What do you use for backup today?

M

Mxsmanic

Over the past few years the capacity of disk drives (and the amount of
space typically used on them) has greatly increased, and now it is
getting more and more difficult to figure out how to back up these
drives.

What type of hardware (and software) do you use on your systems for
backup?

Up to now, I've used HP DDS tape drives (DAT drives) for backup. But
DDS2 is limited to 4 GB, and DDS3 is limited to 24 GB, and that's
getting to be to small to hold even one backup on a single tape (or
even on several tapes in some cases).

So, what else is there? These DAT drives already cost me a fortune in
the good old days, and today they cost nearly as much as the rest of
the computer, when I can find them ... and even DDS4 is still limited
to 40 GB. DLT drives are several times more expensive at the cheap
end, although they do have capacity to hold an entire drive of data.

Are there other practical alternatives? What about external USB
drives, can that work? Old stuff like Zip drives and so on is
history, as it has even less capacity than tape. Archiving to CD or
DVD is also too low in capacity. It's getting to the point that the
only affordable option seems to be some sort of disk-to-disk copy (or
RAID for those who can afford it), but it would be nice to have
removable media that could be put in a safe place.

So what is everyone else building into their new machines for backup?
And do you just use standard backup tools like ntbackup on Windows or
dump on UNIX, or do you use special software purchased separately?
 
J

John Doe

Mxsmanic said:
Over the past few years the capacity of disk drives (and the
amount of space typically used on them) has greatly increased,
and now it is getting more and more difficult to figure out how
to back up these drives.
What type of hardware (and software) do you use on your systems
for backup?

I have a second hard disk drive, 1/6 size of the main. I also have
a recently purchased DVD writer.

I don't use software. I just copy the stuff.

Have fun.
 
J

Jan Alter

I've settled into using a Maxtor One Touch USB/firewire drive with
Retrospect software from Dantz (software comes with the drive). This is the
easiest backup procedure I've ever used. Just push a button. Or for that
matter I could auto-set it to back up daily.
Additionally I make a Ghost image backup on the USB/firwire drive as well.
 
R

Roger

Mxsmanic said:
Over the past few years the capacity of disk drives (and the amount of
space typically used on them) has greatly increased, and now it is
getting more and more difficult to figure out how to back up these
drives.

What type of hardware (and software) do you use on your systems for
backup?

Up to now, I've used HP DDS tape drives (DAT drives) for backup. But
DDS2 is limited to 4 GB, and DDS3 is limited to 24 GB, and that's
getting to be to small to hold even one backup on a single tape (or
even on several tapes in some cases).

So, what else is there? These DAT drives already cost me a fortune in
the good old days, and today they cost nearly as much as the rest of
the computer, when I can find them ... and even DDS4 is still limited
to 40 GB. DLT drives are several times more expensive at the cheap
end, although they do have capacity to hold an entire drive of data.

Are there other practical alternatives? What about external USB
drives, can that work? Old stuff like Zip drives and so on is
history, as it has even less capacity than tape. Archiving to CD or
DVD is also too low in capacity. It's getting to the point that the
only affordable option seems to be some sort of disk-to-disk copy (or
RAID for those who can afford it), but it would be nice to have
removable media that could be put in a safe place.

So what is everyone else building into their new machines for backup?
And do you just use standard backup tools like ntbackup on Windows or
dump on UNIX, or do you use special software purchased separately?

I think the most important criteria for backups is -- as you stated, it
would be nice to have reliable media to put into a safe place. This
protects you against possible theft, fire, or accidently deleting a file
and not noticing it for some time.

One issue with DAT drives is they tend to be output only media. If you
have an out of spec drive you may never notice until you try to restore
a file using a different drive. With a CD or DVD you may have multiple
drives yourself, or if not, at least once in a while you may share a
copy of something with a friend.

I back up only my own data (no program files) to DVDs using good old
WinZip as a batch process to make incremental backups of changed
directories of files (archive bit on). When the incremental becomes too
large, I backup whole directories, turn off the archive bit, and start
over with small incrementals.

