Bootable eSata backup software?

In ,
RnR typed on Sun, 08 Aug 2010 11:21:11 -0500:
BTW, I noticed you said TI v12 and that caught me by surprise. Are
you sure? I will have to re-read the beta I'm using (I thought it
was v.11) and check the Acronis site too.

Let me correct myself ... my beta is TI Home 2011.

Oh okay, that makes more sense. ;-)

--
Bill
Gateway MX6124 ('06 era) 1 of 3 - Windows XP SP2

On Sun, 8 Aug 2010 12:29:42 -0500, "BillW50" wrote:

In ,
RnR typed on Sun, 08 Aug 2010 11:17:13 -0500:
On Sun, 8 Aug 2010 08:07:18 -0500, "BillW50" wrote:

In ,
RnR typed on Sat, 07 Aug 2010 22:43:12 -0500:
On Sat, 7 Aug 2010 22:14:33 -0500, "BillW50"
wrote:

In ,
William R. Walsh typed on Sat, 7 Aug 2010 20:26:31 -0500:
Hi!

On the box they touted some of their software that claimed to be
able to create a bootable backup image on the external hard
drive. I googled their software and it did not sound good.

It's probably every bit as bad as it sounded and then some. Why
those who sell external hard drives insist on loading this crap on
them when there are some good, free choices out there confounds
me. (And don't get me started on Western Digital DumbWare.)

A software program such as Acronis True Image can do the job you
want to do, and it should do so fairly painlessly. As far as I
know, it is clear for use on 64-bit Windows (not tried it,
though).

No! Acronis True Image is the worst when it comes to external hard
drives. As you can make backups all you want too, but some you
can't restore from. Acronis True Image fix is to tell you to use an
internal hard drive instead. And I say to Acronis True Image to go
to hell! No other backup software I know has this same problem. And
I have pages of other problems with Acronis True Image as well. But
when it works, it works well. When it doesn't, it is completely
useless.

I remember reading some time ago about TI problems. FWIW, I'm using
their TI version 11 beta now. Hopefully it will solve some or all
of the problems you know of. And no I'm not a TI lover but I
don't know of a better alternative right now. I have done some
research on this. That said, I'm sure I didn't cover every
alternative so I'm willing to listen to others.

I am running Acronis True Image v12 right now and the problems are
still there. And they were there as long as I can remember. And
Acronis True Image has never shown any interest in fixing them in
all of these years.

There are lots of alternatives out there. Paragon is one that is
better in this regard than Acronis True Image is. Only two things I
don't like about Paragon is that incremental is super slow. And the
boot CD doesn't work on a 800x480 screen (7 inch netbook screens).
Then there is Norton Ghost which is quite good. And believe it or
not, even firing up BartPE and just copy the files and folders over
works well too. In fact, I do this latter one all of the time.


I've read a lot of reviews and Paragon was mentioned in some. Of
course different reviews pick different software for their favorites.
I think tho Acronis is one of the more popular of recent but that
doesn't mean it's the best. As far as copying files, that's okay but
usually that doesn't work for open files typical in windows.

BTW, I noticed you said TI v12 and that caught me by surprise. Are
you sure? I will have to re-read the beta I'm using (I thought it
was v.11) and check the Acronis site too.

Both Paragon and Acronis True Image uses memory even when not running.
For example, Acronis True Image Home 2009 (v12) is using up the
following without even running it.

Acronis Scheduler 2 (scedul2.exe) 30MB
Acronis True Image Monitor (TrueImageMonitor.exe) 70MB
Monitor for Acronis True Image Backup Archive Explorer
(TimounterMonitor.exe 50MB
Acronis Scheduler Helper (schedhlp.exe) 34MB

Total 184MB

I think this is just nuts! There should be a way to turn this off
besides uninstalling (or using the Task Manager and killing them). True
most of us are not using 10 year old machines and we have RAM to spare.
But wasting it in this fashion I think is just nuts. Even if it ends up
in the swapfile later.

Copying locked files? No, you don't understand. BartPE or WinPE is like
a Linux Live, but it isn't Linux based. Rather it is either XP, Vista,
or Windows 7 based. So the Windows you are copying is all unlocked as
that OS isn't even running and thus all files are unlocked and you are
free to copy away. You could probably use a Linux Live CD to copy files
too, but Linux can't modify the registry like BartPE can. Nor can Linux
run Windows software either.

