Need to discuss payware disaster recovery in this NG

[Richard Steinfeld]

Yeah, I know: payware is "off topic" here. Sometimes fiercely.
But let's face it:

Every one of us may need to resort to payware recovery utilities in
order to rescue our computers from damage caused by badly- or
irresponsibly-crafted freeware. God knows what will happen when we click
on a file named "install.exe." I've already had this experience.
Freeware coders don't exactly provide us with professional documentation
(if at all!), and we can't depend on calling them to bail us out. Most
of these crafters are not software engineers, and they have not been
trained in engineering discipline. If their code has screwed up our
system, chances are pretty good that they have no idea why.

Because of my response about this in another thread, one of the
participants requested that I address this issue in a new thread. Here
it is. I was jogged because one of our regular participants just told
someone that his issue was "off topic." The subject, however, dealt with
recovery software that was only available as payware. Let's get real.

When I recently tested metronome programs, I found in two cases that the
software caused my computer to crash. In one case, the
wonderfully-glitzy program installed an obscure Borland authoring suite
into an obscure directory, and made numererous arcane registry entries
under three different root names, one of which was a word the coder had
invented with a high school chum about something else.

*** None of this was documented or even mentioned. ***

Borland had long abandoned this authoring product, and had removed all
references and support on their web site. I had to sleuth all of this
out for myself. The programmer didn't answer emails. Even though I used
an install tracking program, my registry was still a mess. Yes: this
could be you!

Installing new freeware isn't as risky as dining on blowfish, but it can
damage your installation so badly that without technical expertise, your
only option may be to reformat your hard disk and install everything
again (taking days of work).

So, for me a discussion of any product that can be used to fix a system
that got busted by freeware is on-topic for us, even if it's commercial.
This is especially true when, as in the case of image restore products,
there's no freeware solution. In fact, these discussions should be
essential, constant topics on this board, because the damage is done by
(on-topic) freeware. The need to keep heads-up far outweighs any and all
theoretical purity.

Richard

 

[=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=BBQ=AB?=]

So, for me a discussion of any product that can be used to fix a
system that got busted by freeware is on-topic for us, even if
it's commercial. This is especially true when, as in the case of
image restore products, there's no freeware solution.

But the payware solutions are well-known, and there are plenty of other
places to discuss them. In years of using freeware, I haven't had the
troubles you have with "busted" systems, but I do use payware partition
imaging/recovery software; when I need to discuss it, I just go
elsewhere, which works fine.

 

[John Fitzsimons]

On Sun, 04 Dec 2005 12:05:10 -0800, Richard Steinfeld

So, for me a discussion of any product that can be used to fix a system
that got busted by freeware is on-topic for us, even if it's commercial.

< snip >

Commercial software is "off topic" here. There are newsgroups for non
freeware if one wants that.

If someone asks for a payware solution, and is too lazy to go to an
appropriate newsgroup, then you can email them with a recommendation.

 

[lisztfr]

The Op is presenting his facts as if ONLY freeware
would mess a system up, but the contrary is true, and all
in all, he is denigrating freeware all over his post.
That is called trolling.

By-the-way before clicking on the dreadfull "exe", get a
helmet, or install things with total uninstal or get a spare
drive with a test system.

"...without technical expertise" --> i'm not concerned

laurent

 

[Bob S]

So, for me a discussion of any product that can be used to fix a system
that got busted by freeware is on-topic for us, even if it's commercial.
This is especially true when, as in the case of image restore products,
there's no freeware solution. In fact, these discussions should be
essential, constant topics on this board, because the damage is done by
(on-topic) freeware. The need to keep heads-up far outweighs any and all
theoretical purity.

Richard,

I agree with you and this has been discussed many time in the past. There
is no charter for this group and there's 2 FAQ's (1 FAQ, 1 Anti-FAQ) that I
know of which are simply someone's idea of what is acceptable in the
newsgroup and what is not. Item 3 of one of the FAQ's clearly states:
...................................................
3 ) WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF THE ALT.COMP.FREEWARE NEWSGROUP ?
To discuss matters relating to computer freeware.
...................................................

