Reviewing your subscriptions

Topic

New Reply

ON SECURITY By Susan Bradley On an annual basis, I like to review those subscriptions and services that impact my bank account. Many times, vendors us
[See the full post at: Reviewing your subscriptions]

Susan Bradley Patch Lady/Prudent patcher

16 users thanked author for this post.

Elly, ibe98765, rizzquery, jburk07, Casey S, fisher75, David Simms, Norio, Geo, abbodi86, SueW, Citizen_G, DLivesInTexas, rc primak, WSalgrinch, lmacri

Reply | Quote

Replies

If you are concerned that placing all your passwords into a software program is a risk…

I’m surprised to see “software program” in this newsletter. Isn’t it redundant? ATM machine, VIN number, VAB building, etc.

If it’s software, it is by definition, a program, yes? If it’s a program, isn’t it software? Excluding firmware, which had to start as software somewhere in its development, it’s still software and still a program.

Thanks for your consideration.

Reply | Quote

Excellent article and good advice.
I want to add that you do not have to buy backup software to have a good backup system of Windows.

I have taken a lot of negative comments for promoting a backup system using only Windows utilities and mostly from those that never really tried it. This is mostly because Windows backup of personal items leaves much to be desired and will not be a backup you can count on. I do not suggest or use Windows backup for personal items. However, Windows image backup of the drive Windows is installed on (C:) is complete, accurate, and restores just as easily as images made by third party software. I and the numerous users that follow my instructions have restored many of these backup images with great results, so my statements are based on experience. Windows Backup image software, like all software, has to be used correctly to get the desired results and all the errors I’ve seen are for using it incorrectly. The only disadvantages with a Windows backup image is you can’t virtually mount it to extract a file or edit the image and when the Windows image is restored to a new larger drive it will only use that amount of space on the new drive that was the total size of the drive the image was made of. This is an easy fix in Disk Management.

I use Robocopy commands in .bat files ran by the Task Scheduler to back up my personal files, which in the long run gives me a setup I can’t find in other backup software. I keep a perpetual backup (actually, several copies) of personal files where only new or changes files are added to the backup. Files deleted on the PC are not deleted from the backups. AKA: all original files (documents, photos, etc.) are still in the backup copies. All files are immediately available from the backup drive and no backup file has to be opened or mounted. The only hassle with using Robocopy commands is that the files to be copied must not be in use when copied. Easy solution for me is to schedule the backups when I am not using the files…when I sleep.

I know this is not the right choice for many users who want the GUI and enhanced features that backup software provides, but for some users Windows can provide an adequate backup system without the purchase, learning how to use, updating, new version learning curve, and more purchasing for newer versions that is involved in third party backup software.

There is a viable alternative to purchasing backup software.

HTH, Dana:))

1 user thanked author for this post.

NaNoNyMouse

Reply | Quote

I want to add that you do not have to buy backup software to have a good backup system of Windows.

The one thing you forgot about Windows Backup is that it does not verify the backup image. This missing step is why I use Macrium Reflect for my backups, and would also recommend the free EaseUS ToDo Backup as an alternative. I also am a fan of clear, graphical interfaces for many low-level system tasks. Less chance of a typo or syntax error messing things up.

-- rc primak

3 users thanked author for this post.

rizzquery, TechTango, SueW

Reply | Quote

Is anyone at Askwoody was up for doing a VPN service review? I hear things like: ‘VPN services are honey pots’ etc.. it would be great to have a list of VPN services are legitimately providing the privacy and protection people are paying for.

Thanks for all the great work you do!!!

2 users thanked author for this post.

rizzquery, rc primak

Reply | Quote

The one thing everyone says about VPN services is that you get what you pay for. Free VPN services are often not good for privacy. Logging is a major factor. Many free VPN services also share user data to advertisers, which kind of defeats the whole privacy purpose of having a VPN in the first place. Also, stand alone VPN programs are said to be better than the ones which are installed as browser add-ons.

-- rc primak

1 user thanked author for this post.

rizzquery

Reply | Quote

rc primak wrote:

Also, stand alone VPN programs are said to be better than the ones which are installed as browser add-ons.

By whom?