It helps to organize your data so that backups are easier. My biggest
challenge is digital photos. I have a "stable" directory that doesn't
change and a "current" directory that has a lot of activity. From time
to time I copy stuff from the current directory to the stable one just
before I make a full backup. The full backups go to the bank vault and
every month or two I move an incremental backup to the vault as well.

While I may make a copy of the W/XP CD and other pricy software, I never
bother backing up software, the registry, etc. If the hard drive goes,
it is an opportunity to start with a fresh install and get rid of the
old crappy software I don't use anymore.

If you have multiple PCs and hard drive backups are what you want to do,
there is a nice free utility called Unison File Synchronizer that will
keep directories in sync. it even works across different operating
systems such as Windows and Linux.

Roger
 
S

sbb78247

Mxsmanic said:
What about things like the registry?


John tends to be a dumbfuck.

use a imaging program such as drive image, ghost, acronis true backup and a
removable drive. you get an exact restorable image of your drive plus you
can do incremental backups to keep the original image up to date.
 
S

spodosaurus

Mxsmanic said:
Over the past few years the capacity of disk drives (and the amount of
space typically used on them) has greatly increased, and now it is
getting more and more difficult to figure out how to back up these
drives.

What type of hardware (and software) do you use on your systems for
backup?

All backups, as well as shared files, are transfered to my linux server
with software RAID 1 (2x80 and 2x120). Further, I have a 200GB drive in
a 3.5" enclosure that I back up all this data onto for an 'off site'
backup one a month, minimum.
Up to now, I've used HP DDS tape drives (DAT drives) for backup. But
DDS2 is limited to 4 GB, and DDS3 is limited to 24 GB, and that's
getting to be to small to hold even one backup on a single tape (or
even on several tapes in some cases).

So, what else is there? These DAT drives already cost me a fortune in
the good old days, and today they cost nearly as much as the rest of
the computer, when I can find them ... and even DDS4 is still limited
to 40 GB. DLT drives are several times more expensive at the cheap
end, although they do have capacity to hold an entire drive of data.

Are there other practical alternatives? What about external USB
drives, can that work?

Yes. You can send entire ghost images to them or just create a backup
plan. I wonder if any of the commercial (or freeware) backup software
will let you set the USB HDD as a destination for the files, or if these
softwares are able to incrementally update onlt the files that are new
or have changed? I know there's a technique in linux to do this, and I
should REALLY look into it soon.
Old stuff like Zip drives and so on is
history, as it has even less capacity than tape. Archiving to CD or
DVD is also too low in capacity. It's getting to the point that the
only affordable option seems to be some sort of disk-to-disk copy (or
RAID for those who can afford it), but it would be nice to have
removable media that could be put in a safe place.

Even windows sofware RAID is quite cheap. Unlike hardware RAID, you need
to use the manufacturer's windows drivers.
So what is everyone else building into their new machines for backup?
And do you just use standard backup tools like ntbackup on Windows or
dump on UNIX, or do you use special software purchased separately?


--
spammage trappage: replace fishies_ with yahoo

I'm going to die rather sooner than I'd like. I tried to protect my
neighbours from crime, and became the victim of it. Complications in
hospital following this resulted in a serious illness. I now need a bone
marrow transplant. Many people around the world are waiting for a marrow
transplant, too. Please volunteer to be a marrow donor:
http://www.abmdr.org.au/
http://www.marrow.org/
 
J

JAD

generally I let the transmission handle this, I prefer automatic.....oh
wait.....wrong direction...I ghost a 10gig os partition every week to
another off box HD(1394 external). data and project files are burned to CD
and also stored in a separate partition on the off box drive.
 
C

Clyde

Mxsmanic said:
Over the past few years the capacity of disk drives (and the amount of
space typically used on them) has greatly increased, and now it is
getting more and more difficult to figure out how to back up these
drives.

