XP restore function

[Richie Hardwick]

Because I examined the drwatson log file, and found it in there. To quote
it:
Application exception occurred:
App: C:\WINDOWS\System32\svchost.exe (pid=1060)
When: 12/17/2008 @ 20:02:43.562
Exception number: c0000005 (access violation)


I'm on dialup, so yes, that's what I meant. I haven't had the problem yet
when I'm offline, but I'm often online, so it may not be 100% conclusive,
but I'd bet a beer on it.

I forgot to mention that I even restored a previous complete C: partition
image backup (prior to having this problem), and THAT didn't resolve it!!
So I'm pretty much concluding this bug is due to some other issues (and not
my windows and programs installations).

Not Windows, anyway.

But I'm also using AdMuncher, AdShield, CallWave, CacheSentryPro, for
example), and figure there may be something going on in there.

One - or a combo - of the above is probably the culprit. Start
stopping the one you've most recently begun to use.

Callwave... that one brings back memories of the olden dialup days for
me! Just the name of "CacheSentryPro" looks suspicious.


Richie Hardwick

 

[Bill in Co.]

Not Windows, anyway.

Right. That's a bit more accurate.

One - or a combo - of the above is probably the culprit. Start
stopping the one you've most recently begun to use.

We'll, I'm working on these guys one at a time, so thanks! Unfortunately,
they were all in use around the same time.

Callwave... that one brings back memories of the olden dialup days for
me! Just the name of "CacheSentryPro" looks suspicious.

CacheSentry and CacheSentryPro are pretty good, and do a better job of
managing the TIF than IE does. And are much more customizable (like you
can decide which cached items should be retained longer, and not rely on IE
to (more or less) randomly dispose of them when the cache gets full
(although it's supposed to be a last in, last out thing, so the oldest guys
go first). Plus it has an option to clear the TIF's index.dat file at
reboot, which is not an easy task to accomplish in Windows XP for a somewhat
corrupted TIF! (in Win98SE you could do it by booting into real mode DOS,
and doing it down there)

Here is a link related to CacheSentry (free) and CacheSentryPro
(inexpensive): http://www.enigmaticsoftware.com/cachesentry_pro/index.html

It's pretty useful for those of us on dialup to be able to retain some
select pages in the cache as we see fit (otherwise it takes forever to
reload them).

 

[Richie Hardwick]

Right. That's a bit more accurate.


We'll, I'm working on these guys one at a time, so thanks! Unfortunately,
they were all in use around the same time.


CacheSentry and CacheSentryPro are pretty good, and do a better job of
managing the TIF than IE does. And are much more customizable (like you
can decide which cached items should be retained longer, and not rely on IE
to (more or less) randomly dispose of them when the cache gets full
(although it's supposed to be a last in, last out thing, so the oldest guys
go first). Plus it has an option to clear the TIF's index.dat file at
reboot, which is not an easy task to accomplish in Windows XP for a somewhat
corrupted TIF! (in Win98SE you could do it by booting into real mode DOS,
and doing it down there)

Here is a link related to CacheSentry (free) and CacheSentryPro
(inexpensive): http://www.enigmaticsoftware.com/cachesentry_pro/index.html

It's pretty useful for those of us on dialup to be able to retain some
select pages in the cache as we see fit (otherwise it takes forever to
reload them).

Personally, I'd dump that program and just make my TIF folder HUGE.

I've never had a corrupted TIF index.dat file... and I've been playing
around online since about two years before Mosaic became available.

Richie Hardwick

 

[windmap]

I have been reading up on ERUNT as a substitute for the XP "restore"
function. It sounds like it is a more complete and reliable function than
"restore".

Opinions?

NO its wrong,ERUNT is a good program for backing up the registry but
isnt a complete restore program like system restore.System restore
offers wizard based restore option also backups the registry
automatically on daily basis.When its the question of which one is
best and more complete i would say "system restore" is more complete
then erunt because system restore backups up both registry and also
some other settings

 

[windmap]

I have been reading up on ERUNT as a substitute for the XP "restore"
function. It sounds like it is a more complete and reliable function than
"restore".

Opinions?

NO its wrong,ERUNT is a good program for backing up the registry but
isnt a complete restore program like system restore.System restore
offers wizard based restore option also backups the registry
automatically on daily basis.When its the question of which one is
best and more complete i would say "system restore" is more complete
then erunt because system restore backups up both registry and also
some other settings

 

[Bill in Co.]

Personally, I'd dump that program and just make my TIF folder HUGE.

