Yes, I am referring to Backup Exec. I have been using it since version 1 -
up until about one year ago. They have always had a desktop version that was
in the $50 range. By carefully reading the "readme" files I knew when a new
version would not be compatible with my old backups. I therefore restored
all the old backups, uninstalled the old version of Backup Exec, installed
the newer version and then backed up again with the new version. I then
deleted the original files from the hard drive as I rarely needed them Yet
when I did need them I was easily able to pull what I wanted from the
backup.
I can still access files that I created in 1992 by doing this, even though
the original files have not resided on my hard drive for over a dozen years.
--
Regards,
Richard Urban
Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User
(For email, remove the obvious from my address)
"Anteaus" <Anteaus@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:72917735-2323-4F4C-A35F-C22398D74705@microsoft.com...
>
> "Richard Urban" wrote:
>
>> What you may be missing is that most business owners, and advanced home
>> users, have a dedicated backup program that affords many more options
>> than
>> those allowed by Microsoft Backup.
>
> I take it you refer to the likes of Backup Exec or Arcserve, which are not
> only phenomenally expensive, but are so complex that to operate them
> without
> special training would be very difficult. They are also, in my experience,
> not all that reliable, nor especially helpful in the event of disk
> failure.
>
> It strikes me that backup IS a function which an OS should rightly
> perform,
> as a successful backup may require 'understanding' of special
> filing-system
> features which the writer of a third-party app may not have. Especially
> with
> Vista. Yet, instead we have OS's which perform Internet browsing, media
> playback, etc. which are rightly the job of third-party apps. Meanwhile,
> backup is relegated to the 'also rans' category.
>
>
Linear Mode