What type of hardware (and software) do you use on your systems for
backup?

I have an iOmega external, Firewire drive the same size as my main HD. I
use iOmega's Automatic Backup Pro software. It will backup data or the
whole system. The key is that is will backup open files, so it get
everything. This software was part of the package with the drive.

Clyde
 
A

Arnold

Mxsmanic said:
Over the past few years the capacity of disk drives (and the amount of
space typically used on them) has greatly increased, and now it is
getting more and more difficult to figure out how to back up these
drives.

What type of hardware (and software) do you use on your systems for
backup?

Up to now, I've used HP DDS tape drives (DAT drives) for backup. But
DDS2 is limited to 4 GB, and DDS3 is limited to 24 GB, and that's
getting to be to small to hold even one backup on a single tape (or
even on several tapes in some cases).

So, what else is there? These DAT drives already cost me a fortune in
the good old days, and today they cost nearly as much as the rest of
the computer, when I can find them ... and even DDS4 is still limited
to 40 GB. DLT drives are several times more expensive at the cheap
end, although they do have capacity to hold an entire drive of data.

Are there other practical alternatives? What about external USB
drives, can that work? Old stuff like Zip drives and so on is
history, as it has even less capacity than tape. Archiving to CD or
DVD is also too low in capacity. It's getting to the point that the
only affordable option seems to be some sort of disk-to-disk copy (or
RAID for those who can afford it), but it would be nice to have
removable media that could be put in a safe place.

So what is everyone else building into their new machines for backup?
And do you just use standard backup tools like ntbackup on Windows or
dump on UNIX, or do you use special software purchased separately?


Mxmanic:
No doubt you'll get a slew of responses to your query each one touting his
or her favorite backup scheme, so let me give you my "take" on this
subject....

In my opinion, the best backup system for the average home user and even
small business owner in most cases is having his or her desktop computer
equipped with two removable hard drives and using a disk imaging program
such as Symantec's Norton Ghost or Acronis True Image to "clone" the
contents of their working hard drive to another removable hard drive. There
are other advantages in having two removable hard drives on one's desktop
computer but the most significant one is providing a near fail-safe backup
system. The speed, flexibility and peace of mind you get with this
arrangement far outweighs (for most users) the relatively small additional
cost of equipping one's desktop computer with this hardware configuration.
Note that the removable hard drive mobile racks we are discussing are
designed to be installed in desktop computers and not laptop or notebook
computers. The size, weight, and design considerations of laptops/notebooks
do not allow for this hardware configuration.

Using this setup, backing up your hard drive is simple, straightforward,
fast, and most important of all -- effective. By easily and relatively
quickly making a clone of your hard drive, using a software program like
Symantec's Norton Ghost or Acronis True Image, programs which are
specifically designed for this purpose, you get, what seems to me, the
ultimate backup solution given the present state of personal desktop
computer technology. Unlike backup programs that merely back up your data
files - that is, the files you've created in the various programs and
applications you use - by cloning your hard drive, you're backing up your
operating system, your registry, all your programs and applications, your
configuration settings, your data files - in short, everything on the hard
drive from which you're making (for all practical purposes) a bit for bit
copy.

And you're doing all this in one fell swoop, the result of which is the
creation of an exact duplicate of your working hard drive. And for *added*
safety you can remove this newly-cloned hard drive from the premises, not to
mention making unlimited additional clones you desire for near-absolute
security.

While it is true that backup software programs can backup the files you have
created in your various programs, they are unable to backup your operating
system and (for the most part) the programs installed on your computer. As
others have pointed out more that once, many, if not most, computer users
have invested substantial time and effort in customizing Windows and
configuring their applications to work the way they want to and putting all
of that back the way it was can be a difficult, frustrating, and
time-consuming effort.

