Kayman said:
According to ERUNT FAQ
<hxxp://
www.larshederer.homepage.t-online.de/erunt/faq.htm> the
Windows XP's System Restore function should be disabled when using
ERUNT.
Do the experts in this newsgroup agree with this statement?
No. He's raving. I'm quite surprised by that one actually!
I'll tell you something about Lars. I wasn't at all happy with having to use
Task Manager to get ERUNT to run once a day and back up to a seperate
folder, or having it run at every boot, so I wrote a batch so that it backs
up at *only* the first boot of every day, to folders named for the day, ie
Monday, Tuesday etc (so there are never more than 7).
Eventually I wrote to Lars and gave him a link to download it so's he could
see what I'd done. I wasn't trying to get him to use *my* batch, just to
make ERUNT capable of doing it. I never heard from him. A month or so later
(2 years ago?) he released a new build in which much of this was now
possible. But even now I think my solution is better!
I'm not suggesting he stole my idea. I think he got in a huff because I
wondered aloud why I should *have to* resort to writing my own batch to do
what was otherwise so obviously a pita!
In the past I have used the Windows XP's System Restore function a
number of times quiet successfully but if ERUNT is deemed to be a
superior product then naturally I'd go for it.
Use them both. As he observes, ERUNT only reverses registry errors. There
are other problems could sometimes do with reversing. For instance, driver
rollback does not always work. System Restore doesn't always work. It's
worth having all the recovery strategies you can get. The only reason Lars
has for disabling System Restore is to save disk space, which is a ludicrous
idea! Properly set System Restore should use just about 500MB on C: and be
disabled on any other drive. Anyone running XP on a system that can't easily
spare 500MB has got to be someone who doesn't believe in getting a new
computer and is probably running it on the one he used to run Windows 98 on!
Shane