But that also has its drawback and potential problems (i.e., I believe
increases the likelyhood of getting a corrupted TIF should power go out or
after a blue screen, while online). As the TIF gets larger, more TIF
subfolders are created, all of which have to be routinely indexed and
maintained by IE. (As it is now, I already have 12 subfolders in the TIF).
And as I recall, there comes a point where it can take longer to find an
entry in a larger TIF than it would take to just load it in fresh. My TIF
is currently set at 100 MB, which is on the high end for the recommended
size.

I've never had a corrupted TIF index.dat file... and I've been playing
around online since about two years before Mosaic became available.

Richie Hardwick

Well ok, in implying that I had a truly corrupted TIF, I may have overstated
it. (but at this point in time, and over all the years of using Windows
through its various "incarnations", I can't even recall for sure).

But I *do* remember that after clearing the TIF in IE, many old TIF files
are not removed, and its "index.dat" file often remains bloated (as in:
several megabytes). The only way to clear the index.dat file (for a clean
TIF) is to delete it, and then it will get rebuilt on the next bootup. (the
default size for a clean index.dat file is around 32 KB, and NOT several
Megabytes).

 

[Bill in Co.]

NO its wrong,ERUNT is a good program for backing up the registry but
isnt a complete restore program like system restore.System restore
offers wizard based restore option also backups the registry
automatically on daily basis.When its the question of which one is
best and more complete i would say "system restore" is more complete
then erunt because system restore backups up both registry and also
some other settings

Well, truth be told, even System Restore is not a full and complete restore
program. It will not replace everything (like all the files it doesn't
monitor, for example). I don't think there truly exists such a thing, short
of restoring an image or clone backup of the system. THAT is the only
truly complete restore path.

 

[Bill in Co.]

Addended.

But that also has its drawback and potential problems (i.e., I believe
increases the likelyhood of getting a corrupted TIF should power go out or
after a blue screen, while online). As the TIF gets larger, more TIF
subfolders are created, all of which have to be routinely indexed and
maintained by IE. (As it is now, I already have 12 subfolders in the
TIF).
And as I recall, there comes a point where it can take longer to find an
entry in a larger TIF than it would take to just load it in fresh. My
TIF
is currently set at 100 MB, which is on the high end for the recommended
size.


Well ok, in implying that I had a truly corrupted TIF, I may have
overstated
it. (but at this point in time, and over all the years of using Windows
through its various "incarnations", I can't even recall for sure).

But I *do* remember that after clearing the TIF in IE, many old TIF files
are not removed, and its "index.dat" file often remains bloated (as in:
several megabytes). The only way to clear the index.dat file (for a clean
TIF) is to delete it, and then it will get rebuilt on the next bootup.
(the
default size for a clean index.dat file is around 32 KB, and NOT several
Megabytes).

Ooops, spoke too soon. I forgot about those cases where, after visiting
some sites, and then looking at the TIF (within IE options), it appeared as
if the almost all of the TIF files there had mysteriously vanished! That
has happened to me on several occasions. I discovered it by looking
under "Tools, Internet Options, Settings, View Files", where I saw hardly
anything in there anymore, and yet in Windows Explorer, I could see the TIF
was quiot full (e:g: 100 MB worth), and had thousands of files still in
there! IOW: a corrupted TIF and index.dat file.

 

[windmap]

Well, truth be told, even System Restore is not a full and complete restore
program.   It will not replace everything (like all the files it doesn't
monitor, for example).  I don't think there truly exists such a thing, short
of restoring an image or clone backup of the system.   THAT is the only
truly complete restore path.

Yes i understand that System restore is not a complete restore program
like Disk Imaging program.I also admit that there is no such software
as complete backup software.
However when it comes to the Question of which one is better of the
two.Its should be System Restore.

 

[Anna]

Yes i understand that System restore is not a complete restore program
like Disk Imaging program.I also admit that there is no such software
as complete backup software.
However when it comes to the Question of which one is better of the
two.Its should be System Restore.


windmap:
Well, what about a disk-to-disk cloning program? Would you not consider this
"as complete backup software"?
Anna

 

[Daave]

Yes i understand that System restore is not a complete restore program
like Disk Imaging program.I also admit that there is no such software
as complete backup software.

That paragraph is self-contradictory!

What exactly would be the difference between a complete backup program
and a complete restore program??!! They are two sides of the same coin!

For the newbies out there:

As good as it is, System Restore takes periodic snapshots of the Windows
XP *system* (which can be very helpful), but it does not back up data.
There are two reliable methods to completely back up *everything* on
your hard drive: imaging and cloning. You can also choose to
periodically back up your data -- hopefully in addition to imaging or
cloning. If you *only* back up data, then if something serious occurs,
you may not have any choice but to reinstall your OS. Reinstallation is
unnecessary, however, if you regularly image or clone your hard drive:
simply restore the image or swap the drives and you'll be good to go.