Windows 7 and filePro 5.6 installation

[John Sica]

I use Cobian (free) almost exclusively for workstations. For servers 
that need an image and/or crash recovery bootable CD or workstations 
that need an image and/or crash recovery bootable CD then I use Acronis.

Although the author of Cobian does not support Windows 7 on version 
9(his latest), many people use it. I've used Cobian on vista, but mostly 
XP. I like Cobian because I can run tasks as an admin user or as a 
service. I can also have a different schedule for each backup task. It 
also supports ftp backups. I also can create a log of just errors or a 
summary or a verbose log. It can mail the log after the backup to any 
number of recipients. This was one of the most important features. It 
supports shadow copy, and I can run tasks just before and just after the 
backup. It can shut down applications like Outlook, so as to backup the 
pst files. It supports 7zip and winzip compression or no compression. It 
also supports encryption which I found extremely valuable in one 
instance. While backing up over 50 PCs to a QNAP 5bay NAS device, the 
owner wanted 2 PC's backups to be encrypted. Cobian was able to do all 
this. It also works on Win95 Win98 Win2000 XP and Vista. So I was able 
to use the same product (although earlier versions) for all the 
desktops. I usually make 5 backup tasks, one for each day of the week 
and keep about 2 copies of each day before it writes over the earliest 
backup. I can keep as many versions as my NAS devices will hold. I've 
recently switched to the Synology NAS due to better support. Synology 
now supports native encryption on any filesystem I choose. That's a new 
feature. So on the removable media, it is always encrypted, cause it 
goes off site. The in-house backups are not encrypted so they can easily 
be accessed, but the owner's and controller's Cobian encrypted backup on 
the in-house backups are always encrypted.

I know this is more than you asked for, but I've got this in at least 10 
places and find it very useful.

BTW on unix/linux I almost always use BackupEDGE, but I have several 
existing Lone Tar installations.

John





Nancy Palmquist wrote:
> Mark,
>
> It did require that I change a setting at the BIOS level, so I know it 
> was a hardware supported function.  But I am loving it.  My worries 
> about some old software and testing installations for XP, had been 
> relieved and I might be able to totally replace my XP box.
>
> I still have some functions I have not got on line yet that I might 
> need, but each week I move closer.
>
> I have had the XP box off for 3 days, so I am hopeful.
>
> Got filepro 5.6 to run on Win7 and WinXP mode.  Not sure if I want or 
> need to mess with the GI stuff. I will wait and see if I need it at some 
> future time.
>
> Nancy
>
> On 2/17/2010 1:03 PM, Fairlight wrote:
>   
>> On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 12:28:59PM -0500, Nancy Palmquist, the prominent pundit,
>> witicized:
>>    
>>     
>>> Mine supports it beautifully.
>>>
>>> Intel(R) Core(TM) Duo CPU E6750 @ 2.66GHz
>>> 64-bit
>>> With Windows 7 Ultimate.
>>>      
>>>       
>> Well, I'm only guessing that VTx is what's needed, based on Ken's
>> description.  I've tried turning VTx on in VirtualBox, and vbox complains
>> that my system doesn't support Intel VTx.  Based on Intel's site, my -chip-
>> supports VTx, as does yours.  Looks like I either need to enable VTx in the
>> BIOS, or update my BIOS because the feature was added later.
>>
>>    
>>     
>>> I am finding it stable and fast.  I like it.  I am even finding the
>>> changes to Windows rather better in many cases than I have seen in other
>>> upgrades.  Still have to get a backup solution, but I keep getting more
>>> of the functions added each day, as I have time.
>>>      
>>>       
>> Your chip will run warmer than mine.  The 6750 is 65nm, the 8400 is 45nm.
>> The smaller the lithography and die size, the cooler the chip.  Make sure
>> you keep your cooling adequate.  :)
>>
>> The smaller die size you can get in anything (CPU, GPU, etc.), the cooler
>> those chips run.  My integrator (specifically talking about Intel) said
>> that they'll release a chip with great performance boosts, and then eleven
>> months later they'll realease a version with fairly modest performance
>> gains, but with a smaller die size, which will run cooler.
>>
>>    
>>     
>>> I have had lousy luck with many of the backup software for WindowsXP.  I
>>> will have to see what is supported by Windows7 for a reliable backup method.
>>>      
>>>       
>> I have yet to find anything adequate.  I -had- a USB cage with two 500GB
>> drives, and I think the firmware on it flaked out, because every time we
>> plug it into a system (desktop, laptop, doesn't matter), it says it was
>> just unsafely ejected and refuses to be used.  I finally gave up.
>>
>> The problem is, I need to back up just shy of 2TB, and there's not really
>> anything really affordable that you'd want to put somewhere that will
>> handle that volume of data.  Not last time I looked, anyway.  Ideally what
>> -I- want is an ethernet-based disk array, -not- USB.  The software is
>> really a trivial matter.  One could get Unison (a really souped up rsync)
>> for Windows and use that, problem solved as far as raw files.  If you
>> wanted something that'll do a full restore...that'd require something more
>> Windows-centric, of course.  Ideally, I personally want the ability to use
>> a 2TB+ ethernet-based storage device with software that will let you backup
>> and restore multiple systems at once.
>>
>>    
>>     
>>> Acronis would not work on my old machine.  I tried to work with their
>>> tech support but after a month, I gave up and uninstalled it.  I think
>>> some months later I had a hard drive issue, which I think was what keep
>>> Acronis from working.  Although the error message was not clear.
>>>      
>>>       
>> Acronis messed up Windows 2000 badly enough that I gave up on it after
>> about two days.  I've never been impressed with it.
>>
>>    
>>     
>>> Retrospect was nice because it let me make a duplicate of a drive.  I
>>> like this format, because I can roll around and grab things from an
>>> older version.  But it would stop running for no reason, sometimes.  I
>>> found that a bit of an issue.  I was also very confused by way it kept
>>> the real backups, in volumes and stuff.  Pretty proprietary, if you need
>>> the stuff and the new computer does not run retrospect.  That always
>>> worried me.  I want something less proprietary, I think.
>>>
>>> Any suggestions?
>>>      
>>>       
>> Depends how much data you're talking about.  I keep distributed backups via
>> rsync of my Really Important Files[tm] (ie., all my development code, email
>> backups, etc.) around the net.  The really important stuff that I can't
>> afford to lose is really probably under 50MB.  The real annoyance would be
>> blowing a drive and losing all my video, music, game installations, etc.
>> You know--the stuff computers are REALLY for.  :)
>>
>> I hear good things about Carbonite for limited offsite backups of the really
>> important stuff, but you wouldn't want to use it for, say,>  2GB, depending
>> on your broadband throughput.  But...I'm not a fan of cloud storage, even
>> if it's encrypted.
>>
>> It really depends on what your backup needs and philosophies are.
>>
>> mark->
>> _______________________________________________
>> Filepro-list mailing list
>> Filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
>> http://mailman.celestial.com/mailman/listinfo/filepro-list
>>
>>    
>>     
>
>