Reply | Quote

This is old but still useful to be mindful of:

Using a free VPN? Why not skip the middleman and just send your data to President Xi?
Majority of sketchy apps can be traced to China, study finds
By Andrew Orlowski
19 Nov 2018

Many popular free VPN apps are sketchy Chinese operations with dubious privacy policies, according to research.
….
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/11/19/vpn_app_investigation/

Reply | Quote

https://www.cisa.gov/sites/default/files/2024-12/guidance-mobile-communications-best-practices.pdf

“8. Do not use a personal virtual private network (VPN). Personal VPNs simply shift residual risks from your internet service provider (ISP) to the VPN provider, often increasing the attack surface. Many free and commercial VPN providers have questionable security and privacy policies. However, if your organization requires a VPN client to access its data, that is a different use case. ”

This was just recently released.

Susan Bradley Patch Lady/Prudent patcher

7 users thanked author for this post.

rc primak, Elly, rizzquery, Toa Of Justice, Bob99, Tem, WSalgrinch

Reply | Quote

Best VPN services 2024: Top picks for speed, price, privacy, and more
There are a lot of VPN options out there; we’ll help you cut through the clutter.
By Sam Singleton
Assistant Editor, PCWorld Oct 11, 2024 11:30 am PDT
https://www.pcworld.com/article/406870/best-vpn-services-apps-reviews-buying-advice.html

1 user thanked author for this post.

WSalgrinch

Reply | Quote

The latest rankings of respected VPN programs — and their costs — are available at the following expert sites. Each reviewer recommends several VPNs, all of which have various pros and cons:

https://www.askwoody.com/newsletter/your-free-vpn-may-actually-be-a-malware-bot/

1 user thanked author for this post.

WSalgrinch

Reply | Quote

Although not about computer security per se  but a recent  mass scare advertisement being  broadcasted about subscribing to a home deed monitoring  service.  In order to protect you from thieves who  try to take out loans against your deed.  Before subscribing to the service check first with your county Recorder of Deeds who in my case with my county; offer  the monitoring service for free.

2 users thanked author for this post.

rc primak, Tem

Reply | Quote

Great article about “reviewing your subscriptions”.

I’d like to learn more about the browser protections you mention. I followed the link “at your router”. It takes me to OpenDNS where free software is available, BUT the site offers no explanation of exactly what that software is, or does, or how it works. How about an article detailing what that service does for me and how it works?

2 users thanked author for this post.

Norio, b

Reply | Quote

rc primak wrote:

Many free VPN services also share user data to advertisers, which kind of defeats the whole privacy purpose of having a VPN

You should never use a VPN service located in one of 14Eyes countries.

1 user thanked author for this post.

rc primak

Reply | Quote

I recently purchased a Windows 11 business-grade desktop PC from HP.  It came with a 3-year subscription to HP Wolf Security.  Does anyone here — particularly from a corporate IT desktop administration community — have an opinion about it?

Reply | Quote

There are some older threads about issues with it.  https://h30434.www3.hp.com/t5/Notebook-Software-and-How-To-Questions/HP-Wolf-Security-causing-issues/td-p/8067456 I’ve tested it on a workstation and not found it too intrusive. That said it does need a bit of user education about what to expect.

Susan Bradley Patch Lady/Prudent patcher

1 user thanked author for this post.

Tem

Reply | Quote

I appreciate the use of Two FActor Authentication. However, TFA increasingly uses a cell phone message to send the key. I am 92 years old and have been using computers since the 1970s. However, my hearing loss and other issues make a cell phone utterly useless to me. If TFA does not allow for email exchange for the Key, I will soon lose access. I suspect that is a violation of the old Americans With Disabilities Act, and I would truly hate to lose my connection to friends and the world of technology with a discriminatory TFA blocking me.

Reply | Quote

When a code is sent to your phone, you don’t need to hear it?  You just look in the message section.  I have my phone on mute most of the time otherwise it would bing/bong all day long.  Also if you have an iphone look into using airbuds as a hearing enhancement.

Susan Bradley Patch Lady/Prudent patcher

1 user thanked author for this post.

WSbobby-p

Reply | Quote

My assumption is that @salyers32 doesn’t have a cellphone, because it isn’t useful to him… utterly useless as he said…

Non-techy Win 10 Pro and Linux Mint experimenter

Reply | Quote

I enjoyed this article. One thing it reminded me of is the fact that I am unhappy with my current back up process. Your article suggests paying for a legitimate back up system, which I appreciate. I went back in the archives and noticed that you previously reviewed and highly recommended AOMEI Backupper. However, that article was a little bit dated. Do you still recommend this software or is there something better today?

