System restore question

[Unknown]

The point is that System Restore is a very valuable tool for novices (and
me) and I would not classify myself as a novice.
Posters on this group should not 'scare' people from using it when
necessary. I cannot think of a single person in my family or large group of
friends that hasn't used it. I don't know of anyone who has had a problem
with it.

 

[Gerry]

I was not advocating turning off System Restore. It is, however, a
troublesome tool because many users are not aware of it's limitations.
They hear about System Restore and think it will solve any problem. It
does not. You only have to consult Bert Kinney's site to realise the
many ways it can lull a user into a false sense of security.

The first common misunderstanding is that many users do not understand
that System Restore only restores certain system settings and files. A
separate system is needed for backing up data files.

System Restore should be turned off on all partitions, with the
exception of the system partition. If the user introduces a removable
exterrnal drive and subsequently moves it in and out of the computer
chaos ensues. External removable drives must not be monitored. A problem
with System Restore in Windows XP is that the default setting is to
monitor all volumes. A consequence is that if a user changes an existing
set up a volume can start to be monitored without the user being aware
that it is. The outcome can be that when the user needs a restore point
there may not be one to use.

Restore points are only helpful for a limited period of time. If you
regularly make system changes you should not use a restore point more
than a few days old.

If a system get a virus or malware existing restore points need to be
dumped after the infection has been removed. Many users are not aware of
this so that they can be at risk of a new outbreak of the infection they
have just got rid of.

Another more recent problem has been the enhancing of security measures
in anti-virus and anti-spyware software, which prevent using System
Restore from restoring to a previous arrangement. Users are frequent
unaware that this additional protection exists and do not know how to
turn off the protection when they need to do so.

Is System Restore intended as as a tool to remove malware? I think not
as it will not be monitoring the files that the malware has installed!
That is the job of the anti-virus and anti-spyware software the user has
installed. The more appropriate way to remove restore points is to run
the option for removal in Disk CleanUp.

To whom? To many users until they have a basic understanding of how it
works! There are many out there who gave up on System Restore.
Fortunately users now have Bert Kinney's web site to go to for advice.
For many early years in the life of Windows XP there was very little
information available on how the tool should be used.


--



Hope this helps.

Gerry
~~~~
FCA
Stourport, England
Enquire, plan and execute
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

[Gerry]

Your first comment is extremely rude and unnecessary. Bert has done more
to help users with System Restore problems than any other person posting
to these newsgroups. He is also arguably the most knowledgeable on the
topic. We all disagree with others from time to time but such rudeness
is totally out of order and does not advance any constructive point you
wish to bring to the discussion.

--



Hope this helps.

Gerry
~~~~
FCA
Stourport, England
Enquire, plan and execute
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

[Unknown]

It is not rude but very necessary. Why do you say 'arguably' the most
knowledgeable? Is he or isn't he? The point of the matter is very simple.
Post FACTS not emotions, and I might add, teach instead of scaring the blue
blazes out of novices. Your post is extremely rude to me.

 

[Unknown]

I was not advocating turning off System Restore. It is, however, a
troublesome tool because many users are not aware of it's limitations. They
hear about System Restore and think it will solve any problem. It does not.
You only have to consult Bert Kinney's site to realise the many ways it can
lull a user into a false sense of security.

A troublesome tool; on the contrary it has solved problems for many novice
users.

The first common misunderstanding is that many users do not understand
that System Restore only restores certain system settings and files. A
separate system is needed for backing up data files.

Is that a fact or in your imagination? How long does it take before a user
realizes
a separate system is needed for backup? If they don't know, here is where to
tell them.
I.E. Teach; not scare them.

System Restore should be turned off on all partitions, with the exception
of the system partition. If the user introduces a removable exterrnal
drive and subsequently moves it in and out of the computer chaos ensues.
External removable drives must not be monitored. A problem with System
Restore in Windows XP is that the default setting is to monitor all
volumes. A consequence is that if a user changes an existing set up a
volume can start to be monitored without the user being aware that it is.
The outcome can be that when the user needs a restore point there may not
be one to use.

Restore points are only helpful for a limited period of time. If you
regularly make system changes you should not use a restore point more than
a few days old.

Is that a fact or your opinion? I have used it to restore back more than two
weeks
with great success.

If a system get a virus or malware existing restore points need to be
dumped after the infection has been removed. Many users are not aware of
this so that they can be at risk of a new outbreak of the infection they
have just got rid of.

Don't you think they should be told this information instead of ' It causes
more problems than
it's worth'?

Another more recent problem has been the enhancing of security measures in
anti-virus and anti-spyware software, which prevent using System Restore
from restoring to a previous arrangement. Users are frequent unaware that
this additional protection exists and do not know how to turn off the
protection when they need to do so.

That is a problem with the anti-virus and anti-spyware software and not
System Restore.
THEY (caps for emphasis) cause many more problems than any of Microsofts
programs which includes System Restore.
..

Is System Restore intended as as a tool to remove malware? I think not as
it will not be monitoring the files that the malware has installed!

