to point me to a white paper on V2I rather than
answering these [perhaps simple] questions, that would be fine.
They're obvious on the powerquest site.
Full manuals and a downloadable trial too.
Rhetorical question. I was really asking for any
reasons/justifications on why I should upgrade.
You did the same thing with 2002 too. And tried to bullshit your
way out of your predicament when your nose was rubbed in your
silly stuff with that, and appear to have eventually come to your
senses with 2002. Maybe the same thing with happen with DI7 too.
I know that the file browser is now integrated, and there
are some other cosmetic changes, but I was wondering
about the possible differences between V2I and PQI.
The main advantage is with other than completely bog standard
hardware and being able to image the Win partition thats currently
been booted from. 2002 cant do either.
I actually run it quite a lot. Once every three days, if not more.
Mad.
I do beta testing and download other public betas,
and I always want to restore back to a clean image.
You're always welcome to continue to use 2002.
Or in this case, after using DI7, instead of doing an Uninstall, I
just restore back to an image previous to the installation of DI7.
You're always welcome to continue to use 2002.
Or come to your senses and realise that if you have done a
manually initiated install of what you are trying, its hardly the
end of civilisation as we know it any time soon to have to
manually initiate the restore of the image you made before that.
Presumably you did eventually manage to work out
how to get around the lack of QuickImage that you
howled about so mindlessly with 2002 previously too.
Now clean up that mess you made when you started
tearing up the carpet in your little tantrum exercise.
