Joe, Doesn't running software "professionally" include backups? This is not a great solution, but I use a utility called ghost at work (at home I use a tape backup). I backup and send the image to another PC (40 Gig hard drives are cheap) before any major install. It takes about 1/2 hour to run a full backup of my system, after spending about 5 minutes to start it. If I do this during lunch there is very little lost time. If I have a problem, I then burn a bootable CD with the image and reload, which takes about 1 an hour. I have only had to do this twice, but in those cases I am sure it saved 10 times over reloading the system from scratch. David Morris >>> joepluta@PlutaBrothers.com 01/17/02 05:30PM >>> ... My take on the issue of "just reloading" is that I've got to reload a bunch of utilities, getting the registration numbers and so on. Then I have to reset every one of my defaults, such as how folders work. Not to mention reconfiguring TCP/IP and any other communications. And re-establishing any shares I might have, including shared devices. My biggest problem, though, is something more fundamental: the fact that people all over the world think that "professional" software is so lacking in quality that it's "normal" to have to completely erase everything you've done and rebuild it from scratch. In the real world, that would be akin to, what? ... All I know is that, back in the day, if we were to deliver a program that wiped out all the user data, we were going to be looking for alternate employment. Today, the idea is "if all else fails, reload from scratch". It's a load of crap, and shame on us for tolerating it. Ah well, I'm cranky. My mail server was down all day. I reloaded it from scratch. Works like a charm. >sigh<
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.