Fab's AutoBackup 7 Pro - a must have tool for techs

[britechguy]

Because some of the tools can be used in a malicious manner.

Then limit those to the ones not whitelisted. The vast majority of his tools cannot be.

Almost anything can be twisted to nefarious purpose. But design intent, and actual general usage pattern for the software as designed, is what should matter. His utilities are not malware and should not be identified as such, in my opinion.

 

[nlinecomputers]

Can't download any Nirsoft tools with the latest Autobackup version. There is no firewall and AV is disabled. @fabs

 

[fabs]

Thus goin

Can't download any Nirsoft tools with the latest Autobackup version. There is no firewall and AV is disabled. @fabs

This is going to be fixed with next update. For now, there are 2 workarounds:
- Grab full package from website as Nirsoft tools are now bundled inside.
- You can also use the "check for updates" link on first page. After that Nirsoft tools should download like they are supposed to do.

 

[fabs]

Hello,
Fab's AutoBackup 7 Pro and Fab's AutoBackup 7 Home & Office V7.9.1.5168 have just been released.

Here is the change log for both versions:

Added:
- When dealing with dying slow hard drives, it is better to focus on the most important data for users. In backup mode, the program now processes users documents, pictures, music, etc... and emails before web browsers. Nothing changes in restore or transfer modes when it can be useful to be able to browse the internet while the program is processing remaining data.

Removed:
- Old BlackBerry OS smartphones do not work anymore since January 4th 2022. So, BlackBerry Desktop manager settings and BlackBerry backups items have been removed from Fab's AutoBackup.

Fixed:
- Fab's AutoBackup 7.9.0.5112 could not download Nirsoft tools if they were missing even without firewall restrictions.
- Some antivirus softwares (Kaspersky for example) could delete Fab's AutoBackup main program because of suspect behavior since it tried to whitelist itself from Windows Defender at startup.

Grab it from your orders history's details on the shop's website at https://store.fpnet.fr/account.php or using the bundled updater tool (click the "Download Fab's AutoBackup 7.X" link within the program and get the updated files).

 

[HCHTech]

- When dealing with dying slow hard drives, it is better to focus on the most important data for users. In backup mode, the program now processes users documents, pictures, music, etc... and emails before web browsers.

Nice, thanks!

 

[cypress]

Great update!

 

[fabs]

Hello,
Fab's AutoBackup 7 Pro and Fab's AutoBackup 7 Home & Office V7.9.1.5177 have just been released.

Here is the change log for both versions:

Fixed:
- Nirsoft tools could still get caught and deleted by Windows Defender. Fab's AutoBackup now extracts them to a "%TMP%\Nirsoft" temporary folder and this folder also gets excluded from Windows Defender real time protection. Of course, Fab's AutoBackup removes that exclusion when it is closing.

Grab it from your orders history's details on the shop's website at https://store.fpnet.fr/account.php or using the bundled updater tool (click the "Download Fab's AutoBackup 7.X" link within the program and get the updated files).

 

[sapphirescales]

@fabs I have a suggestion. I know that our software generates a report of failed files in the end, but could you write a function where you have the option to retry the files that failed during the initial transfer? Nothing sucks worse than using your software only to have hundreds of failed files in the end and your only option is to either live without those files, manually transfer them one by one, or just use a different software and run the backup again (I usually choose the third option). I'd really like to finally retire Unstoppable Copier, but it's just better at getting all the files when Fabs fails. I can't keep using this thing. The last time it was updated was 2010.

 

[MudRock]

@fabs I have a suggestion. I know that our software generates a report of failed files in the end, but could you write a function where you have the option to retry the files that failed during the initial transfer? Nothing sucks worse than using your software only to have hundreds of failed files in the end and your only option is to either live without those files, manually transfer them one by one, or just use a different software and run the backup again (I usually choose the third option). I'd really like to finally retire Unstoppable Copier, but it's just better at getting all the files when Fabs fails. I can't keep using this thing. The last time it was updated was 2010.

There is a "Skip them" option in Fabs, which does run a lot quicker on second pass. My comment though, is that you need to identify why those files are failing, and also if same files failing, need to evaluate why; You may have to change your process, or in some instances, they can't be transferred (OneDrive offline files for example).

VSS almost completely eliminates this too except PST files and OneDrive files unless there is an actual problem.

You can click 'Previous' and then do it again with all the same settings. Not sure if a Retry button is needed.

 

[tmboss]

I bought my first license of Fabs 7 Pro 2 years ago. How often do people refresh Fabs for newer features and changes? Is there an update pattern or cycle that makes sense?

 

[cypress]

I bought my first license of Fabs 7 Pro 2 years ago. How often do people refresh Fabs for newer features and changes? Is there an update pattern or cycle that makes sense?

I purchase the 3 years support. I purchased it back in 2018 when it started and then renewed again last year. Having features like what @fabs just released is worth its' weight in gold. Used it last night to transfer data from an old laptop to a brand new one and it sped up the process even more because the HD on the previous laptop was slowing down anyway.

 

[MudRock]

I bought my first license of Fabs 7 Pro 2 years ago. How often do people refresh Fabs for newer features and changes? Is there an update pattern or cycle that makes sense?

Well, I guess two ways; Either keep paying for upgrades (It really isn't expensive, and you should be either charging for transfers or incorporating into your price) or let it lapse until you see a benefit.

I don't think there's any "explicit" pattern to it; Fabrice is always upgrading, adding new features, fixing when an app changes how it works. To be honest, its not expensive, and even just the "little" fixes for when an app changes its data store is worth is vs the headache of figuring out why its not working.

