Should I create partition for XP or rely on system restore?

hackmole

Senior member
Dec 17, 2000
250
3
81
I just upgraded computers and am now using Windows XP Home. On my last computer I had made several partitions putting just the Windows 2000 operating system on C and then using Direct Image to make a backup of it. This worked out very well because several times my system became very sluggish from trying out so many different programs and even uninstalling and reinstalling the program wouldn't help. An image backup reinstall fixed everything each time.

Is making a separate partition for the operating system still as important to do with XP or should I just rely on XP's system restore.
 

Pciber

Senior member
Feb 17, 2004
977
1
0
Wow you are just now moving to windows xp? Could have waited a few months and skipped XP entirely :eek:

XP's system restore feature is trash. Not only does it not do much when you need it, but several pieces of malware have found a way to restore themselves after you have deleted them, using system restore.

IMO you should keep on doing what you have been doing with the imaging program.
 

Navid

Diamond Member
Jul 26, 2004
5,053
0
0
I am not sure if you can create a restore point with XP and keep it like you can with an image. I think the XP restore points get automatically overwritten after a while.
 

Netopia

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
4,793
4
81
True that there is malware that can hide in restore points. Also true that all the better anti-spyware software can help you get rid of these.

I do IT work for a living and have a side consulting business in addition. System restore is not the number one best piece of software out there, but it is certainly worth using. I've had MANY occasions where System Restore worked perfectly and saved me hours of work.

Joe
 

Pirotech

Senior member
Jul 19, 2005
352
0
0
i'd not fully trust to XP system restore, you know system restore like notepad and 3d party backup prog like word, so if you have an opportunety to use direct image use it. especially since XP doesn't differ from 2000 very much.
 

Robor

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
16,979
0
76
I would rely on System Restore 100% but I had it work flawlessly for a user a few weeks ago. They were having a Windows Update problem that caused their system to go into an update and reboot loop. They rolled back 2 days and it fixed it. Very nice! :D
 

Netopia

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
4,793
4
81
Yup... good example. I've had a LOT of occasions where it fixed things like that, which could have otherwise been a real pain to deal with.

Joe
 

Cr0nJ0b

Golden Member
Apr 13, 2004
1,141
29
91
meettomy.site
I've been using XP since it came out and System Restore is definitely a must have tool. It's not the best, there are some qwerks with it, but when you need it and it works...you will be very happy.

The cost of system restore is disk space, but disk is cheap.

I've been saved about 5-6 times by system restore, especially in the driver mismatch arena. I would say that I have even gotten a little sloppy with driver patches, since I know that I can almost always rollback.

On the question of partitions...I'm not a huge fan. I like making large drives out of large drives. My feeling is that If I want to protect the data, I need to back it up. I would say that you should consider either adding a second physical drive for your user data, or as a spot for backups...or just copy stuff to DVD that you can't do without. In my experience my data loss has come from this...in order.

1) OS failure or corruption -- This generally come from wonky drivers messing with the File table or virus level corruption of files and data. partitions will help with this some amount...so if you only have one drive, then do it. but lower level corrution of the partion table or MBR would still be an issue.

2) Drive Failure -- This happens. Some drives are better than others, but generally ATA or non-SCSI non-FC drives are much worse when it comes to failures. They will just die and you won't see it coming. In my case out of say 10 disk failures, 8 were predictable. That's not the industry standard, but I knew or was pretty sure I knew the disks were dying...which gave me a bit of time to recover before they were lost. Partitioning won't help with this situation at all. all drive partitions will be gone.

3) Component failure (Other) -- heat issues and motherboard issues -- usually can be fixed at the component level with no loss of data, just move the drives. (but some times lead to hard data loss in one of the above categories)...In addition, moving to a new motherboard usually requires a fresh install...as 4 describes.

4) Move from one OS to another -- I generally lose something when I upgrade or reload the OS. It's usually planned for, so it's not important stuff. Like losing programs when you reload, losing email from accounts I've forgotten about and such. I usually reload XP every 18-24 months...most often because I'm upgrading hardware.

5) User error -- I deleted something that I shouldn't have...and often don't know I did it until I need to find the file. The only way to recover here would be to have a tape backup to restore from...I don't.

My 2 cents
 

Smilin

Diamond Member
Mar 4, 2002
7,357
0
0
The final answer:


ALWAYS use system restore.

ALWAYS make backups in addition to this.

 

Navid

Diamond Member
Jul 26, 2004
5,053
0
0
If you just rely on system restore, you could run into trouble as already mentioned if you get some kind of spyware.
But, if that happens and you have an image of your OS, you can get your system back without having to go through an entire re-install process.
Some are going to say "if you are careful, you will never end up with a spyware on your machine". lol

Anyway, if you decide to have an imaging scheme, keeping system restore is not going to hurt. You may never need to use it. But, it won't hurt to keep it.
 

Brazen

Diamond Member
Jul 14, 2000
4,259
0
0
If you like to play with new apps, you might check out the free VMWare Server to create a virtual machine to play around in, and keep your main desktop clean and clear.