BartPE and WinPE uses all generic drivers. Thus they run on anything. As
same copy that runs on one computer will run on a totally different
computer. This is handy for lots of things. Usually to repair a
non-bootable Windows. Also it is good to copy files and make backups
too.


I gotcha about the linux based. Yeah, that makes sense then so you
aren't locking files using windows. And I agree about Acronis using
too much memory. I've noticed they try to put too many features in
newer versions and it takes up more memory and at times affects
performance too. It's definitely not perfect but I think it's still
good software. Ghost was accused years ago also of using too much
memory. I'm not up to date with Ghost now. It was the first software
I ever used for backups. Then it was lean, mean and dependable.

Hi!

True! But you were pretty generic about raving about Acronis True Image
with external drives in general. And here I disagree with you.

What else could I be? My experiences were pretty limited, and that is a flaw
in my theory.

I should know better than to be so optimistic, being in the system
administration racket as I am... :-)

And I just don't understand people supporting such a product who clearly
doesn't care about protecting your backups. They even claim that
changing build numbers could break your backups. What kind of nonsense
is that? Who in their right mind would support such a product?

"Never rely on just one backup solution" is something I would firmly suggest
for home users as well as businesses. And on that subject, I'd recommend
something like a FreeNAS and rsync (multi-OS availability). They require a
little reading and understanding but once that's done to get the setup done,
but after that they just work. I then do rsync copies from the internal
drive on the old computer to an external one that goes offsite into secure
storage (bank deposit box).

I used TrueImage a few times to migrate data from one drive to another. USB
came into play in systems where more than one drive couldn't be hooked up
internally. In that role it performed admirably.

William

RnR writes:

On Sun, 8 Aug 2010 12:29:42 -0500, "BillW50" wrote:

In ,
RnR typed on Sun, 08 Aug 2010 11:17:13 -0500:
On Sun, 8 Aug 2010 08:07:18 -0500, "BillW50" wrote:

In ,
RnR typed on Sat, 07 Aug 2010 22:43:12 -0500:
On Sat, 7 Aug 2010 22:14:33 -0500, "BillW50"
wrote:

In ,
William R. Walsh typed on Sat, 7 Aug 2010 20:26:31 -0500:
Hi!

On the box they touted some of their software that claimed to be
able to create a bootable backup image on the external hard
drive. I googled their software and it did not sound good.

It's probably every bit as bad as it sounded and then some. Why
those who sell external hard drives insist on loading this crap on
them when there are some good, free choices out there confounds
me. (And don't get me started on Western Digital DumbWare.)

A software program such as Acronis True Image can do the job you
want to do, and it should do so fairly painlessly. As far as I
know, it is clear for use on 64-bit Windows (not tried it,
though).

No! Acronis True Image is the worst when it comes to external hard
drives. As you can make backups all you want too, but some you
can't restore from. Acronis True Image fix is to tell you to use an
internal hard drive instead. And I say to Acronis True Image to go
to hell! No other backup software I know has this same problem. And
I have pages of other problems with Acronis True Image as well. But
when it works, it works well. When it doesn't, it is completely
useless.

I remember reading some time ago about TI problems. FWIW, I'm using
their TI version 11 beta now. Hopefully it will solve some or all
of the problems you know of. And no I'm not a TI lover but I
don't know of a better alternative right now. I have done some
research on this. That said, I'm sure I didn't cover every
alternative so I'm willing to listen to others.

I am running Acronis True Image v12 right now and the problems are
still there. And they were there as long as I can remember. And
Acronis True Image has never shown any interest in fixing them in
all of these years.

There are lots of alternatives out there. Paragon is one that is
better in this regard than Acronis True Image is. Only two things I
don't like about Paragon is that incremental is super slow. And the
boot CD doesn't work on a 800x480 screen (7 inch netbook screens).
Then there is Norton Ghost which is quite good. And believe it or
not, even firing up BartPE and just copy the files and folders over
works well too. In fact, I do this latter one all of the time.


I've read a lot of reviews and Paragon was mentioned in some. Of
course different reviews pick different software for their favorites.
I think tho Acronis is one of the more popular of recent but that
doesn't mean it's the best. As far as copying files, that's okay but
usually that doesn't work for open files typical in windows.

BTW, I noticed you said TI v12 and that caught me by surprise. Are
you sure? I will have to re-read the beta I'm using (I thought it
was v.11) and check the Acronis site too.

Both Paragon and Acronis True Image uses memory even when not running.
For example, Acronis True Image Home 2009 (v12) is using up the
following without even running it.