So when the day comes - as it *surely* will - that your hard drive fails
because of some mechanical or electrical defect, it's a wonderful feeling to
know that you have a perfectly good copy of that failed hard drive that you
simply shove in the computer, boot up, and you're off and running. Or if you
ever get some miserable computer virus that plays havoc with your system, or
for some unknown reason this or that system file is missing or becomes
corrupt resulting in an inoperable computer, isn't it nice to know that you
have at hand a perfectly good virus-free clone of your hard drive? And then
simply clone that "good" previously cloned hard drive to the virus-infected
one so that once again you now have two perfectly good hard drives. And in
the case where the hard drive is kaput because of some mechanical/electronic
failure, you purchase a new hard drive, simply remove the defective drive
from the removable tray, plop in the new one, make two simple connections,
shove it in the computer and then clone your good hard drive to the new one.
And the added beauty of this arrangement is that you do all this from the
comfort of your computer chair. There's no need to open your computer case
and get into the "guts" of your computer to make complicated cable
disconnects/connects. Everything is done outside of your computer because
each hard drive resides in a tray (caddy) that you simply slide into the
computer's mobile rack.

There's *no* need to partition and format the new drive; *no* need to
reinstall your operating system on the new drive; *no* need to reinstall
your programs and data files. None of this is necessary. By simply cloning
the
previously-cloned hard drive to the new drive you once again have two
functioning hard drives at your disposal. And a simple turn of the mobile
rack's keylock allows the user to boot to either hard drive following the
cloning operation.

As previously indicated, these mobile rack devices are two-piece affairs -
the rack itself and the inner tray or caddy (in which the hard drive
resides) that slides into the rack. They come in all-aluminum models or a
combination of aluminum-plastic ranging in price from about $15 to $50.
Naturally, your desktop computer case will need two 5¼" bays that are
available to house the mobile racks. Mobile racks come in various versions,
depending upon whether the hard drive to be housed is an IDE/ATA, SATA, or
SCSI device. A Google search for "removable hard drive mobile racks" will
result in a wealth of information on these products and their vendors. I'm
aware of many users who have been using inexpensive plastic mobile racks
without any problems whatsoever. Unfortunately, there is no industry
standard involving the design and construction of the racks nor the inner
trays that contain the hard drive.Consequently, there is (usually) no
interchangeability of these trays among the various manufacturers of mobile
racks. Indeed, there is frequently no interchangeability of the inner trays
among different models from the same manufacturer. This lack of
interchangeability may not be an issue if the user will be purchasing a
particular model of mobile rack for a single computer, however, if the user
will have access to other computers, he or she may want to settle on a
specific brand and model of mobile rack that will provide for tray
interchangeability amongst different computers.

As I've previously indicated, the cloning process itself is easy and
relatively fast. Using Symantec's Norton Ghost 2003 cloning program as an
example, with the two removable hard drives connected to the computer, you
simply boot up your desktop computer with the bootable floppy disk (my
preferred method) that contains the Ghost program and after a few key clicks
the cloning process begins. The cloning process is practically automatic and
you need not be in attendance during the actual cloning operation. The size
(disk capacity) or make/model of your hard drives need not be identical; all
that matters is that your destination drive contains sufficient capacity to
receive the contents of your source drive. Incidentally, I've recently been
experimenting with the Acronis True Image program because of the many
favorable reports I've come across about this program. Using a bootable ATI
CD, I find the cloning speed of this program is considerably faster than
that of Ghost. And so far I've run into no problems with the cloning process
itself. Depending upon the speed of your processor and hard drives you
should get cloning speeds of somewhere between 700 MB to 1.5+ GB per minute
(less if cloning to a USB/Firewire external hard drive).

I can virtually guarantee that once you begin working with two removable
hard drives, you'll have but one regret and only one regret. And that is you
didn't have this arrangement on your previous computer or computers. While
the additional cost involved in configuring your desktop computer with two
mobile racks together with the additional hard drive and disk imaging
software is not negligible, I can assure you it's money well spent. Frankly,
when you consider the enormous advantages of having two removable hard
drives on your desktop computer, the additional cost of so equipping your
computer in this fashion practically pales into insignificance.
Anna
 
M

Mxsmanic

Roger said:
One issue with DAT drives is they tend to be output only media. If you
have an out of spec drive you may never notice until you try to restore
a file using a different drive.

