On 2021-05-05 2:14 p.m., J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
> On Wed, 5 May 2021 at 13:55:35, Rene Lamontagne <rlamont@shaw.ca> wrote
> (my responses usually follow points raised):
>> On 2021-05-05 1:08 p.m., Char Jackson wrote:
>>> On Wed, 5 May 2021 11:08:51 -0500, Rene Lamontagne <rlamont@shaw.ca>
>>> wrote:
> []
>>>> My C" drive is kept neat and clean, programs are on D" they are
>>>  Hi Rene, not criticizing, just curious. Does putting Windows on C and
>>> installing programs on D buy you anything, in terms of system
>>> reliability,
>>> or is it more of an organizational approach?
>>
>> No, no real gain, I back them up as a set.
>> When I got my first SSD it was Only 50 GB so to save space for Windows
>> I decided to put all programs on Another drive, so stayed with it since.
>> If I ever have to reinstall windows I will probably put Windows and
>> programs all on one drive.
>>
> My C: - Windows _and_ software - is a 100 (well, 99.9) GB capacity
> partition; it's only 46.2 GB used after many years on 7 (and not being
> at all miserly about what software I install), so yes, you won't find it
> very big. (Unless - possibly - you have Apple software to back up your
> iPhone; my friend has, and we haven't figured out where you tell it to
> store the backup[s] on other than C:. [With the result her C: approaches
> the 100G we've made it.])
> []

My C:\ and D:\ drives together are 45.49 GB. :-)

Rene

On Wed, 5 May 2021 13:55:35 -0500, Rene Lamontagne <rlamont@shaw.ca> wrote:

>On 2021-05-05 1:08 p.m., Char Jackson wrote:
>> On Wed, 5 May 2021 11:08:51 -0500, Rene Lamontagne <rlamont@shaw.ca> wrote:
>>
>>> No, never lost anything of value. I use and play with a lot of utility
>>> programs and sometimes they break Windows, It is so much easier to do a
>>> Macrium restore than reinstall Windows and 70 or 80 programs, All my
>>> important stuff is stored on the internal and backed to a disconnected
>>> external drive.
>>>
>>> My C" drive is kept neat and clean, programs are on D" they are
>>
>> Hi Rene, not criticizing, just curious. Does putting Windows on C and
>> installing programs on D buy you anything, in terms of system reliability,
>> or is it more of an organizational approach?
>
>No, no real gain, I back them up as a set.
>When I got my first SSD it was Only 50 GB so to save space for Windows I
>decided to put all programs on Another drive, so stayed with it since.
>If I ever have to reinstall windows I will probably put Windows and
>programs all on one drive.
>
>>
>>> automatically backed up daily NVMe to NVME, takes 4 minutes, and an auto
>>> backup weekly to an external spinner, restore also takes about 4
>>> minutes, I only keep 4 copies on each drive so space is not a problem.
>>
>> Do you keep just the latest 4 copies? If so, I wonder if there'd be a risk
>> of discovering a corrupt file or wanting an earlier version of a file and
>> not being able to step back far enough to find a good copy.
>
>The 4 weekly copy's cover me for i month back so I don't think I have
>any worries as there is no real important stuff there, and besides older
>copies are outdated weekly with new patch Tuesday stuff.

Thanks, Rene. Sounds like you've evaluated your situation and are acting
accordingly.

--

Char Jackson

J. P. Gilliver (John) graced us with on 5/5/2021 11:57 AM:
> On Wed, 5 May 2021 at 08:10:33, Sailfish
> <NIXCAPSsailfish@NIXCAPSunforgettable.com> wrote (my responses usually
> follow points raised):
>> J. P. Gilliver (John) graced us with on 5/5/2021 5:32 AM:
>>> On Tue, 4 May 2021 at 20:08:46, Sailfish
>>> <NIXCAPSsailfish@NIXCAPSunforgettable.com> wrote (my responses
>>> usually follow points raised):
>>> []
>>>> Well, mixed results on this. I re-formatter my SSD drive and then
>>>> rebooted and selected the bootup Reflect boot menu option. The DOS-like
>>> []
>>>> I don't have a clue of what went wrong on the first attempts but
>>>> when I find time, I will again start from scratch and try the boot
>>>> menu Reflect restore procedure since that is the one I must have
>>>> absolute confidence in for secure restore confidence.
>>>>
>>>> Any thoughts on the matter would be appreciated.
>>>>
>>> I'm not familiar with the "boot menu option". I use the "boot from
>>> CD" option, having made the CD; _that_ is the one _I_ "must have"
>>> "for secure ["bare metal"] restore confidence". Apologies if that's
>>> what you meant.
>>
>> Yes, you are correct, it is what I meant. I have several system
>> restore DVDs for the various Windows versions I have accumulated,
>> several I
>
> "system restore DVDs" implies you mean ones made by Windows. I meant a
> Macrium CD (used to restore from a .mrimg file on a different drive).
> When you said "bootup Reflect boot menu option", I assumed (from the
> word "Reflect") that this was something Macrium. I don't have Macrium
> _installed_ on this machine: the CD is one I made years ago on another
> machine.
>
Sorry for the confusion. Before visit this thread, I only used Reflect
for making Clone backups (copies one drive to another at the sector
level) so that if a disk crashed, I could swap out the last backup
cloned disk and I am up and going again fairly quickly. So, yes, my
system restore DVDs were of the Windows variety and I used them for when
I need to fix a boot sector or some other non-fatal system error on the
drive.

I did mean the Reflect boot menu option for what I recently installed
using the Reflect software. I've also created a Macrium Reflect bootable
SD card in the event that my boot drive version is corrupt.

>> have no real use for anymore, like Win98, 2000, XP, &c (I have those
>> installed on Virtual Box [VB].) Having the restore ability as part of
>> the boot menu is too convenient to ignore.
>
> So I assume you _do_ have Macrium installed on the HD (or SSD).

On my hard drive, yes, and use it often to clone my drives, as mentioned
above.
>>
>> The more I think about it, the more I'm convinced that my initial
>> problem was either due to the SSD itself, as Rene surmised or from a
>> "short between the headsets" when my eyes fell upon tempting new items
>> to explore and twiddle further before initiating the restore. I plan
>> to try it again, this time only going directly to the "Restore image"
>> feature.
>>
After further testing, I regret to mention that the problem I
experienced using the Macrium Reflect book feature is repeatable, both
from the hard drive boot menu and the standalone SD card boot version.

I've attempted it with several source drives using the same MRimage file
and get the same restore failure. However, the Windows version of
Reflect works fine on restoring the drive. I believe it's due to either
incompatible HD or SSD drivers for these offline Reflect programs or
maybe the boot level reflect having problems using the single partition
restore (SSD only) from the 4 partition MRimage file (SSD+3 other HD
partitions)?

Since the screenshot function doesn't work on the boot version of
Reflect, I had to take camera shots of the errors, see link below.
Regrettably, the quality is of less quality but still discernible.

Boot Reflect Error Images: https://imgur.com/a/n9Xrcpr

--
Sailfish
CDC Covid19 Trends: https://www.facebook.com/groups/624208354841034
Rare Mozilla Stuff: http://tinyurl.com/z86x3sg

Rene Lamontagne graced us with on 5/5/2021 7:10 AM:
> On 2021-05-05 7:32 a.m., J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
>> On Tue, 4 May 2021 at 20:08:46, Sailfish
>> <NIXCAPSsailfish@NIXCAPSunforgettable.com> wrote (my responses usually
>> follow points raised):
>> []
>>> Well, mixed results on this. I re-formatter my SSD drive and then
>>> rebooted and selected the bootup Reflect boot menu option. The DOS-like
>> []
>>> I don't have a clue of what went wrong on the first attempts but when
>>> I find time, I will again start from scratch and try the boot menu
>>> Reflect restore procedure since that is the one I must have absolute
>>> confidence in for secure restore confidence.
>>>
>>> Any thoughts on the matter would be appreciated.
>>>
>> I'm not familiar with the "boot menu option". I use the "boot from CD"
>> option, having made the CD; _that_ is the one _I_ "must have" "for
>> secure ["bare metal"] restore confidence". Apologies if that's what
>> you meant.
>
> I use the boot menu option, But have a current copy of Macrium Reflect
> on both a DVD optical disc and a USB flash drive, Triple redundancy. :-)
>
Another great tip. For others who are interested, here's Macrium's HOWTO
for creating rescue media, including bootable USB Flash drive or SD card,

https://kb.macrium.com/KnowledgebaseArticle50210.aspx

--
Sailfish
CDC Covid19 Trends: https://www.facebook.com/groups/624208354841034
Rare Mozilla Stuff: http://tinyurl.com/z86x3sg

Sailfish wrote:
> J. P. Gilliver (John) graced us with on 5/5/2021 11:57 AM:
>> On Wed, 5 May 2021 at 08:10:33, Sailfish
>> <NIXCAPSsailfish@NIXCAPSunforgettable.com> wrote (my responses usually
>> follow points raised):
>>> J. P. Gilliver (John) graced us with on 5/5/2021 5:32 AM:
>>>> On Tue, 4 May 2021 at 20:08:46, Sailfish
>>>> <NIXCAPSsailfish@NIXCAPSunforgettable.com> wrote (my responses
>>>> usually follow points raised):
>>>> []
>>>>> Well, mixed results on this. I re-formatter my SSD drive and then
>>>>> rebooted and selected the bootup Reflect boot menu option. The
>>>>> DOS-like
>>>> []
>>>>> I don't have a clue of what went wrong on the first attempts but
>>>>> when I find time, I will again start from scratch and try the boot
>>>>> menu Reflect restore procedure since that is the one I must have
>>>>> absolute confidence in for secure restore confidence.
>>>>>
>>>>> Any thoughts on the matter would be appreciated.
>>>>>
>>>> I'm not familiar with the "boot menu option". I use the "boot from
>>>> CD" option, having made the CD; _that_ is the one _I_ "must have"
>>>> "for secure ["bare metal"] restore confidence". Apologies if that's
>>>> what you meant.
>>>
>>> Yes, you are correct, it is what I meant. I have several system
>>> restore DVDs for the various Windows versions I have accumulated,
>>> several I
>>
>> "system restore DVDs" implies you mean ones made by Windows. I meant a
>> Macrium CD (used to restore from a .mrimg file on a different drive).
>> When you said "bootup Reflect boot menu option", I assumed (from the
>> word "Reflect") that this was something Macrium. I don't have Macrium
>> _installed_ on this machine: the CD is one I made years ago on another
>> machine.
>>
> Sorry for the confusion. Before visit this thread, I only used Reflect
> for making Clone backups (copies one drive to another at the sector
> level) so that if a disk crashed, I could swap out the last backup
> cloned disk and I am up and going again fairly quickly. So, yes, my
> system restore DVDs were of the Windows variety and I used them for when
> I need to fix a boot sector or some other non-fatal system error on the
> drive.
>
> I did mean the Reflect boot menu option for what I recently installed
> using the Reflect software. I've also created a Macrium Reflect bootable
> SD card in the event that my boot drive version is corrupt.
>
>>> have no real use for anymore, like Win98, 2000, XP, &c (I have those
>>> installed on Virtual Box [VB].) Having the restore ability as part of
>>> the boot menu is too convenient to ignore.
>>
>> So I assume you _do_ have Macrium installed on the HD (or SSD).
>
> On my hard drive, yes, and use it often to clone my drives, as mentioned
> above.
>>>
>>> The more I think about it, the more I'm convinced that my initial
>>> problem was either due to the SSD itself, as Rene surmised or from a
>>> "short between the headsets" when my eyes fell upon tempting new
>>> items to explore and twiddle further before initiating the restore. I
>>> plan to try it again, this time only going directly to the "Restore
>>> image" feature.
>>>
> After further testing, I regret to mention that the problem I
> experienced using the Macrium Reflect book feature is repeatable, both
> from the hard drive boot menu and the standalone SD card boot version.
>
> I've attempted it with several source drives using the same MRimage file
> and get the same restore failure. However, the Windows version of
> Reflect works fine on restoring the drive. I believe it's due to either
> incompatible HD or SSD drivers for these offline Reflect programs or
> maybe the boot level reflect having problems using the single partition
> restore (SSD only) from the 4 partition MRimage file (SSD+3 other HD
> partitions)?
>
> Since the screenshot function doesn't work on the boot version of
> Reflect, I had to take camera shots of the errors, see link below.
> Regrettably, the quality is of less quality but still discernible.
>
> Boot Reflect Error Images: https://imgur.com/a/n9Xrcpr

I see an "Error 5" on the .mrimg, which is a permissions
error and should not happen. Because, in that environment,
the launch of Macrium would be elevated. Since Macrium has to
effectively belong to the "Backup Group" and must be all-powerful
to do what is necessary to effect a Restore, there should be
plenty of horsepower for the problem (the Impersonate privilege).

