Backward compatibility in NTBACKUP?

[Jonathan Sachs]

My old computer was a tower system running Windows 2000. My backup
device was an HP C1537A DAT drive connected to an Adaptec SCSI card.

My new computer is a laptop running Windows XP. I just finished
connecting the same DAT drive to it through an Adaptec USB2XCHANGE
converter, which connects a SCSI chain to a USB 2.0 port.

The new system looks like it's going to work like a charm, except for
one little problem: when I insert one of my old backup tapes in the
drive, NTBACKUP reports "Unrecognized media."

What's going on here? Is it Microsoft's policy to make each new
version of NTBACKUP incompatible with previous ones, ensuring that
when I migrate to a new version of Windows, all of my prior backups
will become useless? Or is a more likely that there is some
incompatibility between the USB2XCHANGE device and traditional Adaptec
SCSI controllers?

My mail address is jsachs177 at earthlink dot net.

 

[Jupiter Jones [MVP]]

Jonathan;
NTBACKUP is not compatible with earlier versions.
Since NTBACKUP is designed to back-up data for use on the same
computer in the event of problems, this is not a problem when used as
intended.
Simply copy the desired data from the old computer to new and/or
transfer the data over a network.

 

[Jonathan Sachs]

Jonathan;
NTBACKUP is not compatible with earlier versions.

That is very unwelcome news. The rest of your message is rather
disturbing, since it implies that Microsoft will make no effort to fix
the problem.

Since NTBACKUP is designed to back-up data for use on the same
computer in the event of problems, this is not a problem when used as
intended.

That is a meaningless statement. I need to use it to restore a file
from a backup which I created a few months ago. A few months ago my
system happened to be a different computer running the previous
version of Windows. That is irrelevant to the fact that I need to
restore the file.

Simply copy the desired data from the old computer to new and/or
transfer the data over a network.

That is also a meaningless statement. "The desired data" is the
monthly full backup and daily differential backup of my data drive
(i.e. everything except the operating system and application software)
over the last year.

If I were gifted with the foresight required to know which old
versions of which files I might need at some undetermined time in the
future, I would not be messing around with computers. I would retire
to the tropical island which I would buy with my winnings in the stock
market.

In effect, you are telling me that because of a design flaw in
Microsoft's backup program, I must retain my old computer for a year,
just for the occasional situations where I need to restore an old
version of a file.

I'm no longer shocked by any bug I find in a Microsoft product, but it
does bother me to come here for useful advice and be told in effect,
"If eating makes your stomach hurt, don't try to eat."

My mail address is jsachs177 at earthlink dot net.

 

[Jupiter Jones [MVP]]

Jonathan;
It is not a bug and it is not a problem, so it does not need fixing..
Simply restore on a computer with the original OS.
Then copy data to the new computer.
Then make a full back-up of all important data on the new computer.

If you replaced the computer, you should make back-ups as if none
previously existed.
This does not require "gifted with the foresight", it deals more with
standard practices.

It is not a bug or "design flaw" and if you back-up appropriately, you
will not need the older computer for those purposes.

Your analogy about eating is totally irrelevant.

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
An easier way to read newsgroup messages:
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/pro/using/newsgroups/setup.asp
http://dts-l.org/index.html

 

[Jonathan Sachs]

Simply restore on a computer with the original OS.
Then copy data to the new computer.

That is not a "solution"; it is the precaution which I will have to
resort to if there is no solution. Do you think it's reasonable for me
to have to add a new computer to my office every time I update my
operating system, and keep the old one around for at least a year? I
don't think so.

Then make a full back-up of all important data on the new computer.
If you replaced the computer, you should make back-ups as if none
previously existed.

I have reread my previous explanation, and I don't think it could be
any clearer than it is. Perhaps an example will help you understand
it.

I migrated to a Windows XP computer around the end of August. Suppose
that tomorrow a question from a client requires me to refer to a file
from last May 28. It could be a file that I deleted some time between
then and now, not knowing that I would need it again; it could be a
file that is still on my computer, but has been updated, perhaps many
times, since then. The important fact is that I need the file as it
was on May 28, and until that client asks me that question, I won't
know what file I will need or what date.

If I have to tell my client, "Gee, I can't get at that version any
more; how about August 28?" he isn't going to like it.

It is not a bug or "design flaw"...

Microsoft is, of course, free to assert that any sort of behavior it
doesn't want to fix is "not a bug." But in a case like this, doing so
implies that it is intentionally producing products which make it
difficult or impossible for an important group of users to do their
work.

Anyone who deals with client data on an ongoing basis may need to be
able to restore old files. Lawyers and accountants, in particular, are
subject to this type of need, and failure to meet its will jeopardize
their professional standing as well as their client relations.

An operating system that does not maintain backup compatibility from
release to release is no more acceptable than one that does not
maintain file system compatibility from release to release. Fewer
users are effected, but I do not think they are so few or so
unimportant that they should be ignored.

My mail address is jsachs177 at earthlink dot net.

 

[Jupiter Jones [MVP]]

Jonathan;
The answer is still very simple.
You need to determine what is important to save.
You need to make sure all old data is compatible with a new system.