Acronis Scheduler 2 (scedul2.exe) 30MB
Acronis True Image Monitor (TrueImageMonitor.exe) 70MB
Monitor for Acronis True Image Backup Archive Explorer
(TimounterMonitor.exe 50MB
Acronis Scheduler Helper (schedhlp.exe) 34MB

Total 184MB

I think this is just nuts! There should be a way to turn this off
besides uninstalling (or using the Task Manager and killing them). True
most of us are not using 10 year old machines and we have RAM to spare.
But wasting it in this fashion I think is just nuts. Even if it ends up
in the swapfile later.

Copying locked files? No, you don't understand. BartPE or WinPE is like
a Linux Live, but it isn't Linux based. Rather it is either XP, Vista,
or Windows 7 based. So the Windows you are copying is all unlocked as
that OS isn't even running and thus all files are unlocked and you are
free to copy away. You could probably use a Linux Live CD to copy files
too, but Linux can't modify the registry like BartPE can. Nor can Linux
run Windows software either.

BartPE and WinPE uses all generic drivers. Thus they run on anything. As
same copy that runs on one computer will run on a totally different
computer. This is handy for lots of things. Usually to repair a
non-bootable Windows. Also it is good to copy files and make backups
too.


I gotcha about the linux based. Yeah, that makes sense then so you
aren't locking files using windows. And I agree about Acronis using
too much memory. I've noticed they try to put too many features in
newer versions and it takes up more memory and at times affects
performance too. It's definitely not perfect but I think it's still
good software. Ghost was accused years ago also of using too much
memory. I'm not up to date with Ghost now. It was the first software
I ever used for backups. Then it was lean, mean and dependable.

This confuses me a bit. One runs Acronis when one is not backing up
or restoring? Why?

Sorry, I guess I am a bit behind the times...


--
Andrew Hall
(Now reading Usenet in alt.sys.pc-clone.dell...)

On Mon, 09 Aug 2010 20:34:16 -0400, wrote:

RnR writes:

On Sun, 8 Aug 2010 12:29:42 -0500, "BillW50" wrote:

In ,
RnR typed on Sun, 08 Aug 2010 11:17:13 -0500:
On Sun, 8 Aug 2010 08:07:18 -0500, "BillW50" wrote:

In ,
RnR typed on Sat, 07 Aug 2010 22:43:12 -0500:
On Sat, 7 Aug 2010 22:14:33 -0500, "BillW50"
wrote:

In ,
William R. Walsh typed on Sat, 7 Aug 2010 20:26:31 -0500:
Hi!

On the box they touted some of their software that claimed to be
able to create a bootable backup image on the external hard
drive. I googled their software and it did not sound good.

It's probably every bit as bad as it sounded and then some. Why
those who sell external hard drives insist on loading this crap on
them when there are some good, free choices out there confounds
me. (And don't get me started on Western Digital DumbWare.)

A software program such as Acronis True Image can do the job you
want to do, and it should do so fairly painlessly. As far as I
know, it is clear for use on 64-bit Windows (not tried it,
though).

No! Acronis True Image is the worst when it comes to external hard
drives. As you can make backups all you want too, but some you
can't restore from. Acronis True Image fix is to tell you to use an
internal hard drive instead. And I say to Acronis True Image to go
to hell! No other backup software I know has this same problem. And
I have pages of other problems with Acronis True Image as well. But
when it works, it works well. When it doesn't, it is completely
useless.

I remember reading some time ago about TI problems. FWIW, I'm using
their TI version 11 beta now. Hopefully it will solve some or all
of the problems you know of. And no I'm not a TI lover but I
don't know of a better alternative right now. I have done some
research on this. That said, I'm sure I didn't cover every
alternative so I'm willing to listen to others.

I am running Acronis True Image v12 right now and the problems are
still there. And they were there as long as I can remember. And
Acronis True Image has never shown any interest in fixing them in
all of these years.

There are lots of alternatives out there. Paragon is one that is
better in this regard than Acronis True Image is. Only two things I
don't like about Paragon is that incremental is super slow. And the
boot CD doesn't work on a 800x480 screen (7 inch netbook screens).
Then there is Norton Ghost which is quite good. And believe it or
not, even firing up BartPE and just copy the files and folders over
works well too. In fact, I do this latter one all of the time.


I've read a lot of reviews and Paragon was mentioned in some. Of
course different reviews pick different software for their favorites.
I think tho Acronis is one of the more popular of recent but that
doesn't mean it's the best. As far as copying files, that's okay but
usually that doesn't work for open files typical in windows.