If the error had been "Error 9", those happen when Macrium processes
NTFS and discovers an "inconsistency" just before a backup begins.
Which is caused by Microsoft modifying how NTFS works, without
telling any one. A version 7 CD should cure that, or a 6.3.1865 or similar
high (patched) Version 6.

But the Error 5 is more pedestrian and happens all the time while
the regular OS is running, and the user forgets to elevate
before doing something (say 0x80070005, error ends in 5).
While running the CD, usually the software operation is better
curated than that, and won't shoot itself in
the foot like that.

The conclusion would be, that some other error condition arose,
and the printout chooses to interpret it as a permissions problem,
when it's some other kind of failure we can't see. You would search
for whatever .log Macrium uses and seek details.

Paul

Paul graced us with on 5/6/2021 12:56 AM:
> Sailfish wrote:
>> J. P. Gilliver (John) graced us with on 5/5/2021 11:57 AM:
>>> On Wed, 5 May 2021 at 08:10:33, Sailfish
[snip/]
>> After further testing, I regret to mention that the problem I
>> experienced using the Macrium Reflect book feature is repeatable,
>> both from the hard drive boot menu and the standalone SD card boot
>> version.
>>
>> I've attempted it with several source drives using the same MRimage
>> file and get the same restore failure. However, the Windows version of
>> Reflect works fine on restoring the drive. I believe it's due to
>> either incompatible HD or SSD drivers for these offline Reflect
>> programs or maybe the boot level reflect having problems using the
>> single partition restore (SSD only) from the 4 partition MRimage file
>> (SSD+3 other HD partitions)?
>>
>> Since the screenshot function doesn't work on the boot version of
>> Reflect, I had to take camera shots of the errors, see link below.
>> Regrettably, the quality is of less quality but still discernible.
>>
>> Boot Reflect Error Images: https://imgur.com/a/n9Xrcpr
>
> I see an "Error 5" on the .mrimg, which is a permissions
> error and should not happen. Because, in that environment,
> the launch of Macrium would be elevated. Since Macrium has to
> effectively belong to the "Backup Group" and must be all-powerful
> to do what is necessary to effect a Restore, there should be
> plenty of horsepower for the problem (the Impersonate privilege).
>
> If the error had been "Error 9", those happen when Macrium processes
> NTFS and discovers an "inconsistency" just before a backup begins.
> Which is caused by Microsoft modifying how NTFS works, without
> telling any one. A version 7 CD should cure that, or a 6.3.1865 or similar
> high (patched) Version 6.
>
> But the Error 5 is more pedestrian and happens all the time while
> the regular OS is running, and the user forgets to elevate
> before doing something (say 0x80070005, error ends in 5).
> While running the CD, usually the software operation is better
> curated than that, and won't shoot itself in
> the foot like that.
>
> The conclusion would be, that some other error condition arose,
> and the printout chooses to interpret it as a permissions problem,
> when it's some other kind of failure we can't see. You would search
> for whatever .log Macrium uses and seek details.
>
I had viewed the log and all of the steps completed fine until the very
last which indicated a failure without much details. I'll run it again
in a bit and save the log. I also want to perform other test cases to
isolate the other unknowns, e.g. run a image backup but only containing
the SSD drive thus removing the added HDs that are now in the existing
image file. If that fails, I will then try to restore the HD backup from
the image to see if that works. The HD will take some down time since
its size is over a TB. Hopefully I can slim the problem down to get a
better grasp.

--
Sailfish
CDC Covid19 Trends: https://www.facebook.com/groups/624208354841034
Rare Mozilla Stuff: http://tinyurl.com/z86x3sg

Sailfish graced us with on 5/6/2021 9:43 AM:
> Paul graced us with on 5/6/2021 12:56 AM:
>> Sailfish wrote:
>>> J. P. Gilliver (John) graced us with on 5/5/2021 11:57 AM:
>>>> On Wed, 5 May 2021 at 08:10:33, Sailfish
> [snip/]
>>> After further testing, I regret to mention that the problem I
>>> experienced using the Macrium Reflect book feature is repeatable,
>>> both from the hard drive boot menu and the standalone SD card boot
>>> version.
>>>
>>> I've attempted it with several source drives using the same MRimage
>>> file and get the same restore failure. However, the Windows version
>>> of Reflect works fine on restoring the drive. I believe it's due to
>>> either incompatible HD or SSD drivers for these offline Reflect
>>> programs or maybe the boot level reflect having problems using the
>>> single partition restore (SSD only) from the 4 partition MRimage file
>>> (SSD+3 other HD partitions)?
>>>
>>> Since the screenshot function doesn't work on the boot version of
>>> Reflect, I had to take camera shots of the errors, see link below.
>>> Regrettably, the quality is of less quality but still discernible.
>>>
>>> Boot Reflect Error Images: https://imgur.com/a/n9Xrcpr
>>
>> I see an "Error 5" on the .mrimg, which is a permissions
>> error and should not happen. Because, in that environment,
>> the launch of Macrium would be elevated. Since Macrium has to
>> effectively belong to the "Backup Group" and must be all-powerful
>> to do what is necessary to effect a Restore, there should be
>> plenty of horsepower for the problem (the Impersonate privilege).
>>
>> If the error had been "Error 9", those happen when Macrium processes
>> NTFS and discovers an "inconsistency" just before a backup begins.
>> Which is caused by Microsoft modifying how NTFS works, without
>> telling any one. A version 7 CD should cure that, or a 6.3.1865 or
>> similar
>> high (patched) Version 6.
>>
>> But the Error 5 is more pedestrian and happens all the time while
>> the regular OS is running, and the user forgets to elevate
>> before doing something (say 0x80070005, error ends in 5).
>> While running the CD, usually the software operation is better
>> curated than that, and won't shoot itself in
>> the foot like that.
>>
>> The conclusion would be, that some other error condition arose,
>> and the printout chooses to interpret it as a permissions problem,
>> when it's some other kind of failure we can't see. You would search
>> for whatever .log Macrium uses and seek details.
>>
> I had viewed the log and all of the steps completed fine until the very
> last which indicated a failure without much details. I'll run it again
> in a bit and save the log. I also want to perform other test cases to
> isolate the other unknowns, e.g. run a image backup but only containing
> the SSD drive thus removing the added HDs that are now in the existing
> image file. If that fails, I will then try to restore the HD backup from
> the image to see if that works. The HD will take some down time since
> its size is over a TB. Hopefully I can slim the problem down to get a
> better grasp.
>
Something's happening here
What it is ain't exactly clear

Begging forgiveness from Buffalo Springfield ...

In Win7 I made another MRimage backup file but this time with just the
SSD. Booting Reflect up from boot menu and attempting to open the SSD
MRimage gave an "Unable to load file" error to again, I was able to open
and restore the SSD easily from Win7 Reflect. btw, I also verify that
both the bootup Reflect and the Win7 Reflect are the same version level
v7.3.5854.

Images: https://imgur.com/a/a2GstE5

At this point I'm heavily leaning on it being the boot Reflect disk
drivers since the one on Win7 are provided by the OS while the ones as
part of the boot Reflect may not be. Unless anyone has other
suggestions, I'll submit what I have through their support channel.

curiouser and curiouser

--
Sailfish
CDC Covid19 Trends: https://www.facebook.com/groups/624208354841034
Rare Mozilla Stuff: http://tinyurl.com/z86x3sg

On 2021-05-06 3:43 p.m., Sailfish wrote:
> Sailfish graced us with on 5/6/2021 9:43 AM:
>> Paul graced us with on 5/6/2021 12:56 AM:
>>> Sailfish wrote:
>>>> J. P. Gilliver (John) graced us with on 5/5/2021 11:57 AM:
>>>>> On Wed, 5 May 2021 at 08:10:33, Sailfish
>> [snip/]
>>>> After further testing, I regret to mention that the problem I
>>>> experienced  using the Macrium Reflect book feature is repeatable,
>>>> both from the hard drive boot menu and the standalone SD card boot
>>>> version.
>>>>
>>>> I've attempted it with several source drives using the same MRimage
>>>> file and get the same restore failure. However, the Windows version
>>>> of Reflect works fine on restoring the drive. I believe it's due to
>>>> either incompatible HD or SSD drivers for these offline Reflect
>>>> programs or maybe the boot level reflect having problems using the
>>>> single partition restore (SSD only) from the 4 partition MRimage
>>>> file (SSD+3 other HD partitions)?
>>>>
>>>> Since the screenshot function doesn't work on the boot version of
>>>> Reflect, I had to take camera shots of the errors, see link below.
>>>> Regrettably, the quality is of less quality but still discernible.
>>>>
>>>> Boot Reflect Error Images: https://imgur.com/a/n9Xrcpr
>>>
>>> I see an "Error 5" on the .mrimg, which is a permissions
>>> error and should not happen. Because, in that environment,
>>> the launch of Macrium would be elevated. Since Macrium has to
>>> effectively belong to the "Backup Group" and must be all-powerful
>>> to do what is necessary to effect a Restore, there should be
>>> plenty of horsepower for the problem (the Impersonate privilege).
>>>
>>> If the error had been "Error 9", those happen when Macrium processes
>>> NTFS and discovers an "inconsistency" just before a backup begins.
>>> Which is caused by Microsoft modifying how NTFS works, without
>>> telling any one. A version 7 CD should cure that, or a 6.3.1865 or
>>> similar
>>> high (patched) Version 6.
>>>
>>> But the Error 5 is more pedestrian and happens all the time while
>>> the regular OS is running, and the user forgets to elevate
>>> before doing something (say 0x80070005, error ends in 5).
>>> While running the CD, usually the software operation is better
>>> curated than that, and won't shoot itself in
>>> the foot like that.
>>>
>>> The conclusion would be, that some other error condition arose,
>>> and the printout chooses to interpret it as a permissions problem,
>>> when it's some other kind of failure we can't see. You would search
>>> for whatever .log Macrium uses and seek details.
>>>
>> I had viewed the log and all of the steps completed fine until the
>> very last which indicated a failure without much details. I'll run it
>> again in a bit and save the log. I also want to perform other test
>> cases to isolate the other unknowns, e.g. run a image backup but only
>> containing the SSD drive thus removing the added HDs that are now in
>> the existing image file. If that fails, I will then try to restore the
>> HD backup from the image to see if that works. The HD will take some
>> down time since its size is over a TB. Hopefully I can slim the
>> problem down to get a better grasp.
>>
> Something's happening here
> What it is ain't exactly clear
>
> Begging forgiveness from Buffalo Springfield ...
>
> In Win7 I made another MRimage backup file but this time with just the
> SSD. Booting Reflect up from boot menu and attempting to open the SSD
> MRimage gave an "Unable to load file" error to again, I was able to open
> and restore the SSD easily from Win7 Reflect. btw, I also verify that
> both the bootup Reflect and the Win7 Reflect are the same version level
> v7.3.5854.
>
> Images: https://imgur.com/a/a2GstE5
>
> At this point I'm heavily leaning on it being the boot Reflect disk
> drivers since the one on Win7 are provided by the OS while the ones as
> part of the boot Reflect may not be. Unless anyone has other
> suggestions, I'll submit what I have through their support channel.
>
> curiouser and curiouser
>
>

Seeing I am running Windows 10 and a UEFI (bios), there may be
differences in our end results, so I won't try and confuse you with
Windows 10 results and actions.

