D
Daddy
I make frequent, regular images of my system partition -- at least once a
day, and before I make any significant changes to my computer. For this
reason, I don't rely on System Restore. In fact, I turned it off long ago.
All it did was make my images bigger.
Now, years later, I'm reconsidering that decision because...well, it's a
healthy thing to do. I still don't see how System Restore benefits me, but
I'm open to other people's opinions. In my view:
For System Restore:
* It's faster than making an image (but it only takes me 9 minutes to image
my system partition.)
* My most recent restore point may be more recent than my most recent image.
Against System Restore:
* Why backup only a selection of system and user files -- if whatever is
causing trouble for my computer is not included in that selection, the
restore point doesn't help me.
* Restoring a restore point means I may end up with some system and user
files from a different date than the rest of my system and user files, which
might possibly lead to instability.
* Restore points are stored on the same disk from which they are taken!
* Even if a restore point succeeds in restoring my computer to a usable
state, there's no guarantee it will reverse all the damage caused by a bad
install, for example, the way an image can.
Anyone care to opine?
Daddy
day, and before I make any significant changes to my computer. For this
reason, I don't rely on System Restore. In fact, I turned it off long ago.
All it did was make my images bigger.
Now, years later, I'm reconsidering that decision because...well, it's a
healthy thing to do. I still don't see how System Restore benefits me, but
I'm open to other people's opinions. In my view:
For System Restore:
* It's faster than making an image (but it only takes me 9 minutes to image
my system partition.)
* My most recent restore point may be more recent than my most recent image.
Against System Restore:
* Why backup only a selection of system and user files -- if whatever is
causing trouble for my computer is not included in that selection, the
restore point doesn't help me.
* Restoring a restore point means I may end up with some system and user
files from a different date than the rest of my system and user files, which
might possibly lead to instability.
* Restore points are stored on the same disk from which they are taken!
* Even if a restore point succeeds in restoring my computer to a usable
state, there's no guarantee it will reverse all the damage caused by a bad
install, for example, the way an image can.
Anyone care to opine?
Daddy