I've heard of this but I haven't experienced it. Then again, I use
the same drive for saving and restoring. I've always used HP
SureStore DAT drives.

I've restored on different drives in business environments and that
hasn't presented a problem, although I didn't do it regularly.
It helps to organize your data so that backups are easier. My biggest
challenge is digital photos. I have a "stable" directory that doesn't
change and a "current" directory that has a lot of activity. From time
to time I copy stuff from the current directory to the stable one just
before I make a full backup. The full backups go to the bank vault and
every month or two I move an incremental backup to the vault as well.

I lost about 1200 scans last year when a drive failed before I had
archived them to CD.
While I may make a copy of the W/XP CD and other pricy software, I never
bother backing up software, the registry, etc. If the hard drive goes,
it is an opportunity to start with a fresh install and get rid of the
old crappy software I don't use anymore.

Sometimes it's hard to remember all the things you tweaked, though. I
spent hours yesterday trying to figure out how to send data spooled to
Acrobat Distiller directly to a file, without being prompted for a
file name. I finally discovered (probably for the tenth time) how to
do it. Then I'll probably forget and have to figure it out again next
time.
 
M

Mxsmanic

spodosaurus said:
Even windows sofware RAID is quite cheap. Unlike hardware RAID, you need
to use the manufacturer's windows drivers.

The motherboards of the last two PCs I've been support hardware RAID
for SATA drives, but I'm wary of trying it out, as things like that
move into the "danger area" of hardware/software interactions that can
cause lots of problems and take forever to sort out.
 
M

Mxsmanic

Arnold said:
In my opinion, the best backup system for the average home user and even
small business owner in most cases is having his or her desktop computer
equipped with two removable hard drives and using a disk imaging program
such as Symantec's Norton Ghost or Acronis True Image to "clone" the
contents of their working hard drive to another removable hard drive.

This solution is tempting to me, too, although I don't have the budget
for it at the moment. It might be the way I go in future, as tape
drives with sufficient capacity to hold all the disk space I now have
would cost thousands of dollars for the drives alone, plus $100 or so
each for each data cartridge.
And you're doing all this in one fell swoop, the result of which is the
creation of an exact duplicate of your working hard drive. And for *added*
safety you can remove this newly-cloned hard drive from the premises, not to
mention making unlimited additional clones you desire for near-absolute
security.

Yes, being able to move the media elsewhere is important, as it guards
against major disasters.
While it is true that backup software programs can backup the files you have
created in your various programs, they are unable to backup your operating
system and (for the most part) the programs installed on your computer. As
others have pointed out more that once, many, if not most, computer users
have invested substantial time and effort in customizing Windows and
configuring their applications to work the way they want to and putting all
of that back the way it was can be a difficult, frustrating, and
time-consuming effort.

But there is an opposite side to the coin: What happens if you have to
restore the system to somewhat different hardware? All that OS
information in the registry covering the hardware configuration now is
obsolete. You'll be restoring a system that may not even boot. How
do you selective restore from a clone in such a way that you get all
your data and software configuration information back, but you can
still restore to a somewhat different hardware configuration?

After all, if your computer is destroyed, you may not be able to build
one that is rigorously identical to it from a hardware standpoint.
And if the new computer isn't identical, restoring the software
configuration for the hardware may cause a heap of trouble. You have
to be able to modify the hardware configuration information without
changing anything else. How do you do that with something that just
clones the entire drive?
... isn't it nice to know that you
have at hand a perfectly good virus-free clone of your hard drive?

Yes, if I have an identical hardware platform to which I can restore
the clone.

How do you restore the clone to the virus-infected drive without
infecting both with the virus? After all, you'll be running the
cloning program on the machine that has the virus.