Rene

Sailfish wrote:
> Sailfish graced us with on 5/6/2021 9:43 AM:
>> Paul graced us with on 5/6/2021 12:56 AM:
>>> Sailfish wrote:
>>>> J. P. Gilliver (John) graced us with on 5/5/2021 11:57 AM:
>>>>> On Wed, 5 May 2021 at 08:10:33, Sailfish
>> [snip/]
>>>> After further testing, I regret to mention that the problem I
>>>> experienced using the Macrium Reflect book feature is repeatable,
>>>> both from the hard drive boot menu and the standalone SD card boot
>>>> version.
>>>>
>>>> I've attempted it with several source drives using the same MRimage
>>>> file and get the same restore failure. However, the Windows version
>>>> of Reflect works fine on restoring the drive. I believe it's due to
>>>> either incompatible HD or SSD drivers for these offline Reflect
>>>> programs or maybe the boot level reflect having problems using the
>>>> single partition restore (SSD only) from the 4 partition MRimage
>>>> file (SSD+3 other HD partitions)?
>>>>
>>>> Since the screenshot function doesn't work on the boot version of
>>>> Reflect, I had to take camera shots of the errors, see link below.
>>>> Regrettably, the quality is of less quality but still discernible.
>>>>
>>>> Boot Reflect Error Images: https://imgur.com/a/n9Xrcpr
>>>
>>> I see an "Error 5" on the .mrimg, which is a permissions
>>> error and should not happen. Because, in that environment,
>>> the launch of Macrium would be elevated. Since Macrium has to
>>> effectively belong to the "Backup Group" and must be all-powerful
>>> to do what is necessary to effect a Restore, there should be
>>> plenty of horsepower for the problem (the Impersonate privilege).
>>>
>>> If the error had been "Error 9", those happen when Macrium processes
>>> NTFS and discovers an "inconsistency" just before a backup begins.
>>> Which is caused by Microsoft modifying how NTFS works, without
>>> telling any one. A version 7 CD should cure that, or a 6.3.1865 or
>>> similar
>>> high (patched) Version 6.
>>>
>>> But the Error 5 is more pedestrian and happens all the time while
>>> the regular OS is running, and the user forgets to elevate
>>> before doing something (say 0x80070005, error ends in 5).
>>> While running the CD, usually the software operation is better
>>> curated than that, and won't shoot itself in
>>> the foot like that.
>>>
>>> The conclusion would be, that some other error condition arose,
>>> and the printout chooses to interpret it as a permissions problem,
>>> when it's some other kind of failure we can't see. You would search
>>> for whatever .log Macrium uses and seek details.
>>>
>> I had viewed the log and all of the steps completed fine until the
>> very last which indicated a failure without much details. I'll run it
>> again in a bit and save the log. I also want to perform other test
>> cases to isolate the other unknowns, e.g. run a image backup but only
>> containing the SSD drive thus removing the added HDs that are now in
>> the existing image file. If that fails, I will then try to restore the
>> HD backup from the image to see if that works. The HD will take some
>> down time since its size is over a TB. Hopefully I can slim the
>> problem down to get a better grasp.
>>
> Something's happening here
> What it is ain't exactly clear
>
> Begging forgiveness from Buffalo Springfield ...
>
> In Win7 I made another MRimage backup file but this time with just the
> SSD. Booting Reflect up from boot menu and attempting to open the SSD
> MRimage gave an "Unable to load file" error to again, I was able to open
> and restore the SSD easily from Win7 Reflect. btw, I also verify that
> both the bootup Reflect and the Win7 Reflect are the same version level
> v7.3.5854.
>
> Images: https://imgur.com/a/a2GstE5
>
> At this point I'm heavily leaning on it being the boot Reflect disk
> drivers since the one on Win7 are provided by the OS while the ones as
> part of the boot Reflect may not be. Unless anyone has other
> suggestions, I'll submit what I have through their support channel.
>
> curiouser and curiouser

Either an OS has a set of SIDs (Security IDs) or it doesn't.

I don't generally see permission issues with WinPE environments,
although I also haven't tried attacking Program Files from WinPE.
(What's in there is owned by TrustedInstaller, not Administrator,
and that's on purpose - TrustedInstaller has no login account,
no home directory, and only exists as a "token" when used. The
token is copied from a particular running process, and if that
process is not running, you can't copy the token.)

But if you are getting an Error 5, that's a permissions issue,
and there's something about the environment that's doing it.
One of the problems would be, dumping information on the
topic while the full set of GUIs is not available. For
example, if you had access to file Properties, and the
Security Tab in the Properties window, you could see whether
the various owners of files, their names are decoded. In a
WinPE environment, you would not expect to see the regular
account names.

Modern Macrium, has switched from using pure WinPE, to using
both WinRE (stolen) and WinPE (downloaded) methods for emergency
boot. And the WinRE recovery environment, does it load the
running system registry hives ? I wonder.

macrium makes it easy to be using WinRE, versus WinPE requires
some selection to be made. WinPE is typically made, by downloading
portions of WADK kit. Then compressing and storing the lot, for
later media build attempts.

Paul

Rene Lamontagne graced us with on 5/6/2021 1:54 PM:
> On 2021-05-06 3:43 p.m., Sailfish wrote:
>> Sailfish graced us with on 5/6/2021 9:43 AM:
>>> Paul graced us with on 5/6/2021 12:56 AM:
>>>> Sailfish wrote:
>>>>> J. P. Gilliver (John) graced us with on 5/5/2021 11:57 AM:
>>>>>> On Wed, 5 May 2021 at 08:10:33, Sailfish
>>> [snip/]
>>>>> After further testing, I regret to mention that the problem I
>>>>> experienced using the Macrium Reflect book feature is repeatable,
>>>>> both from the hard drive boot menu and the standalone SD card boot
>>>>> version.
>>>>>
>>>>> I've attempted it with several source drives using the same MRimage
>>>>> file and get the same restore failure. However, the Windows version
>>>>> of Reflect works fine on restoring the drive. I believe it's due to
>>>>> either incompatible HD or SSD drivers for these offline Reflect
>>>>> programs or maybe the boot level reflect having problems using the
>>>>> single partition restore (SSD only) from the 4 partition MRimage
>>>>> file (SSD+3 other HD partitions)?
>>>>>
>>>>> Since the screenshot function doesn't work on the boot version of
>>>>> Reflect, I had to take camera shots of the errors, see link below.
>>>>> Regrettably, the quality is of less quality but still discernible.
>>>>>
>>>>> Boot Reflect Error Images: https://imgur.com/a/n9Xrcpr
>>>>
>>>> I see an "Error 5" on the .mrimg, which is a permissions
>>>> error and should not happen. Because, in that environment,
>>>> the launch of Macrium would be elevated. Since Macrium has to
>>>> effectively belong to the "Backup Group" and must be all-powerful
>>>> to do what is necessary to effect a Restore, there should be
>>>> plenty of horsepower for the problem (the Impersonate privilege).
>>>>
>>>> If the error had been "Error 9", those happen when Macrium processes
>>>> NTFS and discovers an "inconsistency" just before a backup begins.
>>>> Which is caused by Microsoft modifying how NTFS works, without
>>>> telling any one. A version 7 CD should cure that, or a 6.3.1865 or
>>>> similar
>>>> high (patched) Version 6.
>>>>
>>>> But the Error 5 is more pedestrian and happens all the time while
>>>> the regular OS is running, and the user forgets to elevate
>>>> before doing something (say 0x80070005, error ends in 5).
>>>> While running the CD, usually the software operation is better
>>>> curated than that, and won't shoot itself in
>>>> the foot like that.
>>>>
>>>> The conclusion would be, that some other error condition arose,
>>>> and the printout chooses to interpret it as a permissions problem,
>>>> when it's some other kind of failure we can't see. You would search
>>>> for whatever .log Macrium uses and seek details.
>>>>
>>> I had viewed the log and all of the steps completed fine until the
>>> very last which indicated a failure without much details. I'll run it
>>> again in a bit and save the log. I also want to perform other test
>>> cases to isolate the other unknowns, e.g. run a image backup but only
>>> containing the SSD drive thus removing the added HDs that are now in
>>> the existing image file. If that fails, I will then try to restore
>>> the HD backup from the image to see if that works. The HD will take
>>> some down time since its size is over a TB. Hopefully I can slim the
>>> problem down to get a better grasp.
>>>
>> Something's happening here
>> What it is ain't exactly clear
>>
>> Begging forgiveness from Buffalo Springfield ...
>>
>> In Win7 I made another MRimage backup file but this time with just the
>> SSD. Booting Reflect up from boot menu and attempting to open the SSD
>> MRimage gave an "Unable to load file" error to again, I was able to
>> open and restore the SSD easily from Win7 Reflect. btw, I also verify
>> that both the bootup Reflect and the Win7 Reflect are the same version
>> level v7.3.5854.
>>
>> Images: https://imgur.com/a/a2GstE5
>>
>> At this point I'm heavily leaning on it being the boot Reflect disk
>> drivers since the one on Win7 are provided by the OS while the ones as
>> part of the boot Reflect may not be. Unless anyone has other
>> suggestions, I'll submit what I have through their support channel.
>>
>> curiouser and curiouser
>
> Seeing I am running Windows 10 and a UEFI (bios), there may be
> differences in our end results, so I won't try and confuse you with
> Windows 10 results and actions.
>
I also have a UEFI bios so since the problem seems to only exist using
the boot version of Reflect you seem to be implying that it amy be the
was my Win7 Reflect is formatting the MRimage file, yes? Or, are you
thinking it may be related to something else?

--
Sailfish
CDC Covid19 Trends: https://www.facebook.com/groups/624208354841034
Rare Mozilla Stuff: http://tinyurl.com/z86x3sg

On 2021-05-06 8:13 p.m., Sailfish wrote:
> Rene Lamontagne graced us with on 5/6/2021 1:54 PM:
>> On 2021-05-06 3:43 p.m., Sailfish wrote:
>>> Sailfish graced us with on 5/6/2021 9:43 AM:
>>>> Paul graced us with on 5/6/2021 12:56 AM:
>>>>> Sailfish wrote:
>>>>>> J. P. Gilliver (John) graced us with on 5/5/2021 11:57 AM:
>>>>>>> On Wed, 5 May 2021 at 08:10:33, Sailfish
>>>> [snip/]
>>>>>> After further testing, I regret to mention that the problem I
>>>>>> experienced  using the Macrium Reflect book feature is repeatable,
>>>>>> both from the hard drive boot menu and the standalone SD card boot
>>>>>> version.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I've attempted it with several source drives using the same
>>>>>> MRimage file and get the same restore failure. However, the
>>>>>> Windows version of Reflect works fine on restoring the drive. I
>>>>>> believe it's due to either incompatible HD or SSD drivers for
>>>>>> these offline Reflect programs or maybe the boot level reflect
>>>>>> having problems using the single partition restore (SSD only) from
>>>>>> the 4 partition MRimage file (SSD+3 other HD partitions)?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Since the screenshot function doesn't work on the boot version of
>>>>>> Reflect, I had to take camera shots of the errors, see link below.
>>>>>> Regrettably, the quality is of less quality but still discernible.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Boot Reflect Error Images: https://imgur.com/a/n9Xrcpr
>>>>>
>>>>> I see an "Error 5" on the .mrimg, which is a permissions
>>>>> error and should not happen. Because, in that environment,
>>>>> the launch of Macrium would be elevated. Since Macrium has to
>>>>> effectively belong to the "Backup Group" and must be all-powerful
>>>>> to do what is necessary to effect a Restore, there should be
>>>>> plenty of horsepower for the problem (the Impersonate privilege).
>>>>>
>>>>> If the error had been "Error 9", those happen when Macrium processes
>>>>> NTFS and discovers an "inconsistency" just before a backup begins.
>>>>> Which is caused by Microsoft modifying how NTFS works, without
>>>>> telling any one. A version 7 CD should cure that, or a 6.3.1865 or
>>>>> similar
>>>>> high (patched) Version 6.
>>>>>
>>>>> But the Error 5 is more pedestrian and happens all the time while
>>>>> the regular OS is running, and the user forgets to elevate
>>>>> before doing something (say 0x80070005, error ends in 5).
>>>>> While running the CD, usually the software operation is better
>>>>> curated than that, and won't shoot itself in
>>>>> the foot like that.
>>>>>
>>>>> The conclusion would be, that some other error condition arose,
>>>>> and the printout chooses to interpret it as a permissions problem,
>>>>> when it's some other kind of failure we can't see. You would search
>>>>> for whatever .log Macrium uses and seek details.
>>>>>
>>>> I had viewed the log and all of the steps completed fine until the
>>>> very last which indicated a failure without much details. I'll run
>>>> it again in a bit and save the log. I also want to perform other
>>>> test cases to isolate the other unknowns, e.g. run a image backup
>>>> but only containing the SSD drive thus removing the added HDs that
>>>> are now in the existing image file. If that fails, I will then try
>>>> to restore the HD backup from the image to see if that works. The HD
>>>> will take some down time since its size is over a TB. Hopefully I
>>>> can slim the problem down to get a better grasp.
>>>>
>>> Something's happening here
>>> What it is ain't exactly clear
>>>
>>> Begging forgiveness from Buffalo Springfield ...
>>>
>>> In Win7 I made another MRimage backup file but this time with just
>>> the SSD. Booting Reflect up from boot menu and attempting to open the
>>> SSD MRimage gave an "Unable to load file" error to again, I was able
>>> to open and restore the SSD easily from Win7 Reflect. btw, I also
>>> verify that both the bootup Reflect and the Win7 Reflect are the same
>>> version level v7.3.5854.
>>>
>>> Images: https://imgur.com/a/a2GstE5
>>>
>>> At this point I'm heavily leaning on it being the boot Reflect disk
>>> drivers since the one on Win7 are provided by the OS while the ones
>>> as part of the boot Reflect may not be. Unless anyone has other
>>> suggestions, I'll submit what I have through their support channel.
>>>
>>> curiouser and curiouser
>>
>> Seeing I am running Windows 10 and a UEFI (bios),  there may be
>> differences in our end results, so I won't try and confuse you with
>> Windows 10 results and actions.
>>
> I also have a UEFI bios so since the problem seems to only exist using
> the boot version of Reflect you seem to be implying that it amy be the
> was my Win7 Reflect is formatting the MRimage file, yes? Or, are you
> thinking it may be related to something else?
>

I am not sure but I think the Win 7 and Win 10 load different PEs pr
WIMS or some such.
Paul would know much more than I about such stuff, Me I'm more of a
hardware kinda guy.

