-
Join the MyBroadband community
South Africa’s biggest forum. Discuss, discover, and connect with thousands of members.
-
Question of the Day: What's the most interesting small town you've visited in South Africa?
StorageCraft ShadowProtect
- Thread starter rpm
- Start date
DarkStreet
Expert Member
Pity it's for Windows only.
InTheCube
Expert Member
Wait for my boss to do the same to me. Lol.
But seriously though, this sounds interesting. Wonder how much the software costs, and how well it works.
Why isn't there a link posted in the article, or at least in this thread? It is an advertorial after all.
Last edited:
devilfp
Well-Known Member
Yeap. Its a downer!
eltherza
Expert Member
IS it just me, or did this article feel like it was written like an advert?
We use this software a lot but it seems when restoring to different hardware windows blue screens and you still have to run a repair on windows to replace the raid drivers but with acronis you don't have to.
zamicro
Expert Member
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2007
- Messages
- 3,823
- Reaction score
- 5
I also got the feeling that it was an advertisement. Was looking for the rating and price...
Arthur
Honorary Master
A superior solution is Acronis Backup & Recovery.
Supports Windows and Linux.
Faster and more robust than Storagecraft, and fully scalable from single machine to enterprise with thousands of workstations and servers. Various options such as Universal Restore to restore server image to dissimilar hardware. Software deduplication also an option.
There's even a Virtual Edition that supports unlimited VMs, for VMware, Hyper-V, Citrix, Xensoft, Parallels, etc - full P2V, V2V and V2P migration.
Quite widely used in SA, with a very devoted following.
SA distributor is www.synapsys.co.za
Supports Windows and Linux.
Faster and more robust than Storagecraft, and fully scalable from single machine to enterprise with thousands of workstations and servers. Various options such as Universal Restore to restore server image to dissimilar hardware. Software deduplication also an option.
There's even a Virtual Edition that supports unlimited VMs, for VMware, Hyper-V, Citrix, Xensoft, Parallels, etc - full P2V, V2V and V2P migration.
Quite widely used in SA, with a very devoted following.
SA distributor is www.synapsys.co.za
Last edited:
er, sorry if I sound flippant, but of course it does. You can't have much experience with imaging Windows. I'd expect it to blue screen on different hardware 9 times out of 10. That's the nature of imaging. Windows doesn't have all the drivers built into the Kernel like Linux,
so when you boot it on a different motherboard, obviously it goes crazy.
That's totally independent of your imaging software, it's the nature of the OS.
Yes you are right but Storagecraft advertises that it supports Universal Restore which replaces the drivers in the image when restoring but it doesn't work. Now with Acronis this feature works flawlessly everytime so the restored image just boots into windows without having to do a repair.
Have you been able to get the Universal Restore of Storagecraft to work?
Arthur
Honorary Master
You are right about the Windows architecture - you can't just image and restore as-is to dissimilar hardware, and neither can you just remove the drives from one machine and put them into a different type and boot up happily.
But with Acronis Universal Restore (an add-in to the base ABR) you can. It works beautifully. I have imaged dozens of Windows systems and restored to dissimlar hardware and VMs on innumerable occasions. Basically, when restoring an image to dissimilar hw you simply tell UR where the new drivers are (for storage controller, etc) and it slipstreams them in during the image restore. This is only for drivers between the HAL and the NT Executive, which are required to boot the system (otherwise it doesn't know where to find the storage). Once Windows boots on the new hw, Plug 'n Play handles the regular PnP devices. Just this past Monday I used ABR and UR to virtualise on old Vista laptop, now happily running in a VM (and yes, MS did require activation, but it worked fine).
Last edited:
spiderz
Honorary Master
If it was an advertorial I certainly didn't see any money from it. Also, the invariable assumptions that when anything nice is said it is advertorial is precisely why I'm skittish to post links at all. (Though in this case no link was posted because it wasn't in the final edited copy I uploaded)
Anyway, the author provided this link: http://www.ipdimension.net/ - they provided the review copy.
<EDIT>For clarity, this isn't a challenge or [-]passive[/-] aggression towards ToxicWazte, but a genuine query open to anyone to add their 2 coppers.</EDIT> As a point of interest, what differentiates "obvious advertorial is obvious" from a favourable review?
Last edited:
InTheCube
Expert Member
Don't have any issue with advertorials, would have just liked a link to the company/product page, if not in the main article, then at least here in the forum. This is the interconnected world wide web, of course.
