• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

System Restore: Should I turn it off in Vista?

I generally do.

But the shadow copies are nice in Vista. I guess it just depends on if you have the space to spare. I've never used it to restore the entire system to a point in time, but the ability to get a file or directory back from yesterday or last week is pretty handy at times.
 
I turn it off - I've never, ever, ever had the need to use it, all my files are backed up on my server, and I've yet to trash a system so badly that all other methods of restoration failed.
 
I would not turn it off. It is really good for restoring things if something or someone trashes the registry or some other problem that for some reason you're pulling your hair out trying to fix and would just rather restore instead. Plus with Vista you can do it from the DVD in case you can't even boot. Really no reason to turn it off unless you're low on HDD space.
 
I have it turned off, but I make regular images of my OS with Acronis TI. It never fails no matter how badly I trash the OS, MBR, or whatever. System restore has limitations and doesn't work 100% of the time. I also found that system restore in Vista exhibited weird behavior IMO, like wanting to make restore points at times I didn't want it to, like every logon.

Now if I had Vista Ultimate things would be different because if you turn off system restore you lose the volume shadow copy service and therefore lose the ability to use previous version, plus it also has built in imaging software that would work better than system restore.
 
I keep it on since Windows Updates has been known to trash some systems (i.e. BSOD, etc...) --> my laptop was one. Restoring worked perfectly, and I finally figured what was causing the BSOD after updating.
 
I'd leave it on, especially if you have a version of Vista that supports the Previous Versions.
 
I'll join the "Leave it on" gang. I have used it too many times over the years to be without it. It is a much better alternative than reformatting and reinstalling everytime a piece of software mucks up the Registry. It is especially useful for dealing with beta work. And, I also use Acronis TI to keep a ready-to-go reserve drive. I call it planned redundancy. With current HDD size so humongous, disk space quickly becomes a non-issue.
 
Do what you want but please don't come asking for help a year down the road because you can't get your system working again for some reason. Sound fair?
 
Originally posted by: corkyg
I'll join the "Leave it on" gang. I have used it too many times over the years to be without it...
Click to expand...

I don't rely on System Restore. For the most part, I forget it's even there, but...

System Restore has saved my bacon several times, after botched upgrades, patches, et cetera.

It's like...

"Oh, sh!t, what do I do now? Nothing is fixing the problem! %$#^! "

Followed by...

"Doh! System Restore!!!"

It's worked first-time/every-time for me - no way, I'd turn it off... 😉
 
You never turn it off unless you are using a good imaging program and make regular image backups. Imaging based backups beat the holy hell out of System Restore. I have two hard drives, one which I use to store my image backups. I use DriveimageXML and BartPE for my imaging a restoration needs because I can not afford to spend money on Acronis right now. The downside to using DIXML is it does not make incremental backups, so you have to back up the entire disk every time.

 
Originally posted by: VinDSL
Originally posted by: corkyg
I'll join the "Leave it on" gang.

It's like...

"Oh, sh!t, what do I do now? Nothing is fixing the problem! %$#^! "

Followed by...

"Doh! System Restore!!!"

It's worked first-time/every-time for me - no way, I'd turn it off... 😉
Click to expand...


:thumbsup:
Click to expand...
 
Leave it on crowd here, I have had users in the field use it to get the systems back up. Granted it is bad to have on for virus/spyware reasons.
 
Originally posted by: Cutthroat
I have it turned off, but I make regular images of my OS with Acronis TI. It never fails no matter how badly I trash the OS, MBR, or whatever. System restore has limitations and doesn't work 100% of the time. I also found that system restore in Vista exhibited weird behavior IMO, like wanting to make restore points at times I didn't want it to, like every logon.

Now if I had Vista Ultimate things would be different because if you turn off system restore you lose the volume shadow copy service and therefore lose the ability to use previous version, plus it also has built in imaging software that would work better than system restore.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, the imaging tool is Vista is near useless because it's so limited. You can't even do something as simple as save to a network drive, you cant even exclude a folder from the image.
 
Leave it on - especially if you have the HD space ..
--IF you are benchmarking, however, turn it off ... and ready boost too
 
Originally posted by: BD2003
Originally posted by: Cutthroat
I have it turned off, but I make regular images of my OS with Acronis TI. It never fails no matter how badly I trash the OS, MBR, or whatever. System restore has limitations and doesn't work 100% of the time. I also found that system restore in Vista exhibited weird behavior IMO, like wanting to make restore points at times I didn't want it to, like every logon.

Now if I had Vista Ultimate things would be different because if you turn off system restore you lose the volume shadow copy service and therefore lose the ability to use previous version, plus it also has built in imaging software that would work better than system restore.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, the imaging tool is Vista is near useless because it's so limited. You can't even do something as simple as save to a network drive, you cant even exclude a folder from the image.
Click to expand...
That's why it's called COMPLETE PC backup, as in, everything, no exclusions. It's not meant to be a full featured drive imaging program, it's meant to simply be a quick and easy way to back up the entire state of your system, which it does very well. I used it recently to back up an old PATA Seagate drive to an external, and then restored using the Vista DVD to a new SATA Samsung. Worked great.
 
Originally posted by: archcommus
That's why it's called COMPLETE PC backup, as in, everything, no exclusions. It's not meant to be a full featured drive imaging program, it's meant to simply be a quick and easy way to back up the entire state of your system, which it does very well. I used it recently to back up an old PATA Seagate drive to an external, and then restored using the Vista DVD to a new SATA Samsung. Worked great.
Click to expand...

Agreed. It's a fantastic tool to have at your disposal built right in.

I've used it several times and it works great.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top