Your only choice would be to buy yet a third disk, and clone the clean
disk to that. You _might_ be able to clone back to the infected disk
eventually, too, if you can be sure that no virus will sneak in.

But really, viruses aren't a big problem in my view. Drive failures
and other hardware failures are. A simple drive failure can be fixed
by a cloning program such as you describe. But if you have to replace
other hardware, or build a new machine ... then what?

Not that traditional tape backups are any better in this respect,
though. It's a problem for any kind of backup.
Everything is done outside of your computer because
each hard drive resides in a tray (caddy) that you simply slide into the
computer's mobile rack.

Sounds nice, but what about performance ... and purchase cost? It's
the former lower and the latter higher for removal drives? Disk
drives are the slowest link in the chain as it is already.
There's *no* need to partition and format the new drive; *no* need to
reinstall your operating system on the new drive; *no* need to reinstall
your programs and data files. None of this is necessary. By simply cloning
the previously-cloned hard drive to the new drive you once again have two
functioning hard drives at your disposal. And a simple turn of the mobile
rack's keylock allows the user to boot to either hard drive following the
cloning operation.

Unless your hardware configuration has changed. If your cloned system
expects video card A and you've had to replace your burnt-out card A
with a new video card B, it may be difficult to even boot, although I
suppose in that particular case you could fix things fairly quickly.
As previously indicated, these mobile rack devices are two-piece affairs -
the rack itself and the inner tray or caddy (in which the hard drive
resides) that slides into the rack. They come in all-aluminum models or a
combination of aluminum-plastic ranging in price from about $15 to $50.
Naturally, your desktop computer case will need two 5¼" bays that are
available to house the mobile racks. Mobile racks come in various versions,
depending upon whether the hard drive to be housed is an IDE/ATA, SATA, or
SCSI device. A Google search for "removable hard drive mobile racks" will
result in a wealth of information on these products and their vendors. I'm
aware of many users who have been using inexpensive plastic mobile racks
without any problems whatsoever. Unfortunately, there is no industry
standard involving the design and construction of the racks nor the inner
trays that contain the hard drive.Consequently, there is (usually) no
interchangeability of these trays among the various manufacturers of mobile
racks. Indeed, there is frequently no interchangeability of the inner trays
among different models from the same manufacturer. This lack of
interchangeability may not be an issue if the user will be purchasing a
particular model of mobile rack for a single computer, however, if the user
will have access to other computers, he or she may want to settle on a
specific brand and model of mobile rack that will provide for tray
interchangeability amongst different computers.

I'm not clear on this: are you saying that the drives themselves are
ordinary internal disk drives and it's just a special rack that allows
them to be connected more easily, or what? Don't you have to buy
special removable drives and racks that match?
I can virtually guarantee that once you begin working with two removable
hard drives, you'll have but one regret and only one regret. And that is you
didn't have this arrangement on your previous computer or computers. While
the additional cost involved in configuring your desktop computer with two
mobile racks together with the additional hard drive and disk imaging
software is not negligible, I can assure you it's money well spent.

I tend to agree. Unfortunately I have no money to spend at the
moment. When I do, though, I'll surely look into it, as the
alternative of buying a DLT or DDS4 tape drive would probably be at
least as expensive if not more.

Right now I try to keep irreplaceable stuff in a few key folders and I
just copy those somewhere periodically. Not very convenient and very
error prone, but that's all the budget allows right now. Periodically
I save to tape, although now I require multiple DDS cassettes for each
backup because of the growing size of the disks.
Frankly,
when you consider the enormous advantages of having two removable hard
drives on your desktop computer, the additional cost of so equipping your
computer in this fashion practically pales into insignificance.

If you have the money in the first place, but I don't. Maybe someday.
Thanks for your ideas, anyway--it does sound like going removable may
be the wave of the future.
 