Rene

Sailfish wrote:
> Rene Lamontagne graced us with on 5/6/2021 1:54 PM:
>> On 2021-05-06 3:43 p.m., Sailfish wrote:
>>> Sailfish graced us with on 5/6/2021 9:43 AM:
>>>> Paul graced us with on 5/6/2021 12:56 AM:
>>>>> Sailfish wrote:
>>>>>> J. P. Gilliver (John) graced us with on 5/5/2021 11:57 AM:
>>>>>>> On Wed, 5 May 2021 at 08:10:33, Sailfish
>>>> [snip/]
>>>>>> After further testing, I regret to mention that the problem I
>>>>>> experienced using the Macrium Reflect book feature is repeatable,
>>>>>> both from the hard drive boot menu and the standalone SD card boot
>>>>>> version.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I've attempted it with several source drives using the same
>>>>>> MRimage file and get the same restore failure. However, the
>>>>>> Windows version of Reflect works fine on restoring the drive. I
>>>>>> believe it's due to either incompatible HD or SSD drivers for
>>>>>> these offline Reflect programs or maybe the boot level reflect
>>>>>> having problems using the single partition restore (SSD only) from
>>>>>> the 4 partition MRimage file (SSD+3 other HD partitions)?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Since the screenshot function doesn't work on the boot version of
>>>>>> Reflect, I had to take camera shots of the errors, see link below.
>>>>>> Regrettably, the quality is of less quality but still discernible.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Boot Reflect Error Images: https://imgur.com/a/n9Xrcpr
>>>>>
>>>>> I see an "Error 5" on the .mrimg, which is a permissions
>>>>> error and should not happen. Because, in that environment,
>>>>> the launch of Macrium would be elevated. Since Macrium has to
>>>>> effectively belong to the "Backup Group" and must be all-powerful
>>>>> to do what is necessary to effect a Restore, there should be
>>>>> plenty of horsepower for the problem (the Impersonate privilege).
>>>>>
>>>>> If the error had been "Error 9", those happen when Macrium processes
>>>>> NTFS and discovers an "inconsistency" just before a backup begins.
>>>>> Which is caused by Microsoft modifying how NTFS works, without
>>>>> telling any one. A version 7 CD should cure that, or a 6.3.1865 or
>>>>> similar
>>>>> high (patched) Version 6.
>>>>>
>>>>> But the Error 5 is more pedestrian and happens all the time while
>>>>> the regular OS is running, and the user forgets to elevate
>>>>> before doing something (say 0x80070005, error ends in 5).
>>>>> While running the CD, usually the software operation is better
>>>>> curated than that, and won't shoot itself in
>>>>> the foot like that.
>>>>>
>>>>> The conclusion would be, that some other error condition arose,
>>>>> and the printout chooses to interpret it as a permissions problem,
>>>>> when it's some other kind of failure we can't see. You would search
>>>>> for whatever .log Macrium uses and seek details.
>>>>>
>>>> I had viewed the log and all of the steps completed fine until the
>>>> very last which indicated a failure without much details. I'll run
>>>> it again in a bit and save the log. I also want to perform other
>>>> test cases to isolate the other unknowns, e.g. run a image backup
>>>> but only containing the SSD drive thus removing the added HDs that
>>>> are now in the existing image file. If that fails, I will then try
>>>> to restore the HD backup from the image to see if that works. The HD
>>>> will take some down time since its size is over a TB. Hopefully I
>>>> can slim the problem down to get a better grasp.
>>>>
>>> Something's happening here
>>> What it is ain't exactly clear
>>>
>>> Begging forgiveness from Buffalo Springfield ...
>>>
>>> In Win7 I made another MRimage backup file but this time with just
>>> the SSD. Booting Reflect up from boot menu and attempting to open the
>>> SSD MRimage gave an "Unable to load file" error to again, I was able
>>> to open and restore the SSD easily from Win7 Reflect. btw, I also
>>> verify that both the bootup Reflect and the Win7 Reflect are the same
>>> version level v7.3.5854.
>>>
>>> Images: https://imgur.com/a/a2GstE5
>>>
>>> At this point I'm heavily leaning on it being the boot Reflect disk
>>> drivers since the one on Win7 are provided by the OS while the ones
>>> as part of the boot Reflect may not be. Unless anyone has other
>>> suggestions, I'll submit what I have through their support channel.
>>>
>>> curiouser and curiouser
>>
>> Seeing I am running Windows 10 and a UEFI (bios), there may be
>> differences in our end results, so I won't try and confuse you with
>> Windows 10 results and actions.
>>
> I also have a UEFI bios so since the problem seems to only exist using
> the boot version of Reflect you seem to be implying that it amy be the
> was my Win7 Reflect is formatting the MRimage file, yes? Or, are you
> thinking it may be related to something else?
>

Is there a "Log" tab in the interface ?

http://reflect.macrium.com/help/v5/main_screen/log.htm

I think that's for Macrium as run from C: , and not for the
other modes of operation.

Paul

Paul graced us with on 5/6/2021 2:09 PM:
> Sailfish wrote:
>> Sailfish graced us with on 5/6/2021 9:43 AM:
>>> Paul graced us with on 5/6/2021 12:56 AM:
>>>> Sailfish wrote:
>>>>> J. P. Gilliver (John) graced us with on 5/5/2021 11:57 AM:
>>>>>> On Wed, 5 May 2021 at 08:10:33, Sailfish
>>> [snip/]
>>>>> After further testing, I regret to mention that the problem I
>>>>> experienced using the Macrium Reflect book feature is repeatable,
>>>>> both from the hard drive boot menu and the standalone SD card boot
>>>>> version.
>>>>>
>>>>> I've attempted it with several source drives using the same MRimage
>>>>> file and get the same restore failure. However, the Windows version
>>>>> of Reflect works fine on restoring the drive. I believe it's due to
>>>>> either incompatible HD or SSD drivers for these offline Reflect
>>>>> programs or maybe the boot level reflect having problems using the
>>>>> single partition restore (SSD only) from the 4 partition MRimage
>>>>> file (SSD+3 other HD partitions)?
>>>>>
>>>>> Since the screenshot function doesn't work on the boot version of
>>>>> Reflect, I had to take camera shots of the errors, see link below.
>>>>> Regrettably, the quality is of less quality but still discernible.
>>>>>
>>>>> Boot Reflect Error Images: https://imgur.com/a/n9Xrcpr
>>>>
>>>> I see an "Error 5" on the .mrimg, which is a permissions
>>>> error and should not happen. Because, in that environment,
>>>> the launch of Macrium would be elevated. Since Macrium has to
>>>> effectively belong to the "Backup Group" and must be all-powerful
>>>> to do what is necessary to effect a Restore, there should be
>>>> plenty of horsepower for the problem (the Impersonate privilege).
>>>>
>>>> If the error had been "Error 9", those happen when Macrium processes
>>>> NTFS and discovers an "inconsistency" just before a backup begins.
>>>> Which is caused by Microsoft modifying how NTFS works, without
>>>> telling any one. A version 7 CD should cure that, or a 6.3.1865 or
>>>> similar
>>>> high (patched) Version 6.
>>>>
>>>> But the Error 5 is more pedestrian and happens all the time while
>>>> the regular OS is running, and the user forgets to elevate
>>>> before doing something (say 0x80070005, error ends in 5).
>>>> While running the CD, usually the software operation is better
>>>> curated than that, and won't shoot itself in
>>>> the foot like that.
>>>>
>>>> The conclusion would be, that some other error condition arose,
>>>> and the printout chooses to interpret it as a permissions problem,
>>>> when it's some other kind of failure we can't see. You would search
>>>> for whatever .log Macrium uses and seek details.
>>>>
>>> I had viewed the log and all of the steps completed fine until the
>>> very last which indicated a failure without much details. I'll run it
>>> again in a bit and save the log. I also want to perform other test
>>> cases to isolate the other unknowns, e.g. run a image backup but only
>>> containing the SSD drive thus removing the added HDs that are now in
>>> the existing image file. If that fails, I will then try to restore
>>> the HD backup from the image to see if that works. The HD will take
>>> some down time since its size is over a TB. Hopefully I can slim the
>>> problem down to get a better grasp.
>>>
>> Something's happening here
>> What it is ain't exactly clear
>>
>> Begging forgiveness from Buffalo Springfield ...
>>
>> In Win7 I made another MRimage backup file but this time with just the
>> SSD. Booting Reflect up from boot menu and attempting to open the SSD
>> MRimage gave an "Unable to load file" error to again, I was able to
>> open and restore the SSD easily from Win7 Reflect. btw, I also verify
>> that both the bootup Reflect and the Win7 Reflect are the same version
>> level v7.3.5854.
>>
>> Images: https://imgur.com/a/a2GstE5
>>
>> At this point I'm heavily leaning on it being the boot Reflect disk
>> drivers since the one on Win7 are provided by the OS while the ones as
>> part of the boot Reflect may not be. Unless anyone has other
>> suggestions, I'll submit what I have through their support channel.
>>
>> curiouser and curiouser
>
> Either an OS has a set of SIDs (Security IDs) or it doesn't.
>
> I don't generally see permission issues with WinPE environments,
> although I also haven't tried attacking Program Files from WinPE.
> (What's in there is owned by TrustedInstaller, not Administrator,
> and that's on purpose - TrustedInstaller has no login account,
> no home directory, and only exists as a "token" when used. The
> token is copied from a particular running process, and if that
> process is not running, you can't copy the token.)
>
Bare with me while provide more information on my user settings in an
attempt to get a clearer understanding. My account is set to
Administrator and I have set UAC to the minimum setting. The above
explanation seems to only apply to the Win7 version of Reflect (which
handles the restoration properly) and not the boot level version or am I
misunderstanding that?

> But if you are getting an Error 5, that's a permissions issue,
> and there's something about the environment that's doing it.
> One of the problems would be, dumping information on the
> topic while the full set of GUIs is not available. For
> example, if you had access to file Properties, and the
> Security Tab in the Properties window, you could see whether
> the various owners of files, their names are decoded. In a
> WinPE environment, you would not expect to see the regular
> account names.
>
I only received the Error 5 from the image file that contained both the
SSD + the 3 HD partitions after it seemed to load the image file and
began to restore the SSD + HD partitions (although, the process never
showed any movement of the progress bar.) The only message I get from on
selecting the SSD-only image is an immediate popup window indicating
that the boot version of Reflect is unable to load the file. The link
below is a set of Win7 File Properties screenshot, 2 for each of the 2
..mring file test cases. Hopefully, they prove helpful.

Win7 MRimg files property screenshot: https://imgur.com/a/I8m7E5R

> Modern Macrium, has switched from using pure WinPE, to using
> both WinRE (stolen) and WinPE (downloaded) methods for emergency
> boot. And the WinRE recovery environment, does it load the
> running system registry hives ? I wonder.
>
> macrium makes it easy to be using WinRE, versus WinPE requires
> some selection to be made. WinPE is typically made, by downloading
> portions of WADK kit. Then compressing and storing the lot, for
> later media build attempts.