Reply | Quote

Some of use and highly recommend Image for Windows – TeraByte Unlimited.

--Joe

Reply | Quote

Pricing isn’t clear.  Is it annual or subscription renewed each year?

Reply | Quote

David Simms wrote:

recommended AOMEI Backupper

I installed this on a system the other day and it is still good IMO.
It is also free at present (until the 10th). Give it a whirl and see if it works for you.

cheers, Paul

Reply | Quote

rc primak wrote:

The one thing you forgot about Windows Backup is that it does not verify the backup image. This missing step is why I use Macrium Reflect for my backups, and would also recommend the free EaseUS ToDo Backup as an alternative.

No, I have not forgotten that Windows Backup does not verify the backup image and examined this option in detail before deciding on Windows backup image as my image backup solution. I have seen many posters point to this verification as a key advantage is using some backup software and wonder just how much security this feature provides.

Is verifying the backup image a useful step? How many times have you had a backup image fail verification and needed to be repeated? In all the Windows backup images that I have handled (personally and helping others) including those that had problems being restored, I have not seen a Windows backup image fail because the image was bad. Also when I was using third party backup software that did “verify” the image I never had an image that failed verification and had to be imaged again. I estimate this represents well over a hundred (if not hundreds) backups images that the “verification” step was not needed. My experiences show that the “verification” step provides, at best, security for something that “could” occur at a chance of less than one in a 100 (really more like 200-400) and I suspect is really much lower than that. I think it is overkill to select a backup software based upon the “security” of a verification process that “protects” from something that almost never occurs.

rc primak wrote:

I also am a fan of clear, graphical interfaces for many low-level system tasks. Less chance of a typo or syntax error messing things up.

I partially agree with that concerning my use of Robocopy to backup personal files, but Window Image backup uses a graphical interface and so does the Recovery Drive you use to restore the image. Also a GUI doesn’t always make using a software easier and prevent mistakes (take a look at the posts from users using such GUI software such as Macrium Reflect that are having problems using that GUI). I think the key to using any backup system is step by step instructions in setting the software up that prevents “typos” and “syntax” errors, which in the long run causes less errors than a nice GUI and leading to users “figuring out” what parts to click rather than learning how to use the software properly. I question if a nice user GUI is really “better” in the long run considering it entices the user to not read the instructions and figure it out using the GUI.

HTH, Dana:))

Reply | Quote

Drcard:)) wrote:

I have seen many posters point to this verification as a key advantage is using some backup software and wonder just how much security this feature provides.

I’ve used Image For Windows for a couple of decades.  I’ve had at least one validation failure in each Windows version I have used.  In the early days, I would run chkdsk /r, try creating the image again, and validation would complete.  These days I run sfc /scannow, try creating the image again, and validation completes.

Image For Windows also has sometimes backed out during creation of an image if it comes across bad sector(s) on a HDD.  It doesn’t specifically give that as a reason, but running chkdsk /r will allow IFW to create an image and validate byte-for-byte.

I would say that the validation phase is not so much an advantage for the image software as for displaying unknown problems with the drives being imaged.  That’s a big plus for me.  I also make it a fairly routine practice to restore a drive image from time to time just to satisfy myself that IFW is everything I’ve always considered it to be.  I just did that this past Tuesday on my OS partition.

Always create a fresh drive image before making system changes/Windows updates; you may need to start over!

We all have our own reasons for doing the things that we do with our systems; we don't need anyone's approval, and we don't all have to do the same things.

We were all once "Average Users".

Computer Specs

1 user thanked author for this post.

rc primak

Reply | Quote

Susan,
Your reminder to assemble subscription and service information is important for consumers. Capturing all the company names, products, amounts and renewal dates isn’t necessarily a quick task, but with completion, makes it far easier for one to anticipate renewals and make decisions about renewals or cancelations, especially given impending price increases. Much appreciated! —Linda

1 user thanked author for this post.

SueW

Reply | Quote

I’m sure someone must have written an Excel spreadsheet to do this (probably many).  Or there must be software app to do this.

Sounds like a worthwhile how-to story to put together.

