We got a new laptop at work that we need to develop for. Its a fun new Vista with a tablet touch screen. Now i fancy new tech as much as the next geek, but tablet PCs and the handwriting recognition software is wacky cool. Along with the pen and tablet stuff its the next best thing to Surface or those other crazy touch screen comps.
But anyways, back to the story. We needed to do a complete backup of the PC before going balls deep on it so we can save a good image in case we fuck it up. Common sense here for anyone in IT.
Well this Vista system got wacky by NOT letting you do a complete PC backup. Sure you can do shadow backups with partial files, but i needed the whole image saved... but Vista was having none of that.
Perusing the vista forums for the last 30 minutes got me NOTHING. Mostly responses from support asking about FAT32 partitions... because FAT32 doesnt work with Vista. While i know some OS's still use FAT32 and some people still use those OS's... but if yer still using those OS's theres a good chance you know that XP and Vista arent using FAT32 and telling us otherwise is trivial.
So after scouring and scouring i finally came across a forum post that had the correct answer. And considering it was brutal to find it, i thought id prolly just start posting such random computer answers like this here for anyone that needs it.
The answer? Using Intel's Turbo Memory Console: disable ReadyBoost and ReadyDrive. Thats it. Thats whats stopping the total PC backup. This is what kept me from saving 30 gigs of vista fattiness onto a stupid backup drive. Oh and heres a kicker, you cant just uncheck both boxes, if you uncheck one it immediatly tries to restart. Weak eh? I had to actually uncheck one, agree and then quickly uncheck the other one and agree before vista closed. Reminiscent of XP registries but at least there they gave you the option to reboot later.
1 comment:
Can anyone recommend the well-priced Network Monitoring program for a small IT service company like mine? Does anyone use Kaseya.com or GFI.com? How do they compare to these guys I found recently: N-able N-central systems management
? What is your best take in cost vs performance among those three? I need a good advice please... Thanks in advance!
Post a Comment