--
Sailfish
CDC Covid19 Trends: https://www.facebook.com/groups/624208354841034
Rare Mozilla Stuff: http://tinyurl.com/z86x3sg

Paul graced us with on 5/6/2021 7:17 PM:
> Sailfish wrote:
>> Rene Lamontagne graced us with on 5/6/2021 1:54 PM:
>>> On 2021-05-06 3:43 p.m., Sailfish wrote:
>>>> Sailfish graced us with on 5/6/2021 9:43 AM:
>>>>> Paul graced us with on 5/6/2021 12:56 AM:
>>>>>> Sailfish wrote:
>>>>>>> J. P. Gilliver (John) graced us with on 5/5/2021 11:57 AM:
>>>>>>>> On Wed, 5 May 2021 at 08:10:33, Sailfish
>>>>> [snip/]
>>>>>>> After further testing, I regret to mention that the problem I
>>>>>>> experienced using the Macrium Reflect book feature is
>>>>>>> repeatable, both from the hard drive boot menu and the standalone
>>>>>>> SD card boot version.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I've attempted it with several source drives using the same
>>>>>>> MRimage file and get the same restore failure. However, the
>>>>>>> Windows version of Reflect works fine on restoring the drive. I
>>>>>>> believe it's due to either incompatible HD or SSD drivers for
>>>>>>> these offline Reflect programs or maybe the boot level reflect
>>>>>>> having problems using the single partition restore (SSD only)
>>>>>>> from the 4 partition MRimage file (SSD+3 other HD partitions)?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Since the screenshot function doesn't work on the boot version of
>>>>>>> Reflect, I had to take camera shots of the errors, see link
>>>>>>> below. Regrettably, the quality is of less quality but still
>>>>>>> discernible.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Boot Reflect Error Images: https://imgur.com/a/n9Xrcpr
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I see an "Error 5" on the .mrimg, which is a permissions
>>>>>> error and should not happen. Because, in that environment,
>>>>>> the launch of Macrium would be elevated. Since Macrium has to
>>>>>> effectively belong to the "Backup Group" and must be all-powerful
>>>>>> to do what is necessary to effect a Restore, there should be
>>>>>> plenty of horsepower for the problem (the Impersonate privilege).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If the error had been "Error 9", those happen when Macrium processes
>>>>>> NTFS and discovers an "inconsistency" just before a backup begins.
>>>>>> Which is caused by Microsoft modifying how NTFS works, without
>>>>>> telling any one. A version 7 CD should cure that, or a 6.3.1865 or
>>>>>> similar
>>>>>> high (patched) Version 6.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But the Error 5 is more pedestrian and happens all the time while
>>>>>> the regular OS is running, and the user forgets to elevate
>>>>>> before doing something (say 0x80070005, error ends in 5).
>>>>>> While running the CD, usually the software operation is better
>>>>>> curated than that, and won't shoot itself in
>>>>>> the foot like that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The conclusion would be, that some other error condition arose,
>>>>>> and the printout chooses to interpret it as a permissions problem,
>>>>>> when it's some other kind of failure we can't see. You would search
>>>>>> for whatever .log Macrium uses and seek details.
>>>>>>
>>>>> I had viewed the log and all of the steps completed fine until the
>>>>> very last which indicated a failure without much details. I'll run
>>>>> it again in a bit and save the log. I also want to perform other
>>>>> test cases to isolate the other unknowns, e.g. run a image backup
>>>>> but only containing the SSD drive thus removing the added HDs that
>>>>> are now in the existing image file. If that fails, I will then try
>>>>> to restore the HD backup from the image to see if that works. The
>>>>> HD will take some down time since its size is over a TB. Hopefully
>>>>> I can slim the problem down to get a better grasp.
>>>>>
>>>> Something's happening here
>>>> What it is ain't exactly clear
>>>>
>>>> Begging forgiveness from Buffalo Springfield ...
>>>>
>>>> In Win7 I made another MRimage backup file but this time with just
>>>> the SSD. Booting Reflect up from boot menu and attempting to open
>>>> the SSD MRimage gave an "Unable to load file" error to again, I was
>>>> able to open and restore the SSD easily from Win7 Reflect. btw, I
>>>> also verify that both the bootup Reflect and the Win7 Reflect are
>>>> the same version level v7.3.5854.
>>>>
>>>> Images: https://imgur.com/a/a2GstE5
>>>>
>>>> At this point I'm heavily leaning on it being the boot Reflect disk
>>>> drivers since the one on Win7 are provided by the OS while the ones
>>>> as part of the boot Reflect may not be. Unless anyone has other
>>>> suggestions, I'll submit what I have through their support channel.
>>>>
>>>> curiouser and curiouser
>>>
>>> Seeing I am running Windows 10 and a UEFI (bios), there may be
>>> differences in our end results, so I won't try and confuse you with
>>> Windows 10 results and actions.
>>>
>> I also have a UEFI bios so since the problem seems to only exist using
>> the boot version of Reflect you seem to be implying that it amy be the
>> was my Win7 Reflect is formatting the MRimage file, yes? Or, are you
>> thinking it may be related to something else?
>
> Is there a "Log" tab in the interface ?
>
> http://reflect.macrium.com/help/v5/main_screen/log.htm
>
There is a log after a restore operation completes; however, I believe I
may have found something that may help isolating the problem.

This last run I tried to restore the SSD partition from the SSD+HD
partitions MRimage file but this time I selected the Verification
checkbox before starting the operation. It immediately returned a "Data
verification failed. Block 0 File Offset {large decimal number}. The it
displayed a "Restore failed. Error 105" popup.

I'm beginning to think it might be as Rene surmised with the Win7 vs.
Win10 WinRE implementations.

> I think that's for Macrium as run from C: , and not for the
> other modes of operation.
>

--
Sailfish
CDC Covid19 Trends: https://www.facebook.com/groups/624208354841034
Rare Mozilla Stuff: http://tinyurl.com/z86x3sg

Sailfish wrote:
> Paul graced us with on 5/6/2021 7:17 PM:
>> Sailfish wrote:
>>> Rene Lamontagne graced us with on 5/6/2021 1:54 PM:
>>>> On 2021-05-06 3:43 p.m., Sailfish wrote:
>>>>> Sailfish graced us with on 5/6/2021 9:43 AM:
>>>>>> Paul graced us with on 5/6/2021 12:56 AM:
>>>>>>> Sailfish wrote:
>>>>>>>> J. P. Gilliver (John) graced us with on 5/5/2021 11:57 AM:
>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 5 May 2021 at 08:10:33, Sailfish
>>>>>> [snip/]
>>>>>>>> After further testing, I regret to mention that the problem I
>>>>>>>> experienced using the Macrium Reflect book feature is
>>>>>>>> repeatable, both from the hard drive boot menu and the
>>>>>>>> standalone SD card boot version.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I've attempted it with several source drives using the same
>>>>>>>> MRimage file and get the same restore failure. However, the
>>>>>>>> Windows version of Reflect works fine on restoring the drive. I
>>>>>>>> believe it's due to either incompatible HD or SSD drivers for
>>>>>>>> these offline Reflect programs or maybe the boot level reflect
>>>>>>>> having problems using the single partition restore (SSD only)
>>>>>>>> from the 4 partition MRimage file (SSD+3 other HD partitions)?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Since the screenshot function doesn't work on the boot version
>>>>>>>> of Reflect, I had to take camera shots of the errors, see link
>>>>>>>> below. Regrettably, the quality is of less quality but still
>>>>>>>> discernible.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Boot Reflect Error Images: https://imgur.com/a/n9Xrcpr
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I see an "Error 5" on the .mrimg, which is a permissions
>>>>>>> error and should not happen. Because, in that environment,
>>>>>>> the launch of Macrium would be elevated. Since Macrium has to
>>>>>>> effectively belong to the "Backup Group" and must be all-powerful
>>>>>>> to do what is necessary to effect a Restore, there should be
>>>>>>> plenty of horsepower for the problem (the Impersonate privilege).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If the error had been "Error 9", those happen when Macrium processes
>>>>>>> NTFS and discovers an "inconsistency" just before a backup begins.
>>>>>>> Which is caused by Microsoft modifying how NTFS works, without
>>>>>>> telling any one. A version 7 CD should cure that, or a 6.3.1865
>>>>>>> or similar
>>>>>>> high (patched) Version 6.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But the Error 5 is more pedestrian and happens all the time while
>>>>>>> the regular OS is running, and the user forgets to elevate
>>>>>>> before doing something (say 0x80070005, error ends in 5).
>>>>>>> While running the CD, usually the software operation is better
>>>>>>> curated than that, and won't shoot itself in
>>>>>>> the foot like that.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The conclusion would be, that some other error condition arose,
>>>>>>> and the printout chooses to interpret it as a permissions problem,
>>>>>>> when it's some other kind of failure we can't see. You would search
>>>>>>> for whatever .log Macrium uses and seek details.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> I had viewed the log and all of the steps completed fine until the
>>>>>> very last which indicated a failure without much details. I'll run
>>>>>> it again in a bit and save the log. I also want to perform other
>>>>>> test cases to isolate the other unknowns, e.g. run a image backup
>>>>>> but only containing the SSD drive thus removing the added HDs that
>>>>>> are now in the existing image file. If that fails, I will then try
>>>>>> to restore the HD backup from the image to see if that works. The
>>>>>> HD will take some down time since its size is over a TB. Hopefully
>>>>>> I can slim the problem down to get a better grasp.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Something's happening here
>>>>> What it is ain't exactly clear
>>>>>
>>>>> Begging forgiveness from Buffalo Springfield ...
>>>>>
>>>>> In Win7 I made another MRimage backup file but this time with just
>>>>> the SSD. Booting Reflect up from boot menu and attempting to open
>>>>> the SSD MRimage gave an "Unable to load file" error to again, I was
>>>>> able to open and restore the SSD easily from Win7 Reflect. btw, I
>>>>> also verify that both the bootup Reflect and the Win7 Reflect are
>>>>> the same version level v7.3.5854.
>>>>>
>>>>> Images: https://imgur.com/a/a2GstE5
>>>>>
>>>>> At this point I'm heavily leaning on it being the boot Reflect disk
>>>>> drivers since the one on Win7 are provided by the OS while the ones
>>>>> as part of the boot Reflect may not be. Unless anyone has other
>>>>> suggestions, I'll submit what I have through their support channel.
>>>>>
>>>>> curiouser and curiouser
>>>>
>>>> Seeing I am running Windows 10 and a UEFI (bios), there may be
>>>> differences in our end results, so I won't try and confuse you with
>>>> Windows 10 results and actions.
>>>>
>>> I also have a UEFI bios so since the problem seems to only exist
>>> using the boot version of Reflect you seem to be implying that it amy
>>> be the was my Win7 Reflect is formatting the MRimage file, yes? Or,
>>> are you thinking it may be related to something else?
>>
>> Is there a "Log" tab in the interface ?
>>
>> http://reflect.macrium.com/help/v5/main_screen/log.htm
>>
> There is a log after a restore operation completes; however, I believe I
> may have found something that may help isolating the problem.
>
> This last run I tried to restore the SSD partition from the SSD+HD
> partitions MRimage file but this time I selected the Verification
> checkbox before starting the operation. It immediately returned a "Data
> verification failed. Block 0 File Offset {large decimal number}. The it
> displayed a "Restore failed. Error 105" popup.
>
> I'm beginning to think it might be as Rene surmised with the Win7 vs.
> Win10 WinRE implementations.

The individual here gets Error 105, switches from USB3 to USB2 and
it seems to work. A Win7 WinRE as a boot environment, probably doesn't
get a USB3 driver, unless some recipe is followed during media creation,
to add such things. Whereas a Windows 10 WADK based WinPE download would
have the default USB3 class drivers from Windows to do the job.

https://www.windowsphoneinfo.com/threads/issue-with-usb-3-win-re.198116/

Now, what that means, is a "real USB2 port". On quite modern systems,
there might be one of those for the keyboard and mouse connectors. All
the other ports may be "too good" for unassisted Windows 7 usage. You
need to add drivers to Windows 7 goods, if you expect fast ports to work.

Rather than failing verify, your operation failed because the
MRIMG file could not be found (or similar).

What you can't do, is use a Windows 10 WinPE, on a system that lacks
instruction support for the features Windows 10 needs. That would be
a problem, say, on my Northwood P4 system (which can't run Win10,
so can't run Win10 x86 WinPE either). I haven't tested combinations
like that (tried Win10 DVD on crusty computers here) - the Northwood P4
appears to have a Southbridge problem it developed while in storage.
Storing computers really doesn't seem to be good for them :-) The Win10
WinPE might be good enough for about half the computers here. The
crusty ones, not so much. The 440BX with Tualatin, it can't even
read a DVD (no BIOS support!). Plug in a DVD drive, it is just... ignored.
BIOS won't touch it. BIOS on those also won't operate a SATA storage
card addin. Just ignores those too. Damn clever those BIOS people.