Reply | Quote

Your wish has been granted.
Subscription Tracking Spreadsheet.

cheers, Paul

3 users thanked author for this post.

rc primak, ibe98765, Susan Bradley

Reply | Quote

Drcard:)) wrote:

I have not seen a Windows backup image fail because the image was bad. Also when I was using third party backup software that did “verify” the image I never had an image that failed verification and had to be imaged again. I estimate this represents well over a hundred (if not hundreds) backups images that the “verification” step was not needed.

I  totally understand the very low probabilities you’ve outlined. Nice job and I agree with you.

However, for additional Peace of Mind I have automatic verification enabled for every image backup I create with Macrium Reflect.  I do this only because the additional layer of POM is satisfying.  Hard to put a price on that.

Desktop Asus TUF X299 Mark 1, CPU: Intel Core i7-7820X Skylake-X 8-Core 3.6 GHz, RAM: 32GB, GPU: Nvidia GTX 1050 Ti 4GB. Display: Four 27" 1080p screens 2 over 2 quad.

1 user thanked author for this post.

rc primak

Reply | Quote

Thank you for all this information.  I followed your link & created an account at OpenDNS.  However, how do I find out what type of router I have & any other information about it, so that I can use OpenDNS.

Thank you again & Happy Holidays!

Reply | Quote

Your router is the box that you connect your computer to via Wi-Fi or cable. It is often supplied by your ISP.
If you can tell us the model we can help with details of the configuration.

cheers, Paul

Reply | Quote

bbearren wrote:

I’ve had at least one validation failure in each Windows version I have used.  In the early days, I would run chkdsk /r, try creating the image again, and validation would complete.  These days I run sfc /scannow, try creating the image again, and validation completes.

bbearren wrote:

I would say that the validation phase is not so much an advantage for the image software as for displaying unknown problems with the drives being imaged.

Wow.  Image for Windows is definitely different that other backup software that I have used and reviewed in the past.  Other backup software I have used and tested have copied the drive bit for bit including any corrupt files that were on the drive, which will still be corrupt when the image is restored rather than refuse to make the image and fail validation.  I wonder how Image for Windows knows a file is corrupt or miscoded…compare to files in Image for Windows like Windows sfc function does?

I always thought the validation process was to compare the files in the backup up image just made to the files on the drive to make sure the files were copied exactly as they are (AKA copy errors).  I never even considered that the validation process could also detect corrupt or missing files like Windows sfc does.

Edit:

I was interested and did some looking.  Here is Macrium Reflect’s comments at the link below.

The validation process only compares each block to the image to make sure what was copied matches what is there (MD5 hash).  IF the corruption of files on the drive causes the copy process to copy wrongly then the validation will fail; but if the corruption of the files doesn’t cause the copy process to fail then the validation will pass even with the corrupt files.

Also Macrium Reflect estimates the validation failure rate to be:

We estimate that less than 1 in 1,000 systems have problems that lead to image file corruption

Understanding Image Verification Failures

HTH, Dana:))

1 user thanked author for this post.

rc primak

Reply | Quote

Drcard:)) wrote:

Wow. Image for Windows is definitely different that other backup software that I have used and reviewed in the past. Other backup software I have used and tested have copied the drive bit for bit including any corrupt files that were on the drive, which will still be corrupt when the image is restored rather than refuse to make the image and fail validation.

In Settings, Image For Windows can create a backup and ignore corrupt files/sectors if that option is selected.  I don’t use that option.  Here’s the skinny from the Manual:

“Ignore IO Errors – This option only affects how Image for Windows handles bad sectors on the source drive, and it applies to both the back up phase and the validation phase of the backup operation. Normally, if Image for Windows encounters a bad sector on a source partition during a backup operation, it will abort with an error. If you select this option, Image for Windows will ignore the error and continue. Generally, you should select this option only if you need to back up a source partition on a drive you know contains bad sectors. On some systems, if you select this setting and Image for Windows encounters bad sectors, there will be a significant delay as the internal retry/recovery routine of the drive attempts to handle the bad sector(s).”  (emphasis mine)

I personally much prefer the sector check (which is default).  I would rather correct the errors before the image is made, in order to have a known-good image in case I need to restore.

The above is only one of the many reasons I have relied on, and continue to rely on Image For Windows for over two decades, and haven’t had any interest in trying any other imaging software.

Always create a fresh drive image before making system changes/Windows updates; you may need to start over!

