Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 alpha 4/15/85; site ubvax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!bellcore!decvax!decwrl!amdcad!cae780!ubvax!lance
From: lance@ubvax.UUCP (Lance Keigwin)
Newsgroups: net.micro.pc
Subject: Re: DOS 3.1 backup/restore:  a dodge
Message-ID: <464@ubvax.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 10-Mar-86 03:28:06 EST
Article-I.D.: ubvax.464
Posted: Mon Mar 10 03:28:06 1986
Date-Received: Wed, 12-Mar-86 21:57:57 EST
References: <518@imsvax.UUCP> <323@hsi.UUCP>
Reply-To: lance@ubvax.UUCP (Ungermann-Bass root)
Organization: Ungermann-Bass, Inc., Santa Clara, Ca.
Lines: 21
Keywords: Is it REALLY a dodge?

In article <323@hsi.UUCP> tankus@hsi.UUCP (Ed Tankus) writes:
>> 
>> From what I read on the net, I must not be the only one who has experienced
>> ridiculous problems with 3.1 backup & restore.  My suggestion:  for backing
>> up whole disks the "Fastback" program beats anything else going...
>
>I, too, have used FASTBACK(tm). It costs approx. $175 (copy protected) or
>approx $200 (unprotected). It is *NOT*(!) DOS compatible.

I too share the enthusiasm for FASTBACK (although the the follow-up writer
does not).  It *is* fast, but ease of restoration and the catalog it keeps
are the features that sold me.  One thing does bother me: when I ordered
this product I was told I could send in $25 for an unprotected version.
It seems Fifth Generation Systems has had a change of heart and will *NOT*
sell anything but the protected one.  The clerk(?) I spoke with claimed
that there were "technical obstacles" they could not overcome and that I
would receive a written letter of explanation.  Haven't received that letter.
Anyone have any dope on this?

In spite of my enthusiasm for FASTBACK, I do not recommend it given that
you must rely on the floppy for the backups.