BTW, I noticed you said TI v12 and that caught me by surprise. Are
you sure? I will have to re-read the beta I'm using (I thought it
was v.11) and check the Acronis site too.

Both Paragon and Acronis True Image uses memory even when not running.
For example, Acronis True Image Home 2009 (v12) is using up the
following without even running it.

Acronis Scheduler 2 (scedul2.exe) 30MB
Acronis True Image Monitor (TrueImageMonitor.exe) 70MB
Monitor for Acronis True Image Backup Archive Explorer
(TimounterMonitor.exe 50MB
Acronis Scheduler Helper (schedhlp.exe) 34MB

Total 184MB

I think this is just nuts! There should be a way to turn this off
besides uninstalling (or using the Task Manager and killing them). True
most of us are not using 10 year old machines and we have RAM to spare.
But wasting it in this fashion I think is just nuts. Even if it ends up
in the swapfile later.

Copying locked files? No, you don't understand. BartPE or WinPE is like
a Linux Live, but it isn't Linux based. Rather it is either XP, Vista,
or Windows 7 based. So the Windows you are copying is all unlocked as
that OS isn't even running and thus all files are unlocked and you are
free to copy away. You could probably use a Linux Live CD to copy files
too, but Linux can't modify the registry like BartPE can. Nor can Linux
run Windows software either.

BartPE and WinPE uses all generic drivers. Thus they run on anything. As
same copy that runs on one computer will run on a totally different
computer. This is handy for lots of things. Usually to repair a
non-bootable Windows. Also it is good to copy files and make backups
too.


I gotcha about the linux based. Yeah, that makes sense then so you
aren't locking files using windows. And I agree about Acronis using
too much memory. I've noticed they try to put too many features in
newer versions and it takes up more memory and at times affects
performance too. It's definitely not perfect but I think it's still
good software. Ghost was accused years ago also of using too much
memory. I'm not up to date with Ghost now. It was the first software
I ever used for backups. Then it was lean, mean and dependable.

This confuses me a bit. One runs Acronis when one is not backing up
or restoring? Why?

Sorry, I guess I am a bit behind the times...


No problem. One thing that comes to mind is their "try and decide".
Think of it as a virtual OS to try software without installing it in
your real OS. I don't know when they began this feature but it's in
their TI home image 2011 beta (build???). They have other features
too but IMO, they at least relate closer to backups. This could be up
for debate tho.

In my mind, newer versions include too much bloatware (typical for
most software nowadays unfortunately).

RnR writes:

On Mon, 09 Aug 2010 20:34:16 -0400, wrote:

RnR writes:

On Sun, 8 Aug 2010 12:29:42 -0500, "BillW50" wrote:

In ,
RnR typed on Sun, 08 Aug 2010 11:17:13 -0500:
On Sun, 8 Aug 2010 08:07:18 -0500, "BillW50" wrote:

In ,
RnR typed on Sat, 07 Aug 2010 22:43:12 -0500:
On Sat, 7 Aug 2010 22:14:33 -0500, "BillW50"
wrote:

In ,
William R. Walsh typed on Sat, 7 Aug 2010 20:26:31 -0500:
Hi!

On the box they touted some of their software that claimed to be
able to create a bootable backup image on the external hard
drive. I googled their software and it did not sound good.

It's probably every bit as bad as it sounded and then some. Why
those who sell external hard drives insist on loading this crap on
them when there are some good, free choices out there confounds
me. (And don't get me started on Western Digital DumbWare.)

A software program such as Acronis True Image can do the job you
want to do, and it should do so fairly painlessly. As far as I
know, it is clear for use on 64-bit Windows (not tried it,
though).

No! Acronis True Image is the worst when it comes to external hard
drives. As you can make backups all you want too, but some you
can't restore from. Acronis True Image fix is to tell you to use an
internal hard drive instead. And I say to Acronis True Image to go
to hell! No other backup software I know has this same problem. And
I have pages of other problems with Acronis True Image as well. But
when it works, it works well. When it doesn't, it is completely
useless.

I remember reading some time ago about TI problems. FWIW, I'm using
their TI version 11 beta now. Hopefully it will solve some or all
of the problems you know of. And no I'm not a TI lover but I
don't know of a better alternative right now. I have done some
research on this. That said, I'm sure I didn't cover every
alternative so I'm willing to listen to others.