We all have our own reasons for doing the things that we do with our systems; we don't need anyone's approval, and we don't all have to do the same things.

We were all once "Average Users".

Computer Specs

2 users thanked author for this post.

rc primak, TechTango

Reply | Quote

Alex5723 wrote:

rc primak wrote:

Many free VPN services also share user data to advertisers, which kind of defeats the whole privacy purpose of having a VPN

You should never use a VPN service located in one of 14Eyes countries.

And don’t use a VPN based out of North Korea, Russia, China or their satellite countries.

Reply | Quote

bbearren wrote:

Normally, if Image for Windows encounters a bad sector on a source partition during a backup operation, it will abort with an error. If you select this option, Image for Windows will ignore the error and continue. Generally, you should select this option only if you need to back up a source partition on a drive you know contains bad sectors.

Thank You, that explains bad sectors.  Since a bad sector is different than file corruption, it appears that a corrupt file in a good sector will not cause a validation error and will copy the corrupt file to the image, but you indicate a corrupt file or a bad sector will cause a validation error.  The “Ignore IO Errors” speaks only of bad sectors on the drive.  How does Image for Windows detect a corrupt file if the corrupt file is in a good sector?  Corrupt files will often copy and paste with the same corruption in the file and have the same hash value.

I have restored Windows made images that were made from drives that that had bad sectors.  The image restored but some Windows files were missing (same thing will occur with a corrupt file copied to an image).  Running sfc after the restore corrected all the missing/corrupt files).  Such situations are very rare, but did not prevent the image from being restored.   If the missing or corrupt files is so critical it could prevent Windows from running, you can still run sfc from the Repair drive.

Since I still can restore an image that would have failed your software’s validation, and considering the possibility (1:1,000) of such failures; I don’t feel the least bit insecure with backup images without validation.   My backup system doesn’t have a validation step and since the system is totally automatic, I do generate reports on the backup operations and consider those reports as my verification that the backups are being made correctly.

HTH, Dana:))

1 user thanked author for this post.

rc primak

Reply | Quote

“To use Windows Backup, you need to sign in with your Microsoft account.”

I neither have nor want a Microsoft account on any of my PC’s/Laptops.

“Only OneDrive is generally suitable as a backup destination. Anyone who relies on cloud storage can therefore benefit from the new app. Anyone who does not use a Microsoft account or does not want to back up data to OneDrive will not benefit from this app.”

I have a Microsoft 365 account, and I do use OneDrive, but I do not, under any circumstance, want to depend on OneDrive for Windows backup.  Whenever I’m spelunking in Windows innards, I create a drive image before, so I can recover if things go south.  If things go south significantly, getting to that OneDrive backup may prove impossible.  Network connectivity may be compromised.

In addition, I have 21 partitions/logical drives scattered across 7 SSD/NVMe SSD drives.  IFW lets me create a complete drive image of any partition/logical drive on any SSD, or any SSD in its entirety.  Can Windows Backup accomplish that without a Microsoft account?

I’ve never tried Windows Backup for the simple reason that everything I’ve read about it is quite limiting in what can be accomplished backing up to a local external drive.

As for corrupt files, I’d rather get them corrected/repaired before I create a drive image.  That’s what I can consider “a known-good drive image”, and that’s what I want, “known-good drive images”.

Always create a fresh drive image before making system changes/Windows updates; you may need to start over!

We all have our own reasons for doing the things that we do with our systems; we don't need anyone's approval, and we don't all have to do the same things.

We were all once "Average Users".

Computer Specs

1 user thanked author for this post.

rc primak

Reply | Quote

bbearren wrote:

“To use Windows Backup, you need to sign in with your Microsoft account.”

I do NOT use or recommend Windows Backup. Windows System Image (called Windows Recovery Image) uses totally different settings to create an image – NOT backup files to the cloud or OneDrive (which I do not use OneDrive or any cloud storage for any on my files). Many users falsely think the rules, actions, and bad outcomes from Windows Backup of personal files applies to Windows Recovery Image backup.

Windows Image backup is part of Windows Recovery Environment.
You do NOT have to have a Microsoft account to create an image of a drive.
The image can be stored on any other drive and does not have to be stored in OneDrive or in the clouds.
I will state again, all the “bad” things you point out about Windows Backup system do NOT apply to Windows Recovery Image backup.

bbearren wrote:

I’ve never tried Windows Backup for the simple reason that everything I’ve read about it is quite limiting in what can be accomplished backing up to a local external drive.