The key word being "relating". So if a discussion evolves about a payware
option that is better than the freeware version or if there is no known
freeware version, the discussion definitely does relate to and about
freeware or lack thereof. Your interpretation (above) is just as valid but
there are those that will disagree with this and will cite the same FAQ.
One purpose of most software is to solve problems - even freeware and the
discussion of that purpose is most certainly on-topic. I think you'll find
that you'll not get any grief from those of us that work at solving clients
problems on a daily basis and often come here looking for solutions. Your
post was dead-on.

Bob S.

 

[Steve H]

On Sun, 04 Dec 2005 12:05:10 -0800, Richard Steinfeld

So, for me a discussion of any product that can be used to fix a system
that got busted by freeware is on-topic for us, even if it's commercial.
This is especially true when, as in the case of image restore products,
there's no freeware solution. In fact, these discussions should be
essential, constant topics on this board, because the damage is done by
(on-topic) freeware. The need to keep heads-up far outweighs any and all
theoretical purity.

I can see where you're coming from, and indeed I would agree that
anyone who indulges in loading up their machine with all manner of
possibly untested apps ( and some supposedly tested apps! ) really
ought to do so with the comfort and security of having decent backups.

That being said, there really aren't any freeware apps ( as yet ) that
can match the commercial apps, and so any such discussions are limited
to recommending Ghost or Acronis True Image.

For my part I use a combination of measures - XXCopy for routine daily
backups of critical data ( docs, images etc ) and Ghost for partition
imaging.

Such utilities come in very handy when you install a program that
turns out to be less than as free as it was claimed to be.

Regards,

 

[bambam]

Yeah, I know: payware is "off topic" here. Sometimes fiercely.
But let's face it:

Every one of us may need to resort to payware recovery utilities in
order to rescue our computers from damage caused by badly- or
irresponsibly-crafted freeware.

Why can't we use freeware utilities to rescue our computers?
Tell us what you want to achieve, then someone here will show you how to do
it with freeware. Simple really.

 

[Azzman]

[email protected]:

There's also alt.comp.freeware.discussion, and 24hrsupporthelpdesk.
And as far as I'm concerned, you can discuss whatever you want as long as
you put *OT* in the subject.
I won't be the one reading it.

 

[Chris Lee]

Yeah, I know: payware is "off topic" here. Sometimes fiercely.
But let's face it:

Every one of us may need to resort to payware recovery utilities in
order to rescue our computers from damage caused by badly- or
irresponsibly-crafted freeware. God knows what will happen when we
click
on a file named "install.exe." I've already had this experience.
Freeware coders don't exactly provide us with professional
documentation
(if at all!), and we can't depend on calling them to bail us out.
Most
of these crafters are not software engineers, and they have not been
trained in engineering discipline. If their code has screwed up our
system, chances are pretty good that they have no idea why.

Because of my response about this in another thread, one of the
participants requested that I address this issue in a new thread.
Here
it is. I was jogged because one of our regular participants just
told
someone that his issue was "off topic." The subject, however, dealt
with
recovery software that was only available as payware. Let's get
real.

When I recently tested metronome programs, I found in two cases that
the
software caused my computer to crash. In one case, the
wonderfully-glitzy program installed an obscure Borland authoring
suite
into an obscure directory, and made numererous arcane registry
entries
under three different root names, one of which was a word the coder
had
invented with a high school chum about something else.

*** None of this was documented or even mentioned. ***

Borland had long abandoned this authoring product, and had removed
all
references and support on their web site. I had to sleuth all of
this
out for myself. The programmer didn't answer emails. Even though I
used
an install tracking program, my registry was still a mess. Yes: this
could be you!

Installing new freeware isn't as risky as dining on blowfish, but it
can
damage your installation so badly that without technical expertise,
your
only option may be to reformat your hard disk and install everything
again (taking days of work).

So, for me a discussion of any product that can be used to fix a
system
that got busted by freeware is on-topic for us, even if it's
commercial.
This is especially true when, as in the case of image restore
products,
there's no freeware solution. In fact, these discussions should be
essential, constant topics on this board, because the damage is done
by
(on-topic) freeware. The need to keep heads-up far outweighs any and
all
theoretical purity.