I am running Acronis True Image v12 right now and the problems are
still there. And they were there as long as I can remember. And
Acronis True Image has never shown any interest in fixing them in
all of these years.

There are lots of alternatives out there. Paragon is one that is
better in this regard than Acronis True Image is. Only two things I
don't like about Paragon is that incremental is super slow. And the
boot CD doesn't work on a 800x480 screen (7 inch netbook screens).
Then there is Norton Ghost which is quite good. And believe it or
not, even firing up BartPE and just copy the files and folders over
works well too. In fact, I do this latter one all of the time.


I've read a lot of reviews and Paragon was mentioned in some. Of
course different reviews pick different software for their favorites.
I think tho Acronis is one of the more popular of recent but that
doesn't mean it's the best. As far as copying files, that's okay but
usually that doesn't work for open files typical in windows.

BTW, I noticed you said TI v12 and that caught me by surprise. Are
you sure? I will have to re-read the beta I'm using (I thought it
was v.11) and check the Acronis site too.

Both Paragon and Acronis True Image uses memory even when not running.
For example, Acronis True Image Home 2009 (v12) is using up the
following without even running it.

Acronis Scheduler 2 (scedul2.exe) 30MB
Acronis True Image Monitor (TrueImageMonitor.exe) 70MB
Monitor for Acronis True Image Backup Archive Explorer
(TimounterMonitor.exe 50MB
Acronis Scheduler Helper (schedhlp.exe) 34MB

Total 184MB

I think this is just nuts! There should be a way to turn this off
besides uninstalling (or using the Task Manager and killing them). True
most of us are not using 10 year old machines and we have RAM to spare.
But wasting it in this fashion I think is just nuts. Even if it ends up
in the swapfile later.

Copying locked files? No, you don't understand. BartPE or WinPE is like
a Linux Live, but it isn't Linux based. Rather it is either XP, Vista,
or Windows 7 based. So the Windows you are copying is all unlocked as
that OS isn't even running and thus all files are unlocked and you are
free to copy away. You could probably use a Linux Live CD to copy files
too, but Linux can't modify the registry like BartPE can. Nor can Linux
run Windows software either.

BartPE and WinPE uses all generic drivers. Thus they run on anything. As
same copy that runs on one computer will run on a totally different
computer. This is handy for lots of things. Usually to repair a
non-bootable Windows. Also it is good to copy files and make backups
too.


I gotcha about the linux based. Yeah, that makes sense then so you
aren't locking files using windows. And I agree about Acronis using
too much memory. I've noticed they try to put too many features in
newer versions and it takes up more memory and at times affects
performance too. It's definitely not perfect but I think it's still
good software. Ghost was accused years ago also of using too much
memory. I'm not up to date with Ghost now. It was the first software
I ever used for backups. Then it was lean, mean and dependable.

This confuses me a bit. One runs Acronis when one is not backing up
or restoring? Why?

Sorry, I guess I am a bit behind the times...


No problem. One thing that comes to mind is their "try and decide".
Think of it as a virtual OS to try software without installing it in
your real OS. I don't know when they began this feature but it's in
their TI home image 2011 beta (build???). They have other features
too but IMO, they at least relate closer to backups. This could be up
for debate tho.

In my mind, newer versions include too much bloatware (typical for
most software nowadays unfortunately).

Agreed. That is what keeps people buying new hardware

I was amazed at how fast my wife's new Lat 6510 is at booting
and starting up apps. It makes our 4-5 year old systems feel
really REALLY slow...

Thanks,


--
Andrew Hall
(Now reading Usenet in alt.sys.pc-clone.dell...)

In ,
typed on Thu, 12 Aug 2010 15:45:31 -0400:
No problem. One thing that comes to mind is their "try and decide".
Think of it as a virtual OS to try software without installing it in
your real OS. I don't know when they began this feature but it's in
their TI home image 2011 beta (build???). They have other features
too but IMO, they at least relate closer to backups. This could be up
for debate tho.

In my mind, newer versions include too much bloatware (typical for
most software nowadays unfortunately).

Agreed. That is what keeps people buying new hardware

I was amazed at how fast my wife's new Lat 6510 is at booting
and starting up apps. It makes our 4-5 year old systems feel
really REALLY slow...

Thanks,

One could always try new software and run it in a sandbox. If it doesn't
work out, just delete the sandbox and all of it is gone. Running
browsers in a sandbox is nice because you can turn everything on so web
pages displays everything ok, but it still can't hurt your system.