Again, that is NOT true of Windows Recovery Image backup. Also the “I’ve never tried Windows Backup” means you never looked at Windows Recovery Image system either.

That’s the jest of it, bad reputation of Windows backup for personal files falsely lands on Windows Recovery Image backup system so users never try it. Back when I was reviewing backup software for publications I made images with Windows and the backup software that I was testing at the same time, compared the images, restored both of those images, and compared pre and post files. I had some of the software made images fail to restore or miss some files, but the Windows made image restored with all files correctly every time. I guess this is where I decided that Windows made images were what I wanted for my safety even thou I had licenses for all these other backup software. I did not review or test Terabyte software.

bbearren wrote:

As for corrupt files, I’d rather get them corrected/repaired before I create a drive image.

I understand and it appears the validation process will not detect corrupt files, but detects bad sectors and copy errors. A image restored with a corrupt file is just as easily repaired as correcting the file on the drive before the image is made. That is, as you say,

That’s what I can consider “a known-good drive image”, and that’s what I want

a personal preference and not necessary to complete the task of restoring the drive to what is was.

I think your Image for Windows is very good backup software. All I’m saying is Windows Recovery Image system is also very good IMAGE backup software which recovers drives just as good as third party software. Those that state that images made by Windows are not good:
1)Falsely attribute what they have read about Windows Backup for personal files to the Windows Recovery Image system.
2) Have never tried to make a Windows image or they would have seen the difference between the two systems.

HTH, Dana:))

1 user thanked author for this post.

rc primak

Reply | Quote

Drcard:)) wrote:

Again, that is NOT true of Windows Recovery Image backup. Also the “I’ve never tried Windows Backup” means you never looked at Windows Recovery Image system either.

There is a very simple reason that I’ve never tried Windows Backup OR Windows Recovery Image system.  First, I don’t need it.  Second, in your own words:

Drcard:)) wrote:

I do not suggest or use Windows backup for personal items. However, Windows image backup of the drive Windows is installed on (C:) is complete, accurate, and restores just as easily as images made by third party software. I and the numerous users that follow my instructions have restored many of these backup images with great results, so my statements are based on experience. Windows Backup image software, like all software, has to be used correctly to get the desired results and all the errors I’ve seen are for using it incorrectly. The only disadvantages with a Windows backup image is you can’t virtually mount it to extract a file or edit the image and when the Windows image is restored to a new larger drive it will only use that amount of space on the new drive that was the total size of the drive the image was made of. This is an easy fix in Disk Management.

C: is one of 21 logical drives/partitions spread across 7 SSD’s/NVMe SSD’s in my PC, but my data is not on C:, it’s for my OS only and those apps/programs hard-coded to install only in C:\Program Files.  Most of my programs/apps are not on C:.  They are elsewhere in my system.  I use Task Scheduler to create weekly images of the logical drives/partitions where my important information is stored.  Task Scheduler also runs a Robocopy commandline to copy those images to my NAS.  Other Robocopy tasks copy my data to two other locations in my network and create log files on my desktop daily.

I’ve been using IFW for two decades +.  The drive image creations start at 2:00AM Sunday morning.  The only effort involved for me now, is to insert a HDD in the dock on my NAS, copy the drive images for offline storage, then change to another HDD in the dock and do it again, usually on Sunday mornings while I’m having coffee.

I have no reason to even try another method.  Just this afternoon I fudged Windows 11 to the point that it wouldn’t boot.  I just restored this mornings image, and once again, all is well.  I enjoy tinkering, but I don’t need to tinker with drive imaging testing.  I have that one more than solved.  It’s all in green in my signature.

Always create a fresh drive image before making system changes/Windows updates; you may need to start over!

We all have our own reasons for doing the things that we do with our systems; we don't need anyone's approval, and we don't all have to do the same things.

We were all once "Average Users".

Computer Specs

Reply | Quote

I have no reason to even try another method.