It almost sounds like you keep back-ups indefinitely without ever
erasing them.
If that is the case, it is still up to you to make sure they are
accessible on any new system.

Your question also begs a question.
Why are you deleting a file that a client may require at a later date?

You can quibble with words all you want, the point is you need to do
what is necessary to protect you and your clients interests.
I see no reason for multiple older computers just for older data,
however if that is the solution you choose for you and your client,
that is up to you.

Perhaps your better option is not to upgrade to Windows XP.
However if you choose to upgrade, it is up to you and NOT Microsoft to
be sure you are capable of using all necessary data and applications.
If you can not do that, upgrading may be a bad option.

--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
An easier way to read newsgroup messages:
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/pro/using/newsgroups/setup.asp
http://dts-l.org/index.html

 

[Bob Willard]

That is not a "solution"; it is the precaution which I will have to
resort to if there is no solution. Do you think it's reasonable for me
to have to add a new computer to my office every time I update my
operating system, and keep the old one around for at least a year? I
don't think so.




I have reread my previous explanation, and I don't think it could be
any clearer than it is. Perhaps an example will help you understand
it.

I migrated to a Windows XP computer around the end of August. Suppose
that tomorrow a question from a client requires me to refer to a file
from last May 28. It could be a file that I deleted some time between
then and now, not knowing that I would need it again; it could be a
file that is still on my computer, but has been updated, perhaps many
times, since then. The important fact is that I need the file as it
was on May 28, and until that client asks me that question, I won't
know what file I will need or what date.

If I have to tell my client, "Gee, I can't get at that version any
more; how about August 28?" he isn't going to like it.




Microsoft is, of course, free to assert that any sort of behavior it
doesn't want to fix is "not a bug." But in a case like this, doing so
implies that it is intentionally producing products which make it
difficult or impossible for an important group of users to do their
work.

Anyone who deals with client data on an ongoing basis may need to be
able to restore old files. Lawyers and accountants, in particular, are
subject to this type of need, and failure to meet its will jeopardize
their professional standing as well as their client relations.

An operating system that does not maintain backup compatibility from
release to release is no more acceptable than one that does not
maintain file system compatibility from release to release. Fewer
users are effected, but I do not think they are so few or so
unimportant that they should be ignored.

My mail address is jsachs177 at earthlink dot net.

The point you are missing is that backup apps use file formats that
are unique to that backup app; sometimes to a specific version of
that backup app and, therefore, sometimes to a specific OS. Further,
restoring files from a backupset usually restores them correctly
*only* in the filesystem (NTFS or FATxx) of the OS on which the
backupset was created.

If you want to be able to read files from older OSs, then you should
not use backup apps. Instead, you should only use file formats which
are fairly universally understood: .TXT files are your best choice,
..PDF files are pretty stable, and .JPG files are also good choices.
Personally, I would avoid any file formats which are primarily used
by Office (.DOC, .PPT, .XLS, etc.), since those file formats are
proprietary to M$, are not defined in public standards, and have not
been extremely portable across different versions of Office.

File formats have not demonstrated long-term stability, so there is
some unavoidable risk here. The least stable, IMHO, are those file
formats used by backup apps; Office file formats are next worse, and
..TXT is about the best.

Also, make sure your copies are uncompressed and unencrypted, since
compression and encryption programs do not always uncompress or
decrypt files unless they were squished by that version of that
particular app.

 

[Jonathan Sachs]

You are entirely correct that I "need to do what is necessary to
protect [my] clients' interests," but you never addressed the original
issue of Microsoft's apparent failure to provide backup compatibility
between Windows 2000 and Windows XP.

I say "apparent failure" because I have made a discovery which throws
the whole matter in a different light. I tried reading some other
tapes created under Windows 2000 and had no problem with them. Then I
tried reading the tape which occasioned my original message, and I had
no problem with it, either. The original problem evidently was not
caused by an incompatibility either in the adapter or in Windows; it
was just some sort of glitch in the tape drive.

So you have spent the better part of a week defending the indefensible
when you could have been helping me identify the actual problem. And I
spent the better part of a week trying to get some type of helpful
response from you when I could have been identifying it.

There are a couple of lessons to be learned from this. The first one,
for both of us, is that one should always be skeptical about the
apparent cause of an unexpected problem. Windows delivers unpleasant
surprises so often that it's easy to blame Windows whenever one
occurs. Both of us did so here, and it made my problem more difficult
for both of us to solve.

The second lesson concerns the appropriate response when Windows does
fall short.

Throughout this exchange you've taken the position that if Windows
backups aren't compatible across releases then it is automatically
unreasonable to expect them to be. It would have been more
constructive to respond to my original message by thinking, "Yes, that
certainly is unreasonable! I don't think it's the controller, but does
Windows really do that?" This question presumably would have led you
quickly to discover that it does not, and when you informed me of that
fact I could have looked further for the actual problem.

If it had turned out that Windows backups really were incompatible, an
appropriate response would have been, "I'm sorry that Windows is not
serving your needs. I can't help you correct immediate problem, but I
will inform Microsoft of it for consideration in future releases."
(Assuming, of course, that this is a truthful statement!)

I hope you will be able to make use of this experience to serve the
community better in the future.

My mail address is jsachs177 at earthlink dot net.