Paul graced us with on 5/7/2021 2:36 AM:
> Sailfish wrote:
>> Paul graced us with on 5/6/2021 7:17 PM:
>>> Sailfish wrote:
>>>> Rene Lamontagne graced us with on 5/6/2021 1:54 PM:
>>>>> On 2021-05-06 3:43 p.m., Sailfish wrote:
>>>>>> Sailfish graced us with on 5/6/2021 9:43 AM:
>>>>>>> Paul graced us with on 5/6/2021 12:56 AM:
>>>>>>>> Sailfish wrote:
>>>>>>>>> J. P. Gilliver (John) graced us with on 5/5/2021 11:57 AM:
>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 5 May 2021 at 08:10:33, Sailfish
>>>>>>> [snip/]
>>>>>>>>> After further testing, I regret to mention that the problem I
>>>>>>>>> experienced using the Macrium Reflect book feature is
>>>>>>>>> repeatable, both from the hard drive boot menu and the
>>>>>>>>> standalone SD card boot version.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I've attempted it with several source drives using the same
>>>>>>>>> MRimage file and get the same restore failure. However, the
>>>>>>>>> Windows version of Reflect works fine on restoring the drive. I
>>>>>>>>> believe it's due to either incompatible HD or SSD drivers for
>>>>>>>>> these offline Reflect programs or maybe the boot level reflect
>>>>>>>>> having problems using the single partition restore (SSD only)
>>>>>>>>> from the 4 partition MRimage file (SSD+3 other HD partitions)?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Since the screenshot function doesn't work on the boot version
>>>>>>>>> of Reflect, I had to take camera shots of the errors, see link
>>>>>>>>> below. Regrettably, the quality is of less quality but still
>>>>>>>>> discernible.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Boot Reflect Error Images: https://imgur.com/a/n9Xrcpr
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I see an "Error 5" on the .mrimg, which is a permissions
>>>>>>>> error and should not happen. Because, in that environment,
>>>>>>>> the launch of Macrium would be elevated. Since Macrium has to
>>>>>>>> effectively belong to the "Backup Group" and must be all-powerful
>>>>>>>> to do what is necessary to effect a Restore, there should be
>>>>>>>> plenty of horsepower for the problem (the Impersonate privilege).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If the error had been "Error 9", those happen when Macrium
>>>>>>>> processes
>>>>>>>> NTFS and discovers an "inconsistency" just before a backup begins.
>>>>>>>> Which is caused by Microsoft modifying how NTFS works, without
>>>>>>>> telling any one. A version 7 CD should cure that, or a 6.3.1865
>>>>>>>> or similar
>>>>>>>> high (patched) Version 6.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> But the Error 5 is more pedestrian and happens all the time while
>>>>>>>> the regular OS is running, and the user forgets to elevate
>>>>>>>> before doing something (say 0x80070005, error ends in 5).
>>>>>>>> While running the CD, usually the software operation is better
>>>>>>>> curated than that, and won't shoot itself in
>>>>>>>> the foot like that.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The conclusion would be, that some other error condition arose,
>>>>>>>> and the printout chooses to interpret it as a permissions problem,
>>>>>>>> when it's some other kind of failure we can't see. You would search
>>>>>>>> for whatever .log Macrium uses and seek details.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I had viewed the log and all of the steps completed fine until
>>>>>>> the very last which indicated a failure without much details.
>>>>>>> I'll run it again in a bit and save the log. I also want to
>>>>>>> perform other test cases to isolate the other unknowns, e.g. run
>>>>>>> a image backup but only containing the SSD drive thus removing
>>>>>>> the added HDs that are now in the existing image file. If that
>>>>>>> fails, I will then try to restore the HD backup from the image to
>>>>>>> see if that works. The HD will take some down time since its size
>>>>>>> is over a TB. Hopefully I can slim the problem down to get a
>>>>>>> better grasp.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Something's happening here
>>>>>> What it is ain't exactly clear
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Begging forgiveness from Buffalo Springfield ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In Win7 I made another MRimage backup file but this time with just
>>>>>> the SSD. Booting Reflect up from boot menu and attempting to open
>>>>>> the SSD MRimage gave an "Unable to load file" error to again, I
>>>>>> was able to open and restore the SSD easily from Win7 Reflect.
>>>>>> btw, I also verify that both the bootup Reflect and the Win7
>>>>>> Reflect are the same version level v7.3.5854.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Images: https://imgur.com/a/a2GstE5
>>>>>>
>>>>>> At this point I'm heavily leaning on it being the boot Reflect
>>>>>> disk drivers since the one on Win7 are provided by the OS while
>>>>>> the ones as part of the boot Reflect may not be. Unless anyone has
>>>>>> other suggestions, I'll submit what I have through their support
>>>>>> channel.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> curiouser and curiouser
>>>>>
>>>>> Seeing I am running Windows 10 and a UEFI (bios), there may be
>>>>> differences in our end results, so I won't try and confuse you with
>>>>> Windows 10 results and actions.
>>>>>
>>>> I also have a UEFI bios so since the problem seems to only exist
>>>> using the boot version of Reflect you seem to be implying that it
>>>> amy be the was my Win7 Reflect is formatting the MRimage file, yes?
>>>> Or, are you thinking it may be related to something else?
>>>
>>> Is there a "Log" tab in the interface ?
>>>
>>> http://reflect.macrium.com/help/v5/main_screen/log.htm
>>>
>> There is a log after a restore operation completes; however, I believe
>> I may have found something that may help isolating the problem.
>>
>> This last run I tried to restore the SSD partition from the SSD+HD
>> partitions MRimage file but this time I selected the Verification
>> checkbox before starting the operation. It immediately returned a
>> "Data verification failed. Block 0 File Offset {large decimal number}.
>> The it displayed a "Restore failed. Error 105" popup.
>>
>> I'm beginning to think it might be as Rene surmised with the Win7 vs.
>> Win10 WinRE implementations.
>
> The individual here gets Error 105, switches from USB3 to USB2 and
> it seems to work. A Win7 WinRE as a boot environment, probably doesn't
> get a USB3 driver, unless some recipe is followed during media creation,
> to add such things. Whereas a Windows 10 WADK based WinPE download would
> have the default USB3 class drivers from Windows to do the job.
>
> https://www.windowsphoneinfo.com/threads/issue-with-usb-3-win-re.198116/
>
> Now, what that means, is a "real USB2 port". On quite modern systems,
> there might be one of those for the keyboard and mouse connectors. All
> the other ports may be "too good" for unassisted Windows 7 usage. You
> need to add drivers to Windows 7 goods, if you expect fast ports to work.
>
> Rather than failing verify, your operation failed because the
> MRIMG file could not be found (or similar).
>
> What you can't do, is use a Windows 10 WinPE, on a system that lacks
> instruction support for the features Windows 10 needs. That would be
> a problem, say, on my Northwood P4 system (which can't run Win10,
> so can't run Win10 x86 WinPE either). I haven't tested combinations
> like that (tried Win10 DVD on crusty computers here) - the Northwood P4
> appears to have a Southbridge problem it developed while in storage.
> Storing computers really doesn't seem to be good for them :-) The Win10
> WinPE might be good enough for about half the computers here. The
> crusty ones, not so much. The 440BX with Tualatin, it can't even
> read a DVD (no BIOS support!). Plug in a DVD drive, it is just... ignored.
> BIOS won't touch it. BIOS on those also won't operate a SATA storage
> card addin. Just ignores those too. Damn clever those BIOS people.
>
Paul, thanks for the detailed background. I do have 2 USB3 ports,
however, my WinRE restore is neither reading nor writing to a
USB-connected device. The SSD is internal and connected to a SATA port
and the MRimage file is on another internal SATA HD.

Sailfish wrote:

> Paul, thanks for the detailed background. I do have 2 USB3 ports,
> however, my WinRE restore is neither reading nor writing to a
> USB-connected device. The SSD is internal and connected to a SATA port
> and the MRimage file is on another internal SATA HD.
>
> The link below contains 2 images, the 1st image is a CPU-Z readout of my
> CPU. The 2nd contains the properties of both the SSD (top 2) & HS
> (bottom 2).
>
> Images: https://imgur.com/a/KHep6tf

It's possible with a late failure in the Restore, it
is doing (or attempting to do) something with boot materials.
Adding the MBR boot code. Making changes to the BCD
(on the Active partition). Or for that matter, setting the
boot flag on the Active partition so it is Active.

If it's practically done the entire restoration, then it had drivers.

I wonder if WinRE and WinPE do the same things, when
you make a CD with them. You would not expect Macrium to
latch onto this concept, without testing it.

Paul

Paul graced us with on 5/7/2021 1:52 PM:
> Sailfish wrote:
>
>> Paul, thanks for the detailed background. I do have 2 USB3 ports,
>> however, my WinRE restore is neither reading nor writing to a
>> USB-connected device. The SSD is internal and connected to a SATA port
>> and the MRimage file is on another internal SATA HD.
>>
>> The link below contains 2 images, the 1st image is a CPU-Z readout of
>> my CPU. The 2nd contains the properties of both the SSD (top 2) & HS
>> (bottom 2).
>>
>> Images: https://imgur.com/a/KHep6tf
>
> It's possible with a late failure in the Restore, it
> is doing (or attempting to do) something with boot materials.
> Adding the MBR boot code. Making changes to the BCD
> (on the Active partition). Or for that matter, setting the
> boot flag on the Active partition so it is Active.
>
> If it's practically done the entire restoration, then it had drivers.
>
> I wonder if WinRE and WinPE do the same things, when
> you make a CD with them. You would not expect Macrium to
> latch onto this concept, without testing it.
>
That another puzzling part. The test case where it appeared to complete
the restore was when I used the boot menu installed WinRE; while the
test case where it fails before it even starts was when I was using the
SD card installed WinRE. I will re-attempt the test case where it seems
to restore the partition but failed at the end but this time enable the
Verification check at the beginning to see if it, too, fails the
verification. Also, I never created a DVD WinRE so I should give that a
test case run, as well.

--
Sailfish
CDC Covid19 Trends: https://www.facebook.com/groups/624208354841034
Rare Mozilla Stuff: http://tinyurl.com/z86x3sg

Sailfish graced us with on 5/7/2021 5:04 PM:
> Paul graced us with on 5/7/2021 1:52 PM:
>> Sailfish wrote:
>>
>>> Paul, thanks for the detailed background. I do have 2 USB3 ports,
>>> however, my WinRE restore is neither reading nor writing to a
>>> USB-connected device. The SSD is internal and connected to a SATA
>>> port and the MRimage file is on another internal SATA HD.
>>>
>>> The link below contains 2 images, the 1st image is a CPU-Z readout of
>>> my CPU. The 2nd contains the properties of both the SSD (top 2) & HS
>>> (bottom 2).
>>>
>>> Images: https://imgur.com/a/KHep6tf
>>
>> It's possible with a late failure in the Restore, it
>> is doing (or attempting to do) something with boot materials.
>> Adding the MBR boot code. Making changes to the BCD
>> (on the Active partition). Or for that matter, setting the
>> boot flag on the Active partition so it is Active.
>>
>> If it's practically done the entire restoration, then it had drivers.
>>
>> I wonder if WinRE and WinPE do the same things, when
>> you make a CD with them. You would not expect Macrium to
>> latch onto this concept, without testing it.
>>
> That another puzzling part. The test case where it appeared to complete
> the restore was when I used the boot menu installed WinRE; while the
> test case where it fails before it even starts was when I was using the
> SD card installed WinRE. I will re-attempt the test case where it seems
> to restore the partition but failed at the end but this time enable the
> Verification check at the beginning to see if it, too, fails the
> verification. Also, I never created a DVD WinRE so I should give that a
> test case run, as well.
>
Some good news and some better news.

After taking in the consultation from both Rene & Paul I came to the
conclusion that; one, this problem had to be something on my end since
Macrium Reflect most certainly worked on many other Win7 systems and
two, this problem was probably linked to the Restoration environment I
configured. Reading the online documentation more thoroughly I noticed
that they had two PE versions that were recommended for Win7, WinRE
(default choice) and at the bottom, WinPE 3.1. I had selected WinRE
since it was the default choice. However, while it may work with some
Win7 OSes, it turns out it wouldn't work with mine. I finally selected
WinPE 3.1 from the Advanced Options and have run tests and, so far, boot
recovery is working swimmingly.

The better news is that the restoration process performed an SSD TRIM on
my drive prior to restoring it and now transfer rates are noticeably
faster than before.

Ref:
https://knowledgebase.macrium.com/display/KNOW72/Creating+rescue+media#Creatingrescuemedia-AdvancedOptions

Many thanks to both Rene and Paul for tirelessly working with me on this
problem and after a few more successful stress tests, I plan to make
..mrimg my go-to restore format and the boot WinPE 3.1 my boot level
restore program.