J

John Doe

troll

sbb78247 said:
Path: newssvr17.news.prodigy.com!newsdbm02.news.prodigy.com!newsdst01.news.prodigy.com!newsmst01b.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.com!newscon02.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.net!pd7cy2so!shaw.ca!news.alt.net!bnewsoutpeer00.bru.ops.eu.uu.nat!$3ef82b3c!133.256.1.103.MISMATCH!not-for-mail
From: "sbb78247" <sbb78247 don'tknowdon'tcare.invalid>
Newsgroups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
Subject: Re: What do you use for backup today?
Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2005 10:53:57 -0500
Organization: don't even care.invalid
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <db9pbb.29s.1 133.256.1.103.MISMATCH>
References: <eq3fd1dmrsbre7ako2g64e14u2sq9a09rt 4ax.com> <Xns96943D331B2E7wisdomfolly 207.115.63.158> <ebcfd1tq14vbc5ndq9akhu6lv43v6id0vm 4ax.com>
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2527
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2527
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
Xref: newsmst01b.news.prodigy.com alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt:214081 alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt:441086



John tends to be a dumbfuck.

use a imaging program such as drive image, ghost, acronis true backup and a
removable drive. you get an exact restorable image of your drive plus you
can do incremental backups to keep the original image up to date.
--

sbb78247

Speak the truth and leave shortly there after.
 
J

John Doe

Mxsmanic said:
John Doe writes:
What about things like the registry?

I don't think Microsoft has ever genuinely promoted a modular
installation or easy backup of program data, that might promote user
independence. For attempting to preserve my installation, I backup
the whole Windows partition. I have used PartitionMagic, but
currently I am using Partition Manager 2005.
 
M

Mxsmanic

John said:
I don't think Microsoft has ever genuinely promoted a modular
installation or easy backup of program data, that might promote user
independence.

You make it sound deliberate. In fact, it's just a design flaw, not
something Microsoft has deliberately done.

There are generally two models for configuration data: one is the UNIX
model, with configuration files scattered all over the system, and the
other is the Windows model, with everything in one monolithic,
gigantic, proprietary database. Both have advantages and
disadvantages. The UNIX model is probably friendlier from the
standpoint of back-up and restore operations, though.
 
J

John Doe

Mxsmanic said:
John Doe writes:
You make it sound deliberate. In fact, it's just a design flaw,
not something Microsoft has deliberately done.

In fact (fact according to our federal courts), tying users to
Windows is something Microsoft puts great effort into, to the
point of breaking our laws. And for very good reason. Windows, a
monopoly with an 85% profit margin, is Microsoft's cash cow.
There are generally two models for configuration data: one is
the UNIX model, with configuration files scattered all over the
system, and the other is the Windows model, with everything in
one monolithic, gigantic, proprietary database.

Program configuration data has always been scattered, and still
is. Not only in the registry, but in files and folders.
Microsoft's Visual C++ is a good example.
 
M

Mxsmanic

John said:
Program configuration data has always been scattered, and still
is. Not only in the registry, but in files and folders.
Microsoft's Visual C++ is a good example.

Individual applications have the option of storing configuration data
in any way they choose. Some Windows programs use the registry,
others still use .INI files, still others have their own proprietary
methods of holding the data. I rather like programs that hold all the
necessary information in their own directories, since that allows one
to restore them to a system by simply restoring the directory, without
worrying about the registry. Of course, it's inelegant in other ways.
It's easy to back up and restore, though.
 
J

John Doe

Mxsmanic said:
John Doe writes:

Individual applications have the option of storing configuration
data in any way they choose.

Microsoft has the power to force the issue, but Microsoft would
rather bind the user to a single installation on one machine.
Fortunately we can still produce files in Windows that can be
removed.

Back to the subject of application data/settings. Some people keep
their programs on a second partition. I have done that before, but
nowadays the operating system installation is massive by itself,
so I do the basic installation/settings plus the most needed
applications, and copy the whole thing.

Good luck.
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Top