I think it is intended for removal of malware. It doesn't monitor files. I
simply takes snapshots
of files on a regular basis so that an operator/user can revert back to a
previous condition.

 

[Gerry]

Not really. You could have expressed a contrary view without using the
word "hogwash".

Bert is the most knowledgeable and prolific person posting on System
Restore issues that I know of. There are others that post to forums that
I do not generally come across, who may have a similar expertise, I do
not know.

Facts only exist to be disproved in the world of computing.

My post was not rude. Yours was!

--



Hope this helps.

Gerry
~~~~
FCA
Stourport, England
Enquire, plan and execute
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

[Unknown]

You don't think butting in is rude??? Your opinion.

 

[Gerry]

Oh what good vibrations you transmit <G>!

A troublesome tool; on the contrary it has solved problems for many
novice users.

True but problems for many users would not have existed had the default
setting not been to monitor all volumes. Also Microsoft were slow to
disseminate information to enable users to make the best use of the
tool.

Is that a fact or in your imagination?
http://bertk.mvps.org/html/filesfolders.html

How long does it take before a
user realizes a separate system is needed for backup?

How long is a piece of string?

If they don't know, here is where to tell them.
I.E. Teach; not scare them.

Warnings are a necessary part of the leaning process. Were you not told
how to cross the road safely and the consequences of failing to take
care?

Is that a fact or your opinion? I have used it to restore back more
than two weeks
with great success.

It's a matter of judgement. Your successful restoration could be for any
number of reasons. There is no precise time line where a restore will
succeed or fail. It is just that the prospect for a satisfactory outcome
diminish as more changes are made and the number of restore ponts
increase.

Don't you think they should be told this information instead of ' It
causes more problems than it's worth'?

Yes but then I have never said "It causes more problems than it's
worth". That's your imagination working overtime.

That is a problem with the anti-virus and anti-spyware software and
not System Restore.
True.

THEY (caps for emphasis) cause many more problems than any of
Microsofts programs which includes System Restore.
.

That debate is for another time.

I think it is intended for removal of malware. It doesn't monitor
files. I simply takes snapshots
of files on a regular basis so that an operator/user can revert back
to a previous condition.
.

You are correct in pointing out that it records files and settings at a
given time. Monitor, to the extent that it implies a continuing
overview,
was not the best word to use. However, the files it records at defined
intervals or on the occasion of particular events are limited not
exhaustive.

Why more appropriate? One way is as good as the other. They both do
the same thing.

No they don't. Turning off System Restore removes all restore points.
Disk CleanUp leaves the last restore point for future use. There are
situations where the first method is more appropriate but in most cases
the Disk CleanUp approach is safer.

Both emotional statements. You don't know how many. Give facts.

I thought I was being dispassionate not emotional but there you are.The
precise numbers, who have been disillusioned by an experience with
System Restore, is not the type of information I need to know. You can
encounter such individuals regularly in newsgroups and forums. If the
numbers are noticeable in these newsgroups it is patently obvious that
there are many more who never come near a newsgroup or who only read and
do not post.

Any web site that provides advice is a plus. Anything that HELPS is a
plus. Many early years?????? How old do you think XP is?

Windows XP was launched on 25 October 2001 but System Restore was
introduced with Windows ME in 1999. Bert Kinney's site was started on 27
February 2005.


--



Hope this helps.

Good night.

Gerry
~~~~
FCA
Stourport, England
Enquire, plan and execute
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

[Bert Kinney]

Hi,

My point was to warn the user, and that there are other options to try
first, that are less risky than going back further in time.

One risk of going further back in time is for applications there were
installed after the restore point being used. What happens is, System
Restore only removes the monitored files for the installed applications and
the remaining non-monitored files are left behind. Any registry entries made
by the installation of the application will also be gone. This will cause
the application not to function. And in some cases, cause the uninstall and
reinstall process of the partially removed application to fail. This is why
it is recommended to uninstall any applications installed after the restore
point you will be restoring to. If the uninstall and reinstall fail, try to
undo the restore point, uninstall the application in question, then perform
the restore again. The only other option would be to manually remove (for
advanced users) leftover files, folders, shortcuts, and registry entries.

Regards,
Bert Kinney MS-MVP Shell/User
http://bertk.mvps.org
Member: http://dts-l.org

 

[Ken Blake]

Sheer hogwash. I had a problem a while back and tried 3 restores all of
which failed. I finally picked one a little over two weeks old and it
worked perfectly.

*Nobody* has suggested that any time somebody goes back two weeks with
System Restore, it will cause problems. What Bert said--and he is absolutely
correct-- is that the farther you go back, the greater the risk of problems,
and that two weeks or more is iffy.

Of course, having an infected system is not normal that is precisely why I
did a restore. And how can going back a few weeks cause more problems than
it solves?

Because there is the potential to cause out of synch conditions between the
registry and other files on the drive.

 

[Unknown]

Out of sync files is pretty remote. For some reason you people seem to think
downloading programs is an everyday occurrence. How often do you download
something???