No problem. Aren't reviews usually marked as such, with a rating or some scores? Usually also includes price. Isn't there a set format?
If it is an advertorial, then I think it should be marked as such. I personally don't mind advertorials, but would like to be able to easily distinguish between:
- news article (original MyBB content)
- news article (sourced from elsewhere)
- press release from companies/entities
- review (original review conducted by MyBB)
- columns/opinion pieces, by MyBB columnists
- advertorial
Make it easy to distinguish between these different types (and the others I've missed out), and you'll have less people making accusations of being biased, being paid, posting advertorials, etc. Transparency is key. MyBB needs more structure, and it needs to be more obvious and plain for everyone to see. Will definitely reduce the number of unnecessary flame wars...
Cool, allow me answer with how things are right now and you can make suggestions based on that.
These carry the byline of a MyBB journalist. For the most part, articles that make the "main" (i.e. most prominent) block on the front page are original content. We do syndicate content from sources such as Mail & Guardian and MoneyWeb, but when we do there is a link or a reference at the bottom of the article.
A rewritten press release may make this section if the editorial team feels it should, but those are attributed to "Staff Writer" and we have also started quoting the whole press release below the article body.
As explained above, when an article syndicated from elsewhere we place a link or reference at the bottom of the article.
The infamous Staff Writer gets credit for these unless a journalist has added significantly to what the release originally said (or there's been a mistake - these don't happen often and we try to correct them quickly if they do happen) - my recent article on the Vodacom double opt-in system is an example of a press release that came through, but which I did some legwork on to flesh out.
We've also started placing the whole press release in a blockquote below the article body where it makes sense to do so.
As you've already noted - these are easy to spot.
These have a disclaimer below them.
MyBB doesn't do advertorials. By advertorial I mean get paid to place an article in the news section, or give a favourable review. I don't know if a discussion on what constitutes advertorial might be fruitful?
Our requirements are that reviews always reflect the author's true opinion of what is being reviewed, and editorial - not sales - decides what gets published.
If a company has incurred great expense to get us to an event to cover it (my SATNAC and IDF trips come to mind) then we do indicate that a journalist is a guest of the relevant company below the articles that come from that event.
rwenzori
Honorary Master
Only one product is mentioned. It is punted big-time. No mention of alternative products ( only some ghostly mush ). No comparative tests and feature comparisons. Only the weakest of tests, probably because anything real-world would actually require effort. Therefore not to be trusted, just as any bs dished up on a silver platter is not to be trusted.
InTheCube
Expert Member
Thanks Jan. I already knew most of what you said, but perhaps it needs to be made more visible, and in a more clearly-defined way, that is consistent accross all content. Like have a dedicated section top right, or bottom left, saying who the author is, what sources were used, date, etc. This is especially important for new members, and guys who don't frequent MyBB that much.
In any case, if MyBB really wants to improve, and get community feedback, this thread isn't the place to do it. Perhaps post a news article and related thread (and throw in a competition/giveaway for greater visibility) calling on the community to give their views on how MyBB can be improved. Define several areas, and ask people to give their comments/suggestions on each area.
My opinion above is just my opinion. I'm sure you will get lots of different views, many of them way better than my own. Or you may find that you already on target, and don't need to change much. Point is, as a largely community-driven website, MyBB should take into consideration what the users want. I know you guys do this already (kudos!), but it will be better if done in a more open, transparent, clearly-defined way.
Once you've done this, and there is general consensus on what needs to be done, you'll find more the more regular forumites educating the rest of the community, and less flame-wars and accusations.
What do you think?
In any case, if MyBB really wants to improve, and get community feedback, this thread isn't the place to do it. Perhaps post a news article and related thread (and throw in a competition/giveaway for greater visibility) calling on the community to give their views on how MyBB can be improved. Define several areas, and ask people to give their comments/suggestions on each area.
My opinion above is just my opinion. I'm sure you will get lots of different views, many of them way better than my own. Or you may find that you already on target, and don't need to change much. Point is, as a largely community-driven website, MyBB should take into consideration what the users want. I know you guys do this already (kudos!), but it will be better if done in a more open, transparent, clearly-defined way.
Once you've done this, and there is general consensus on what needs to be done, you'll find more the more regular forumites educating the rest of the community, and less flame-wars and accusations.
What do you think?