--
Sailfish
CDC Covid19 Trends: https://www.facebook.com/groups/624208354841034
Rare Mozilla Stuff: http://tinyurl.com/z86x3sg

Sailfish wrote:

> Some good news and some better news.
>
> After taking in the consultation from both Rene & Paul I came to the
> conclusion that; one, this problem had to be something on my end since
> Macrium Reflect most certainly worked on many other Win7 systems and
> two, this problem was probably linked to the Restoration environment I
> configured. Reading the online documentation more thoroughly I noticed
> that they had two PE versions that were recommended for Win7, WinRE
> (default choice) and at the bottom, WinPE 3.1. I had selected WinRE
> since it was the default choice. However, while it may work with some
> Win7 OSes, it turns out it wouldn't work with mine. I finally selected
> WinPE 3.1 from the Advanced Options and have run tests and, so far, boot
> recovery is working swimmingly.
>
> The better news is that the restoration process performed an SSD TRIM on
> my drive prior to restoring it and now transfer rates are noticeably
> faster than before.
>
> Ref:
> https://knowledgebase.macrium.com/display/KNOW72/Creating+rescue+media#Creatingrescuemedia-AdvancedOptions
>
>
> Many thanks to both Rene and Paul for tirelessly working with me on this
> problem and after a few more successful stress tests, I plan to make
> .mrimg my go-to restore format and the boot WinPE 3.1 my boot level
> restore program.

I'm glad to hear you're recording some successes there now.

There is a list of WinPE versions here.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Preinstallation_Environment

3.1 Built from Windows 7 SP1 code base. It is included in a
WAIK supplementary update provided by Microsoft.

5.0 Built from Windows 8.1 code base. It is included in
Windows ADK for Windows 8.1.
...
10.0.19041.1 Built from Windows 10 v2004 code base.

Now, I don't know if the contents of these are documented in
any useful way, but I can say that there's a possibility the
WinPE 3.1 version doesn't have a USB3 driver inside it. This means,
if plugging an external USB3 enclosure into a PC and attempting
to restore from it, only USB2 (35MB/sec) rates may result. The
USB3 enclosure will do at least 100MB/sec and quite likely a
bit more when tested in the same conditions.

There might be a few drivers which would need to be
manually bound into the WIM before making the CD media.
Perhaps some weird 10GbE card for restoring from a
file share on a really fast server, that sort of thing.
For a lot of other common network chip types, the driver
is probably already there.

So while the WinPE 3.1 "passed the test", there are a few
more test cases to run, and the USB3 connector is one of them.
And then some of the other WinPE versions might be more interesting.

But you did some good work there with the WinRE for us,
because I'd only uncovered one issue with their silly
new scheme, which was namely, the tendency for the media
preparation code, to grab the wrong WinRE file when
scanning the computer for them. Selecting a WinPE is
a more "assured" result, because there are fewer file
sources and less ways for it to go wrong.

Since your WinRE results weren't good, I'll try to steer
people away from that choice more forcefully from now on.

WinPE preparation tends to fail, if the Microsoft server
holding the files has been gutted. At least one of the
WinPE versions is that way, and cannot really be fully
fetched because files are missing. Any OS which is still
in Extended Support, the file set for the WinPE to make
it is likely to still be intact and undamaged by the
Microsoft idea of "justice served cold".

Moving too far forward, like selecting WinPE 10, would
not be good for older computers, say a P4 machine.
But I haven't tested that. I don't think I have any
backups for the junkroom. The only backups are for
working stuff.

The WinPE 3.1 would be an excellent "full spectrum"
platform, because I could probably run USB2 restores
on most all of the machines. Some of the machines
have CD drives that don't read "burned media" and
only worked with "pressed media", so I'd need to
install a more modern optical drive. Some of the
machines don't boot from USB (that started around
year 2005 or so). So the fleet has a few problems
when you get back in "crusty peripheral era". But
other than that, the WinPE 3.1 could work.

Paul

On 2021-05-08 3:23 a.m., Paul wrote:
> Sailfish wrote:
>
>> Some good news and some better news.
>>
>> After taking in the consultation from both Rene & Paul I came to the
>> conclusion that; one, this problem had to be something on my end since
>> Macrium Reflect most certainly worked on many other Win7 systems and
>> two, this problem was probably linked to the Restoration environment I
>> configured. Reading the online documentation more thoroughly I noticed
>> that they had two PE versions that were recommended for Win7, WinRE
>> (default choice) and at the bottom, WinPE 3.1. I had selected WinRE
>> since it was the default choice. However, while it may work with some
>> Win7 OSes, it turns out it wouldn't work with mine. I finally selected
>> WinPE 3.1 from the Advanced Options and have run tests and, so far,
>> boot recovery is working swimmingly.
>>
>> The better news is that the restoration process performed an SSD TRIM
>> on my drive prior to restoring it and now transfer rates are
>> noticeably faster than before.
>>
>> Ref:
>> https://knowledgebase.macrium.com/display/KNOW72/Creating+rescue+media#Creatingrescuemedia-AdvancedOptions
>>
>>
>> Many thanks to both Rene and Paul for tirelessly working with me on
>> this problem and after a few more successful stress tests, I plan to
>> make .mrimg my go-to restore format and the boot WinPE 3.1 my boot
>> level restore program.
>
> I'm glad to hear you're recording some successes there now.
>
> There is a list of WinPE versions here.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Preinstallation_Environment
>
>   3.1   Built from Windows 7 SP1 code base. It is included in a
>         WAIK supplementary update provided by Microsoft.
>
>   5.0   Built from Windows 8.1 code base. It is included in
>         Windows ADK for Windows 8.1.
>   ...
>   10.0.19041.1  Built from Windows 10 v2004 code base.
>
> Now, I don't know if the contents of these are documented in
> any useful way, but I can say that there's a possibility the
> WinPE 3.1 version doesn't have a USB3 driver inside it. This means,
> if plugging an external USB3 enclosure into a PC and attempting
> to restore from it, only USB2 (35MB/sec) rates may result. The
> USB3 enclosure will do at least 100MB/sec and quite likely a
> bit more when tested in the same conditions.
>
> There might be a few drivers which would need to be
> manually bound into the WIM before making the CD media.
> Perhaps some weird 10GbE card for restoring from a
> file share on a really fast server, that sort of thing.
> For a lot of other common network chip types, the driver
> is probably already there.
>
> So while the WinPE 3.1 "passed the test", there are a few
> more test cases to run, and the USB3 connector is one of them.
> And then some of the other WinPE versions might be more interesting.
>
> But you did some good work there with the WinRE for us,
> because I'd only uncovered one issue with their silly
> new scheme, which was namely, the tendency for the media
> preparation code, to grab the wrong WinRE file when
> scanning the computer for them. Selecting a WinPE is
> a more "assured" result, because there are fewer file
> sources and less ways for it to go wrong.
>
> Since your WinRE results weren't good, I'll try to steer
> people away from that choice more forcefully from now on.
>
> WinPE preparation tends to fail, if the Microsoft server
> holding the files has been gutted. At least one of the
> WinPE versions is that way, and cannot really be fully
> fetched because files are missing. Any OS which is still
> in Extended Support, the file set for the WinPE to make
> it is likely to still be intact and undamaged by the
> Microsoft idea of "justice served cold".
>
> Moving too far forward, like selecting WinPE 10, would
> not be good for older computers, say a P4 machine.
> But I haven't tested that. I don't think I have any
> backups for the junkroom. The only backups are for
> working stuff.
>
> The WinPE 3.1 would be an excellent "full spectrum"
> platform, because I could probably run USB2 restores
> on most all of the machines. Some of the machines
> have CD drives that don't read "burned media" and
> only worked with "pressed media", so I'd need to
> install a more modern optical drive. Some of the
> machines don't boot from USB (that started around
> year 2005 or so). So the fleet has a few problems
> when you get back in "crusty peripheral era". But
> other than that, the WinPE 3.1 could work.
>
>
Thanks, Good work, Glad to see you and Paul got a handle on it. :-)

Rene

Paul graced us with on 5/8/2021 1:23 AM:
> Sailfish wrote:
>
>> Some good news and some better news.
>>
>> After taking in the consultation from both Rene & Paul I came to the
>> conclusion that; one, this problem had to be something on my end since
>> Macrium Reflect most certainly worked on many other Win7 systems and
>> two, this problem was probably linked to the Restoration environment I
>> configured. Reading the online documentation more thoroughly I noticed
>> that they had two PE versions that were recommended for Win7, WinRE
>> (default choice) and at the bottom, WinPE 3.1. I had selected WinRE
>> since it was the default choice. However, while it may work with some
>> Win7 OSes, it turns out it wouldn't work with mine. I finally selected
>> WinPE 3.1 from the Advanced Options and have run tests and, so far,
>> boot recovery is working swimmingly.
>>
>> The better news is that the restoration process performed an SSD TRIM
>> on my drive prior to restoring it and now transfer rates are
>> noticeably faster than before.
>>
>> Ref:
>> https://knowledgebase.macrium.com/display/KNOW72/Creating+rescue+media#Creatingrescuemedia-AdvancedOptions
>>
>>
>> Many thanks to both Rene and Paul for tirelessly working with me on
>> this problem and after a few more successful stress tests, I plan to
>> make .mrimg my go-to restore format and the boot WinPE 3.1 my boot
>> level restore program.
>
> I'm glad to hear you're recording some successes there now.
>
> There is a list of WinPE versions here.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Preinstallation_Environment
>
> 3.1 Built from Windows 7 SP1 code base. It is included in a
> WAIK supplementary update provided by Microsoft.
>
> 5.0 Built from Windows 8.1 code base. It is included in
> Windows ADK for Windows 8.1.
> ...
> 10.0.19041.1 Built from Windows 10 v2004 code base.
>
> Now, I don't know if the contents of these are documented in
> any useful way, but I can say that there's a possibility the
> WinPE 3.1 version doesn't have a USB3 driver inside it. This means,
> if plugging an external USB3 enclosure into a PC and attempting
> to restore from it, only USB2 (35MB/sec) rates may result. The
> USB3 enclosure will do at least 100MB/sec and quite likely a
> bit more when tested in the same conditions.
>
> There might be a few drivers which would need to be
> manually bound into the WIM before making the CD media.
> Perhaps some weird 10GbE card for restoring from a
> file share on a really fast server, that sort of thing.
> For a lot of other common network chip types, the driver
> is probably already there.
>
> So while the WinPE 3.1 "passed the test", there are a few
> more test cases to run, and the USB3 connector is one of them.
> And then some of the other WinPE versions might be more interesting.
>
> But you did some good work there with the WinRE for us,
> because I'd only uncovered one issue with their silly
> new scheme, which was namely, the tendency for the media
> preparation code, to grab the wrong WinRE file when
> scanning the computer for them. Selecting a WinPE is
> a more "assured" result, because there are fewer file
> sources and less ways for it to go wrong.
>
> Since your WinRE results weren't good, I'll try to steer
> people away from that choice more forcefully from now on.
>
> WinPE preparation tends to fail, if the Microsoft server
> holding the files has been gutted. At least one of the
> WinPE versions is that way, and cannot really be fully
> fetched because files are missing. Any OS which is still
> in Extended Support, the file set for the WinPE to make
> it is likely to still be intact and undamaged by the
> Microsoft idea of "justice served cold".
>
> Moving too far forward, like selecting WinPE 10, would
> not be good for older computers, say a P4 machine.
> But I haven't tested that. I don't think I have any
> backups for the junkroom. The only backups are for
> working stuff.
>
> The WinPE 3.1 would be an excellent "full spectrum"
> platform, because I could probably run USB2 restores
> on most all of the machines. Some of the machines
> have CD drives that don't read "burned media" and
> only worked with "pressed media", so I'd need to
> install a more modern optical drive. Some of the
> machines don't boot from USB (that started around
> year 2005 or so). So the fleet has a few problems
> when you get back in "crusty peripheral era". But
> other than that, the WinPE 3.1 could work.
>
As I've come to expect, very interesting observations with link
reference for additional information, thanks.

Even though I don't have a need to need USB3 for restore capability now
that I have an internal 4TB drive for my backup image stores, I will
attempt to use WinPE 5.0 as a test case run. As Rene mentioned, it never
hurts to have backups for backups. As an aside, I've removed the boot
backup loader WinPE option and decided just to go with multiple the SD
card copies (although, I may still create a non-destructive DVD version
as well).

Given time, I may even try WinPE 10 to see how it performs on Win7 in
the very unlikely event that I find a use for Server 2012 systems in the
future. I realize that I will eventually be forced to migrate to Win10
but will resist mightily to the end.

OT:OT: Reasons for avoiding Win10

1. Win10 nixed Aero (skuemorphic realism icons + transparancy window
frames) desktop and opted for the soul-crushing flat-design desktop.
2. On the test runs I've made when making the decision to stick with
Win7, Win10's performance was worse than Win7. Note: I do have Win10 on
my laptop and on my desktop as a Win7 Virtual Box machine (needed to run
TurboTax).
3. The whole GUI has been made much less friendly and accessible for
power users.
4. Most importantly, the need to log on in order to use it is a huge
privacy invasion and is also the main reason I only have my smartphone
on when traveling and using Maps. Much to my kids dismay, they can't
conveniently reach me using text or my smartphone and must call me on my
VoIP home portable phone.