Richard

Bullshit. There are a number of free software/open source disk imaging/recovery
programs and systems that work just as well or not better than the payware
solutions you are hyping.

Many of the of the Linux-based rescue/recovery cd's are better than the
commerical software you are hyping which don't offer half the support or
features you can find in the Linux-based rescue cdroms

 

[Chris Lee]

On Sun, 04 Dec 2005 12:05:10 -0800, Richard Steinfeld



I can see where you're coming from, and indeed I would agree that
anyone who indulges in loading up their machine with all manner of
possibly untested apps ( and some supposedly tested apps! ) really
ought to do so with the comfort and security of having decent
backups.

That being said, there really aren't any freeware apps ( as yet )
that
can match the commercial apps, and so any such discussions are
limited
to recommending Ghost or Acronis True Image.

For my part I use a combination of measures - XXCopy for routine
daily
backups of critical data ( docs, images etc ) and Ghost for
partition
imaging.

This is your problem. You're using lame software. XXCopy is a ****ing
joke when you compare it to the Linux/UNIX based software.

 

[Fran]

If you are afradi of your system being damaged by freeware, you should try
using only popular/well tested freeware. No program that craches the system
or does unpleasant things to it get among top5 in its category. As for
recovery, there is regcleaner, oldie but goodine, one of the most popular
registry cleaners, that never did me any problems. As for disk imaging,
there are probably linux solutions out there, in a form of bootable rescue
disk.

 

[John Corliss]

Yeah, I know: payware is "off topic" here. Sometimes fiercely.
But let's face it:

Richard,
You already know how I feel about this. There are several other, very
active newsgroups for such discussion of commercial payware recovery
utilities. Those should be used instead of this group.

 

[Steve H]

This is your problem. You're using lame software. XXCopy is a ****ing
joke when you compare it to the Linux/UNIX based software.

If it works, what's the problem?
In fact it all comes in very handy for whenever I've been tempted to
have yet another peek at suse...slackware...mandrake...etc..etc,
Currently got Ubuntu on test...and it seems to think my P4 is a 386.
Bless.

 

[dadiOH]

I can see where you're coming from, and indeed I would agree that
anyone who indulges in loading up their machine with all manner of
possibly untested apps ( and some supposedly tested apps! ) really
ought to do so with the comfort and security of having decent backups.

That being said, there really aren't any freeware apps ( as yet ) that
can match the commercial apps, and so any such discussions are limited
to recommending Ghost or Acronis True Image.

Or Paragon Hard Disc Manager...superior to both IMO, YMMV.


--
dadiOH
____________________________

dadiOH's dandies v3.06...
....a help file of info about MP3s, recording from
LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that.
Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico

 

[Bob S]

Richard,
You already know how I feel about this. There are several other, very
active newsgroups for such discussion of commercial payware recovery
utilities. Those should be used instead of this group.

--
Regards from John Corliss
No adware, cdware, commercial software, crippleware, demoware, nagware,
PROmotionware, shareware, spyware, time-limited software, trialware,
viruses or warez please.

John,

Not to start another argument but it was your FAQ posting I found (Item #3)
that I quoted above. How can you now argue "relating to freeware" is not
on-topic. Perhaps you need to look again at the OP's post and think about
what he said. Comparisons of payware/freeware are valid topics as well as
how to restore a corrupt install that has been damaged by freeware.
...................................................
3 ) WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF THE ALT.COMP.FREEWARE NEWSGROUP ?
To discuss matters relating to computer freeware.
...................................................

"How you feel about this" doesn't matter John - you do not have any say over
what is posted in this ng - just like the rest of us. You do not have to
read a post - nor comment on it.

Someone else made an argument about the OP should only use tested freeware.
Duh.... who's doing the testing? Someone has to be first and not everyone
has the luxury of being able to test the software on a test system. Anyone
here ever just load up some freeware without researching it first - sure you
have, so why jump on someone else?

Bob S.

 

[Steve H]

Someone else made an argument about the OP should only use tested freeware.
Duh.... who's doing the testing? Someone has to be first and not everyone
has the luxury of being able to test the software on a test system. Anyone
here ever just load up some freeware without researching it first - sure you
have, so why jump on someone else?

