[quote MacMagus]As for me, I am retiring from this thread.
Wait! Don't go! In my efforts to become non-plainly stupid, I have a question for you...
What's the relationship between "Windows Recovery Environment" and "Volume Shadow Copy"/"Previous Versions"?
there's so very much wrong with what you said that it would take a few pages to touch the broadest details and I do not care to bother doing that for someone so plainly stupid
I guess these people are wrong and plainly stupid too:
http://bertk.mvps.org/html/missingrpv.html
"if a tool makes a change to the volume without going through Volsnap.sys (the volume shadow copy driver), when Windows Vista is started, it detects that it doesn’t have an accurate representation of the changes to the volume and thus can’t accurately reconstitute older versions of the file for System Restore"
http://www.winsupersite.com/reviews/winvista_05d.asp
"The end-user UI isn't particularly discoverable, but once you know how it works, it can prove a godsend: Simply right-click on any file for which you'd like to access a previous version, choose Properties, and then access the Previous Versions tab to navigate through a list of the previous versions of the file that are available...Unfortunately, it's available only in the non-consumer versions of Windows Vista, including Vista Business, Enterprise, and Ultimate."
http://winconnected.com/forums/permalink...hread.aspx
"Previous Versions are captured on a scheduled basis, and the feature uses the "shadow copy" technology that creates a read-only, point-in-time copy of your disk. This means that versions are captured on a *time* basis (such as every 7:00), and not based on events like saving a new copy of a file."
http://channel9.msdn.com/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=223932
"Vista's Previous Versions is also only based on periodic backups, it does not keep track of each time a is modified during the day.
Previous Versions uses the volume shadow to make a copy a specific intervals, and when system restore makes a checkpoint. Apple gets points for providing an API that allows applications to be notified which backup versions are available and when to display them inside the app as though they were the current version."
http://blogs.msdn.com/adioltean/archive/...91392.aspx
"What seems to be unique to Time Machine, however, is that it removes the necessity for the user to understand exactly where/how any specific app stores the data. For example, in the Address Book demo, Time Machine is able to search backwards through the contents of a single database file to find the deleted entry. In other restore schemes, the user would have to 1) know where the app stores the data, and the name of said file, and 2) have a general idea of the date when the deletion occurred.
"If the user did not know when the deletion occurred, s/he would have to go through a lot of trial-and-error to restore a file, open it in the app, see if the item is present, and if so, export it to a single file, restore the original database, and import the deleted item. That is a lot of work that Time Machine obviates through its implementation."
http://www.roughlydrafted.com/RD/Home/21...11EC6.html
"Users also have to be experts in understanding where their missing data might be. Windows XP exposed backup shadow copies in the Explorer Previous Versions view. That's good for standalone files, but does nothing for users trying to restore data if they don't know where the file is. In the case of restoring contacts or photo albums, the data they are restoring isn't even a file, it's a component of a file.
"...the second entirely new thing Time Machine does: track data for users in a non-file centric model. The demonstrated search through Address Book, using search results, is very much a new and interesting feature. It works like people think, not as system administrators plan. Do Windows users even know that Outlook has stored their personal folder of contacts in:
C:/Documents and Settings/username/Local Settings/Application Data/Microsoft/Outlook/user.pst?
"Good luck finding that and restoring it using Volume Shadow Copy: that file path is invisible by default!
"A third new feature of Time Machine is that it delivers a system wide service that developers can hook into to optimize backups, so that backups only involve the real information users might want to recover. That is a key new thing: VCS just backs up a volume or set of directories without regard for how much of the data would be useful to actually archive. Developers have no mechanism to tell Windows not to back up their scratch files."
http://corvusconsulting.ca/articles/2006...real-value
"The [ Time Machine ] interface bestows a science-fiction inspired feeling and in its simplicity changes disaster into simple remedy. The Volume Shadow Copy interface, or what I could find of it online, provides an intimidating and option-ridden mess that will only make sense to you if you have already used it. So when disaster strikes, you don’t get to act and save the day, you get to go to school
"The Volume Shadow Copy experience does appeal to some people, and according to my ex-Microsoft buddy, that appeal is the secret to why Microsoft maintains its hold on the business market and why Mac will never take it away.
"The reason, he says, and I agree, is that Microsoft does deliver the kind of experience that its key customers need: system admins need to be needed. That is, the complexity and obscurity of Microsoft product design allows administrators to become valued repositories of arcane knowledge. They are wizards in their domains, and to put it bluntly, simplicity and reliability would diminish the need for their magic."
And now, from the horses' mouths:
http://www.apple.com/macosx/leopard/timemachine.html
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/product...ackup.mspx
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/product...wcopy.mspx
BTW, are you one of
them, MM? You know--a "high priest?"