I understand and I am NOT trying to get you to use it.
I am responding to your comments about validation being a necessary component of an image backup and Windows Backup (assuming all Windows backup functions) is bad. I have shown that while validation is considered a good option it is NOT absolutely necessary to create and restore an image as Windows made image without validation will restore images that would fail other software validation and such occurrences are very rare. This basically an option to repair the error before the next backup image is made (a second time after failing validations) rather than repair the error after it is restored (BTW which is only one image made).
I am also responding to your comments “I’ve never tried Windows Backup for the simple reason that everything I’ve read about it is quite limiting in what can be accomplished backing up to a local external drive.” which does not apply to Windows image making abilities. I merely pointed out that does not include the images made by Windows and such comments are based upon what is read and not actual experience.

I totally understand your backup system and totally agree that Windows Image backup is not a good choice in your situation, but you have a unique setup. That being said I notice you use Robocopy commands and Task Scheduler just as I do. The only difference is the app we use to make the images.

My original post state “I have taken a lot of negative comments” such as the ones I am responding to now. These negative comments that the images made by Windows are bad or lacking are based upon wrong assumptions from those that have never made an image with Windows.

Wrong assumption about validation – “Without validation you could have a corrupt image file that will not restore” Wrong – a completed image file will restore. If an image file while being made is so bad it will not complete, no image is made.

Wrong assumption about bad press about Windows Backup of personal files applies to Windows Image backups – Natural assumption, but totally wrong.

Using Windows to setup a total automatic backup system is a safe, effective, and dependable backup option for all Windows users and all the negative comments to me about this have been proven wrong or not totally necessary. It may seem hard to do, but is just as easy as learning how to use a new backup app that you have never used before. It is a real option to consider for a backup system.

HTH, Dana:))

Reply | Quote

Drcard:)) wrote:

Thank You, that explains bad sectors. Since a bad sector is different than file corruption, it appears that a corrupt file in a good sector will not cause a validation error and will copy the corrupt file to the image, but you indicate a corrupt file or a bad sector will cause a validation error.

“The primary capability of a byte-for-byte validation is to detect errors that occur from the source drive to the system memory. As with a standard validation, a byte-for-byte validation applies to the entire image.
Note that when you use the Validate Byte-for-Byte option, you are actually performing a byte-for-byte validation in addition to a standard validation. Therefore, when using this option, it is possible to receive the aforementioned error messages (those which refer to the standard validation process) or Byte-for-Byte comparison failed error messages. This latter message denotes that an error was detected between the source drive and system memory.”

Drcard:)) wrote:

I do not suggest or use Windows backup for personal items. However, Windows image backup of the drive Windows is installed on (C:) is complete, accurate, and restores just as easily as images made by third party software.

Of the three weekly drive images IFW creates by way of Task Scheduler, only one is from C: drive.  Since I dual boot, there are actually 6, two from the respective C:.  The other two (four) are from different partitions on separate SSD’s.  I am quite confident in backing up my personal items with this method.

Drcard:)) wrote:

Using Windows to setup a total automatic backup system is a safe, effective, and dependable backup option for all Windows users and all the negative comments to me about this have been proven wrong or not totally necessary.

Not all Windows users.  How many new PC’s are shipped with a small SSD for the OS and a large HDD for data (personal items)?  How many users store their data on a separate drive, and not on C:

Drcard:)) wrote:

It may seem hard to do, but is just as easy as learning how to use a new backup app that you have never used before. It is a real option to consider for a backup system.

I have an existing backup system, IFW, that does everything I want consistently and has not failed me in over two decades.  Why would I have any desire to try anything else.  Yes, it’s already in Windows at no additional cost, but no, it doesn’t satisfy my personal requirements for backing up my OS, personal items and programs.

I’m out.

Always create a fresh drive image before making system changes/Windows updates; you may need to start over!

We all have our own reasons for doing the things that we do with our systems; we don't need anyone's approval, and we don't all have to do the same things.

We were all once "Average Users".

Computer Specs

Reply | Quote

@bbearren and @wsdrcard
The topic in this thread is “Reviewing your subscriptions,” not the merits of of one backup system vs another. Please continue this discussion in the “Backup” Forum.

1 user thanked author for this post.

rc primak

Reply | Quote

bbearren wrote:

I’m out.

Always create a fresh drive image before making system changes/Windows updates; you may need to start over!

We all have our own reasons for doing the things that we do with our systems; we don't need anyone's approval, and we don't all have to do the same things.

We were all once "Average Users".

Computer Specs

Reply | Quote