I made the comment that people might well be installing apps which
haven't been fully tested.
This isn't a slight on freeware authors, simply a fact of life in that
not everyone has the facilities to fully test their software on a
large variety of systems.
That problems can and do occur is also a fact of life, and it's just
plain common sense to take suitable precautions.

Regards,

 

[John Corliss]

If it works, what's the problem?
In fact it all comes in very handy for whenever I've been tempted to
have yet another peek at suse...slackware...mandrake...etc..etc,
Currently got Ubuntu on test...and it seems to think my P4 is a 386.
Bless.

I read about that the other day:

http://distrowatch.com/dwres.php?resource=review-ubuntu

From that page the following:
_____________________________________

"A minor annoyance was that the wrong kernel was installed. In this
case, "wrong" was not disastrous. What happened was that a 386 kernel
was installed even though I have a 686 processor. The machine ran OK,
but performance clearly suffered. I initially filed a bug report, but
the developers replied that the Ubuntu CD just doesn't have room for
multiple kernels so they have to go with the lowest common denominator,
which is 386. You can check which kernel is installed as follows:

root@x31:~> uname -r
2.6.12-9-386

The solution is to upgrade your kernel. If you're upgrading to a
686-based kernel, the command would be as follows:

apt-get install linux-686

I assume the above is a non-issue if you install Ubuntu on an AMD64 or PPC."
_____________________________________

--
Regards from John Corliss
I don't reply to trolls and other such idiots. No adware, cdware,
commercial software, crippleware, demoware, nagware, PROmotionware,
shareware, spyware, time-limited software, trialware, viruses or warez
please.

 

[John Corliss]

John,

Not to start another argument but it was your FAQ posting I found (Item #3)

Are you confusing me with John Fitzsimons?

that I quoted above. How can you now argue "relating to freeware" is not
on-topic. Perhaps you need to look again at the OP's post and think about
what he said. Comparisons of payware/freeware are valid topics as well as
how to restore a corrupt install that has been damaged by freeware.
..................................................
3 ) WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF THE ALT.COMP.FREEWARE NEWSGROUP ?
To discuss matters relating to computer freeware.
..................................................

"How you feel about this" doesn't matter John - you do not have any say over
what is posted in this ng - just like the rest of us. You do not have to
read a post - nor comment on it.

I meant that remark only in the sens of "IMHO" and as a "my two cents
worth" only. Nothing in it was intended to imply that I think I moderate
this group.

Someone else made an argument about the OP should only use tested freeware.
Duh.... who's doing the testing? Someone has to be first and not everyone
has the luxury of being able to test the software on a test system. Anyone
here ever just load up some freeware without researching it first - sure you
have, so why jump on someone else?

More likely what they meant was that a person should be more inclined to
only use freeware that's listed at a reputable site like Snapfiles,
Nonags or this group's Pricelessware page.

--
Regards from John Corliss
I don't reply to trolls and other such idiots. No adware, cdware,
commercial software, crippleware, demoware, nagware, PROmotionware,
shareware, spyware, time-limited software, trialware, viruses or warez
please.

 

[Steve H]

I read about that the other day:

http://distrowatch.com/dwres.php?resource=review-ubuntu

From that page the following:
_____________________________________

"A minor annoyance was that the wrong kernel was installed. In this
case, "wrong" was not disastrous. What happened was that a 386 kernel
was installed even though I have a 686 processor. The machine ran OK,
but performance clearly suffered. I initially filed a bug report, but
the developers replied that the Ubuntu CD just doesn't have room for
multiple kernels so they have to go with the lowest common denominator,
which is 386. You can check which kernel is installed as follows:

root@x31:~> uname -r
2.6.12-9-386

The solution is to upgrade your kernel. If you're upgrading to a
686-based kernel, the command would be as follows:

apt-get install linux-686

I assume the above is a non-issue if you install Ubuntu on an AMD64 or PPC."
_____________________________________

Yeah, I've read the blurb about it...I thought something was a bit
iffy because of the time it took to boot the system....not so much
Breezy as Wheezy....
Still, it recognised my usb key, so at least something's up to date..

Regards,

 

[*ProteanThread*]

The FAQ is only a set of "guide lines" and NOT a set of rules.