And you don't have to buy a new system to see a speed improvement. Just
wipe the drive out and reinstall your OS or use the recovery disk. Odds
are it is tons faster than before.

--
Bill
Gateway MX6124 ('06 era) 1 of 3 - Windows XP SP2

On Sun, 15 Aug 2010 17:34:38 -0500, "BillW50" wrote:

In ,
typed on Thu, 12 Aug 2010 15:45:31 -0400:
No problem. One thing that comes to mind is their "try and decide".
Think of it as a virtual OS to try software without installing it in
your real OS. I don't know when they began this feature but it's in
their TI home image 2011 beta (build???). They have other features
too but IMO, they at least relate closer to backups. This could be up
for debate tho.

In my mind, newer versions include too much bloatware (typical for
most software nowadays unfortunately).

Agreed. That is what keeps people buying new hardware

I was amazed at how fast my wife's new Lat 6510 is at booting
and starting up apps. It makes our 4-5 year old systems feel
really REALLY slow...

Thanks,

One could always try new software and run it in a sandbox. If it doesn't
work out, just delete the sandbox and all of it is gone. Running
browsers in a sandbox is nice because you can turn everything on so web
pages displays everything ok, but it still can't hurt your system.


I'm not familiar with Sandbox tho I've heard of it. I use vmware
workstation and it really works well for testing my OS's and software
in a virtual setting.


And you don't have to buy a new system to see a speed improvement. Just
wipe the drive out and reinstall your OS or use the recovery disk. Odds
are it is tons faster than before.


Well that depends. Maybe for the average person it's true but not
always. It really depends what you load on after you install the OS.
Some programs just hog resources too much. Some firewall suites are
the first thing that comes to mind in this regard.

"RnR" wrote:
"BillW50" wrote:

typed:
No problem. One thing that comes to mind is their "try and decide".
Think of it as a virtual OS to try software without installing it in
your real OS. I don't know when they began this feature but it's in
their TI home image 2011 beta (build???). They have other features
too but IMO, they at least relate closer to backups. This could be up
for debate tho.

In my mind, newer versions include too much bloatware (typical for
most software nowadays unfortunately).

Agreed. That is what keeps people buying new hardware

I was amazed at how fast my wife's new Lat 6510 is at booting
and starting up apps. It makes our 4-5 year old systems feel
really REALLY slow...

Thanks,

One could always try new software and run it in a sandbox. If it doesn't
work out, just delete the sandbox and all of it is gone. Running
browsers in a sandbox is nice because you can turn everything on so web
pages displays everything ok, but it still can't hurt your system.


I'm not familiar with Sandbox tho I've heard of it. I use vmware
workstation and it really works well for testing my OS's and software
in a virtual setting.

[..............]

I think he means "sandbox", as in a safe compartmented area in
which to experiment, where bad things can happen harmlessly in
isolation from the rest of the system, not "Sandbox" as in a specific
product.

*TimDaniels*

On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 01:36:01 -0700, "Timothy Daniels"
wrote:

"RnR" wrote:
"BillW50" wrote:

typed:
No problem. One thing that comes to mind is their "try and decide".
Think of it as a virtual OS to try software without installing it in
your real OS. I don't know when they began this feature but it's in
their TI home image 2011 beta (build???). They have other features
too but IMO, they at least relate closer to backups. This could be up
for debate tho.

In my mind, newer versions include too much bloatware (typical for
most software nowadays unfortunately).

Agreed. That is what keeps people buying new hardware

I was amazed at how fast my wife's new Lat 6510 is at booting
and starting up apps. It makes our 4-5 year old systems feel
really REALLY slow...

Thanks,

One could always try new software and run it in a sandbox. If it doesn't
work out, just delete the sandbox and all of it is gone. Running
browsers in a sandbox is nice because you can turn everything on so web
pages displays everything ok, but it still can't hurt your system.


I'm not familiar with Sandbox tho I've heard of it. I use vmware
workstation and it really works well for testing my OS's and software
in a virtual setting.

[..............]

I think he means "sandbox", as in a safe compartmented area in
which to experiment, where bad things can happen harmlessly in
isolation from the rest of the system, not "Sandbox" as in a specific
product.

*TimDaniels*



Thanks Tim. On further thought, you're correct and I'm wrong. I was
thinking of a product named "sandboxie" not "sandbox".

That said, I agree with Bill about a virtual environment to test
software. It's safe and it's easy to deal with from my experience.