As @cypress said, even the fix to the Nirsoft stuff to deal with the anti-virus crud should have triggered a lot of people to renew on that alone.

 

[sapphirescales]

@MudRock I never run Fabs on an active operating system. I always either extract the drive or run it from a portable version of Windows 10 on an external SSD. I'm not sure why some files fail but if I run the backup again using Unstoppable Copier it's able to get those files 99% of the time.

 

[fabs]

@fabs I have a suggestion. I know that our software generates a report of failed files in the end, but could you write a function where you have the option to retry the files that failed during the initial transfer? Nothing sucks worse than using your software only to have hundreds of failed files in the end and your only option is to either live without those files, manually transfer them one by one, or just use a different software and run the backup again (I usually choose the third option). I'd really like to finally retire Unstoppable Copier, but it's just better at getting all the files when Fabs fails. I can't keep using this thing. The last time it was updated was 2010.

Actually, when it fails on one file, it tries again using another method. If it still fails then it will log it and skips to next one. If I remember right, Unstoppable copier copies files using local "NT AUTHORITY\SYSTEM" user that can access anything. I've tried a whileback to make Fab's able to use that account but it did not work. Worse, it was just unusable.

 

[sapphirescales]

@fabs It's just frustrating because today I used Fabs to back up a client's machine with over 1TB of data and in the end there were THOUSANDS of files that failed to back up. I did the backup procedure again using Unstoppable Copier and do you know how many files failed to transfer? 0. That's right, ZERO. The drive wasn't failing and I wasn't running Fabs in the native operating system. I was using the most recent version.

What's worse is I just pointed Unstoppable Copier to the root User directory and copied everything, including the Application Data folder and there were literally zero files that Unstoppable Copier failed to get.

I like Fabs because it usually makes my job easier, but when this happens it's extremely frustrating because all I did was waste time by using it instead of another backup software. I know very little about how the copying process happens in the background, but since many people use Fabs to back up failing hard drives, wouldn't it make sense to have a backend similar to Unstoppable Copier? That program can back up damaged files on damaged hard drives (though I'll stress again that in this example the hard drive was completely fine. We were just upgrading to an SSD).

It's very frustrating to see a program like yours, which costs money and seems (on the front-end at least) to be much more sophisticated, be beaten by some 12 year old outdated freeware program written by some guy in his spare time. I'm not trying to be mean here, but rather than working on adding new features, maybe you could work on the core functionality of your software (i.e., copying files) a little more. I usually get failures on most transfers, not in the thousands, but that's because I'm usually not backing up 1TB+ of data with over 100,000 files. When it's a couple dozen files it's at least manageable, but it's still not ideal, especially when Unstoppable Copier can get 100% of the files 99.99% of the time.

 

[fabs]

rather than working on adding new features, maybe you could work on the core functionality of your software (i.e., copying files) a little more. I usually get failures on most transfers, not in the thousands, but that's because I'm usually not backing up 1TB+ of data with over 100,000 files. When it's a couple dozen files it's at least manageable, but it's still not ideal, especially when Unstoppable Copier can get 100% of the files 99.99% of the time.

Ouch, that hurts... I just did not know that there was such a HUGE problem as you're the first one to report it.

 

[sapphirescales]

totally useless

It's not totally useless otherwise I wouldn't use it. When you're only transferring a small amount of data (under 50GB or 20,000 files) there are only a few dozen failures and it's manageable, but when it comes to larger transfers there are hundreds or even thousands of failures, and it's just impractical to transfer those failed files manually afterwards.

 

[fabs]

It's not totally useless otherwise I wouldn't use it. When you're only transferring a small amount of data (under 50GB or 20,000 files) there are only a few dozen failures and it's manageable, but when it comes to larger transfers there are hundreds or even thousands of failures, and it's just impractical to transfer those failed files manually afterwards.

Sorry for that word, I was a bit upset like if my program is not worth anything since a 12 years old free program does the job better... I've edited my post but a bit too late.
Perhaps there's an issue somewhere that prevents Fab's from getting needed permissions. Where are those files located in the profile ?

 

[nlinecomputers]

@fabs consider the source of your complaint. That particular user has a known posting history of questionable statements of greatly exaggerated claims. He may have had a problem but it wasn't hundreds of files.

 

[sapphirescales]

I was a bit upset like if my program is not worth anything since a 12 years old free program does the job better...

Well it DOES do a better job at copying files, which is why I believe you can make your program better. Your program has many more features and can back up Chrome profiles and such. Unstoppable Copier is designed for one thing and one thing only - copying raw files - and it does that exceptionally well. I'd just really like for Fabs to be able to copy files just as well in addition to having all the other features it has. Fabs and Unstoppable Copier are designed for two different purposes, but that doesn't mean that you can't take the good things that Unstoppable Copier has going for it and try to duplicate it in your software.

I'll use an analogy. Fabs is like a Cadillac with tons of fancy options and bells and whistles. Unstoppable Copier is just your basic Ford, but it has a more powerful engine and is is cheaper to perform maintenance on. There's no reason why the Cadillac can't have the same powerful engine as the Ford and be more affordable to maintain like the Ford is. I don't need a button added to the center console in order to roll down the window. I'd much rather have a more powerful engine and/or more affordable maintenance.

Perhaps there's an issue somewhere that prevents Fab's from getting needed permissions. Where are those files located in the profile ?

It varies wildly. Sometimes it's files in folders in the root C directory, other times it's in the documents or the pictures folder, etc. I've never tried running Fabs as administrator before. I didn't think that was necessary.