--
Sailfish
CDC Covid19 Trends: https://www.facebook.com/groups/624208354841034
Rare Mozilla Stuff: http://tinyurl.com/z86x3sg

Rene Lamontagne graced us with on 5/8/2021 8:32 AM:
> On 2021-05-08 3:23 a.m., Paul wrote:
>> Sailfish wrote:
>>
>>> Some good news and some better news.
>>>
>>> After taking in the consultation from both Rene & Paul I came to the
>>> conclusion that; one, this problem had to be something on my end
>>> since Macrium Reflect most certainly worked on many other Win7
>>> systems and two, this problem was probably linked to the Restoration
>>> environment I configured. Reading the online documentation more
>>> thoroughly I noticed that they had two PE versions that were
>>> recommended for Win7, WinRE (default choice) and at the bottom, WinPE
>>> 3.1. I had selected WinRE since it was the default choice. However,
>>> while it may work with some Win7 OSes, it turns out it wouldn't work
>>> with mine. I finally selected WinPE 3.1 from the Advanced Options and
>>> have run tests and, so far, boot recovery is working swimmingly.
>>>
>>> The better news is that the restoration process performed an SSD TRIM
>>> on my drive prior to restoring it and now transfer rates are
>>> noticeably faster than before.
>>>
>>> Ref:
>>> https://knowledgebase.macrium.com/display/KNOW72/Creating+rescue+media#Creatingrescuemedia-AdvancedOptions
>>>
>>>
>>> Many thanks to both Rene and Paul for tirelessly working with me on
>>> this problem and after a few more successful stress tests, I plan to
>>> make .mrimg my go-to restore format and the boot WinPE 3.1 my boot
>>> level restore program.
>>
>> I'm glad to hear you're recording some successes there now.
>>
>> There is a list of WinPE versions here.
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Preinstallation_Environment
>>
>> 3.1 Built from Windows 7 SP1 code base. It is included in a
>> WAIK supplementary update provided by Microsoft.
>>
>> 5.0 Built from Windows 8.1 code base. It is included in
>> Windows ADK for Windows 8.1.
>> ...
>> 10.0.19041.1 Built from Windows 10 v2004 code base.
>>
>> Now, I don't know if the contents of these are documented in
>> any useful way, but I can say that there's a possibility the
>> WinPE 3.1 version doesn't have a USB3 driver inside it. This means,
>> if plugging an external USB3 enclosure into a PC and attempting
>> to restore from it, only USB2 (35MB/sec) rates may result. The
>> USB3 enclosure will do at least 100MB/sec and quite likely a
>> bit more when tested in the same conditions.
>>
>> There might be a few drivers which would need to be
>> manually bound into the WIM before making the CD media.
>> Perhaps some weird 10GbE card for restoring from a
>> file share on a really fast server, that sort of thing.
>> For a lot of other common network chip types, the driver
>> is probably already there.
>>
>> So while the WinPE 3.1 "passed the test", there are a few
>> more test cases to run, and the USB3 connector is one of them.
>> And then some of the other WinPE versions might be more interesting.
>>
>> But you did some good work there with the WinRE for us,
>> because I'd only uncovered one issue with their silly
>> new scheme, which was namely, the tendency for the media
>> preparation code, to grab the wrong WinRE file when
>> scanning the computer for them. Selecting a WinPE is
>> a more "assured" result, because there are fewer file
>> sources and less ways for it to go wrong.
>>
>> Since your WinRE results weren't good, I'll try to steer
>> people away from that choice more forcefully from now on.
>>
>> WinPE preparation tends to fail, if the Microsoft server
>> holding the files has been gutted. At least one of the
>> WinPE versions is that way, and cannot really be fully
>> fetched because files are missing. Any OS which is still
>> in Extended Support, the file set for the WinPE to make
>> it is likely to still be intact and undamaged by the
>> Microsoft idea of "justice served cold".
>>
>> Moving too far forward, like selecting WinPE 10, would
>> not be good for older computers, say a P4 machine.
>> But I haven't tested that. I don't think I have any
>> backups for the junkroom. The only backups are for
>> working stuff.
>>
>> The WinPE 3.1 would be an excellent "full spectrum"
>> platform, because I could probably run USB2 restores
>> on most all of the machines. Some of the machines
>> have CD drives that don't read "burned media" and
>> only worked with "pressed media", so I'd need to
>> install a more modern optical drive. Some of the
>> machines don't boot from USB (that started around
>> year 2005 or so). So the fleet has a few problems
>> when you get back in "crusty peripheral era". But
>> other than that, the WinPE 3.1 could work.
>>
> Thanks, Good work, Glad to see you and Paul got a handle on it. :-)
>
Your assistance was also instrumental in finding the resolution.

Cheers

--
Sailfish
CDC Covid19 Trends: https://www.facebook.com/groups/624208354841034
Rare Mozilla Stuff: http://tinyurl.com/z86x3sg

Sailfish graced us with on 5/8/2021 8:45 AM:
> Paul graced us with on 5/8/2021 1:23 AM:
>> Sailfish wrote:
>>
>>> Some good news and some better news.
>>>
>>> After taking in the consultation from both Rene & Paul I came to the
>>> conclusion that; one, this problem had to be something on my end
>>> since Macrium Reflect most certainly worked on many other Win7
>>> systems and two, this problem was probably linked to the Restoration
>>> environment I configured. Reading the online documentation more
>>> thoroughly I noticed that they had two PE versions that were
>>> recommended for Win7, WinRE (default choice) and at the bottom, WinPE
>>> 3.1. I had selected WinRE since it was the default choice. However,
>>> while it may work with some Win7 OSes, it turns out it wouldn't work
>>> with mine. I finally selected WinPE 3.1 from the Advanced Options and
>>> have run tests and, so far, boot recovery is working swimmingly.
>>>
>>> The better news is that the restoration process performed an SSD TRIM
>>> on my drive prior to restoring it and now transfer rates are
>>> noticeably faster than before.
>>>
>>> Ref:
>>> https://knowledgebase.macrium.com/display/KNOW72/Creating+rescue+media#Creatingrescuemedia-AdvancedOptions
>>>
>>>
>>> Many thanks to both Rene and Paul for tirelessly working with me on
>>> this problem and after a few more successful stress tests, I plan to
>>> make .mrimg my go-to restore format and the boot WinPE 3.1 my boot
>>> level restore program.
>>
>> I'm glad to hear you're recording some successes there now.
>>
>> There is a list of WinPE versions here.
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Preinstallation_Environment
>>
>> 3.1 Built from Windows 7 SP1 code base. It is included in a
>> WAIK supplementary update provided by Microsoft.
>>
>> 5.0 Built from Windows 8.1 code base. It is included in
>> Windows ADK for Windows 8.1.
>> ...
>> 10.0.19041.1 Built from Windows 10 v2004 code base.
>>
>> Now, I don't know if the contents of these are documented in
>> any useful way, but I can say that there's a possibility the
>> WinPE 3.1 version doesn't have a USB3 driver inside it. This means,
>> if plugging an external USB3 enclosure into a PC and attempting
>> to restore from it, only USB2 (35MB/sec) rates may result. The
>> USB3 enclosure will do at least 100MB/sec and quite likely a
>> bit more when tested in the same conditions.
>>
>> There might be a few drivers which would need to be
>> manually bound into the WIM before making the CD media.
>> Perhaps some weird 10GbE card for restoring from a
>> file share on a really fast server, that sort of thing.
>> For a lot of other common network chip types, the driver
>> is probably already there.
>>
>> So while the WinPE 3.1 "passed the test", there are a few
>> more test cases to run, and the USB3 connector is one of them.
>> And then some of the other WinPE versions might be more interesting.
>>
>> But you did some good work there with the WinRE for us,
>> because I'd only uncovered one issue with their silly
>> new scheme, which was namely, the tendency for the media
>> preparation code, to grab the wrong WinRE file when
>> scanning the computer for them. Selecting a WinPE is
>> a more "assured" result, because there are fewer file
>> sources and less ways for it to go wrong.
>>
>> Since your WinRE results weren't good, I'll try to steer
>> people away from that choice more forcefully from now on.
>>
>> WinPE preparation tends to fail, if the Microsoft server
>> holding the files has been gutted. At least one of the
>> WinPE versions is that way, and cannot really be fully
>> fetched because files are missing. Any OS which is still
>> in Extended Support, the file set for the WinPE to make
>> it is likely to still be intact and undamaged by the
>> Microsoft idea of "justice served cold".
>>
>> Moving too far forward, like selecting WinPE 10, would
>> not be good for older computers, say a P4 machine.
>> But I haven't tested that. I don't think I have any
>> backups for the junkroom. The only backups are for
>> working stuff.
>>
>> The WinPE 3.1 would be an excellent "full spectrum"
>> platform, because I could probably run USB2 restores
>> on most all of the machines. Some of the machines
>> have CD drives that don't read "burned media" and
>> only worked with "pressed media", so I'd need to
>> install a more modern optical drive. Some of the
>> machines don't boot from USB (that started around
>> year 2005 or so). So the fleet has a few problems
>> when you get back in "crusty peripheral era". But
>> other than that, the WinPE 3.1 could work.
>>
> As I've come to expect, very interesting observations with link
> reference for additional information, thanks.
>
> Even though I don't have a need to need USB3 for restore capability now
> that I have an internal 4TB drive for my backup image stores, I will
> attempt to use WinPE 5.0 as a test case run. As Rene mentioned, it never
> hurts to have backups for backups. As an aside, I've removed the boot
> backup loader WinPE option and decided just to go with multiple the SD
> card copies (although, I may still create a non-destructive DVD version
> as well).
>
> Given time, I may even try WinPE 10 to see how it performs on Win7 in
> the very unlikely event that I find a use for Server 2012 systems in the
> future. I realize that I will eventually be forced to migrate to Win10
> but will resist mightily to the end.
>
> OT:OT: Reasons for avoiding Win10
>
> 1. Win10 nixed Aero (skuemorphic realism icons + transparancy window
> frames) desktop and opted for the soul-crushing flat-design desktop.
> 2. On the test runs I've made when making the decision to stick with
> Win7, Win10's performance was worse than Win7. Note: I do have Win10 on
> my laptop and on my desktop as a Win7 Virtual Box machine (needed to run
> TurboTax).
> 3. The whole GUI has been made much less friendly and accessible for
> power users.
> 4. Most importantly, the need to log on in order to use it is a huge
> privacy invasion and is also the main reason I only have my smartphone
> on when traveling and using Maps. Much to my kids dismay, they can't
> conveniently reach me using text or my smartphone and must call me on my
> VoIP home portable phone.
>
I finished using the WinPE 10 WIM version. It both passed the the SSD+HD
partitions MRimage verification AND restored the SSD partition without a
problem. Since the documentation suggests the the Win 10 WIM is a
superset of the Win PE 5 WIM I will pass on testing it (unless there's
something I'm missing in not doing so.)

I still need to do a thorough stress test on both the WinPE 3.1 and the
WinPE 10 WIMs but that will need to wait for a bit. However, I since I
do have a 2TB USB portable HD, I plan to do a restore from it on each of
the above two WIMs plugged into a USB 3 port to quantify the performance
difference between the USB2-only and the USB2+3 WIM.

--
Sailfish
CDC Covid19 Trends: https://www.facebook.com/groups/624208354841034
Rare Mozilla Stuff: http://tinyurl.com/z86x3sg

Sailfish graced us with on 5/8/2021 11:10 PM:
> Sailfish graced us with on 5/8/2021 8:45 AM:
[snip/]
>
> I still need to do a thorough stress test on both the WinPE 3.1 and the
> WinPE 10 WIMs but that will need to wait for a bit. However, I since I
> do have a 2TB USB portable HD, I plan to do a restore from it on each of
> the above two WIMs plugged into a USB 3 port to quantify the performance
> difference between the USB2-only and the USB2+3 WIM.
>
WIM WinPE 3.1 USB2-only
MRimg Drive: WD Portable Drive
Restoration Drive: 111.84/238GB SSD
Restore Time: 00:16:29

WIM WinPE 10 USB3
MRimg Drive: WD Portable Drive
Restoration Drive: 111.84/238GB SSD
Restore Time: 00:13:04

It indicates that the WIM WinPE 10 USB3 provides almost a 21% boost in
restoration speed on reading reading this USB drive.

Caveat: While both WinPE 3.1 and WinPE 10 WIMs so far seem to work fine
on my system (Dell 8900 XPS), it's not clear whether that may be the
case for other Win7 systems so some initial testing should be performed
beforehand,

YMMV

--
Sailfish
CDC Covid19 Trends: https://www.facebook.com/groups/624208354841034
Rare Mozilla Stuff: http://tinyurl.com/z86x3sg