Talk:System Restore

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Microsoft Windows: Computing Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Microsoft Windows, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Microsoft Windows on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Microsoft WindowsWikipedia:WikiProject Microsoft WindowsTemplate:WikiProject Microsoft WindowsMicrosoft Windows articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.

regscan

The archaic "regscan" command included in earlier versions of windows should be mentioned. It was the predecessor to System Restore, and functioned quite similarly - it just wasn't as accessibly and user friendly as the modern System Restore interface. NEMT 21:43, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

system restore deletes files!

System Restore does not affect any of the user's files. Files with certain executable extensions are restored and new folders removed, but items in the My Documents folders are always left untouched. Microsoft recommends that if a user is unsure as to whether their files will be affected by System Restore, that they should keep those files under My Documents.

In complete contradiction to what i've always read on this subject and contrary to its reiteration in this article, i just discovered that system restore sometimes deletes files, and even in My Documents! Since this is so shocking and incredible (although i was able to reproduce it many times), i won't change the article until someone corroborates the following:

The strange thing i ran into was very shocking indeed: the NVidia driver's exe file i'd just downloaded from www.nvidia.co.uk/object/winxp_2k_84.21_uk.html disappeared in the process of a system restore!! I thought i must be hallucinating or confusing things, but i was able to reproduce this several times. The only explanation i can think of is that it has to do with the license one accepts when downloading. Perhaps this is connected with a registry entry, and when this entry is changed or deleted, the associated executive is deleted?

This is especially shocking because it even deleted a copy i made in another location before retrying system restore. The original was in a subfolder of My Documents, and the also automatically deleted copy was in a new folder i'd made in the root folder. I then experimented more after downloading a new copy and discovered that system restore also deletes copies of "original.exe" in the same folder, i.e. "copy of original.exe", and even copies i rename "delete.exe" and even just "original" without any file extension!! The only protection against deletion seems to be adding or changing the file extension to .txt or .copy etc. I've never heard anything like this before. (BTW Nothing happened to the also downloaded new Realtek driver exe file during system restore.)

Very much less strange but more proof that system restore does not do exactly what MS claims it does is the following: NVidia says one should uninstall all NVidia display drivers using the Windows control panel. As far as i remember, Add/remove originally had "NVidia drivers" not "NVidia display drivers". In any case, choosing this produced the question whether i'd like to uninstall all NVidia drivers. To be on the safe side and avoid version conflicts, i answered "yes", only to realise a minute later that this meant my Internet connection didn't work anymore. After doing a system restore and again using the control panel to start uninstalling the "NVidia drivers", i no longer got the old question and only the video driver was uninstalled, not the LAN driver.

Another major problem with system restore is that it just says "activity: restore" or something like that for both when one chooses an old restore point and when one reverts a restore process instead of saying clearly "reverted to restore point called XYZ from date XYZ" or "reverted restore process". No wonder people get mixed up when they use system restore because it doesn't let you assign a name to a restore process and doesn't assign any identifiable name to the process. Very sloppy and chaotic programming. I never used system restore before except for a single operation at a time and therefore didn't notice this typical MS nonsense.

So i don't mean the case of making a new restore point; i mean going back to an existing restore point and not knowing later which one you went back to and not knowing if you later reverted that change or went to a different point. Total chaos. No wonder normal users get confused. MS essentially forces users to go back to pencil and paper to note down what the restore process at a certain time did. Unbelievably chaotic and primitive even by MS standards... It'd be interesting to know if this has been improved in Vista. --Espoo 09:04, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I can confirm that Restore does indeed delete exe files in the \My Documents\My Downloads\ directory. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.238.91.241 (talk) 12:08, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

every 24 hours

I would like to see this article be extended. I think the person who is knoledgeable about System Restore should write this article. I would also like to see some more description of System Restore, particularly the procedure and the list of the executable that System Restore restore.

"every 24 hours of computer use (10 hours in Windows ME), or every 24 hours of calendar time, whichever happens first" - How would 24 hours of computer use ever occour before 24 hours of calender time? If the computer has been on for 24 consecutive hours it would happen at the same time, but it seems quite impossible for it to happen before, without bending the space-time continuum ;)

Possibly if you take the computer on a business trip and change the time, it'll still count clock cycles or something to know when 24 actual hours have passed? Sagittarian Milky Way 23:15, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unclear phrase in 'Implementation' section

The last sentence of the 'Implementation' section:

On Windows Vista however, it excludes only document file types; it does not exclude any file monitored type whatsoever of its location and operates on the entire volume.

The phrase after the semicolon is unclear (at least to me). Proposal for replacement (but only if it's a correct interpretation!):

...; it does not exclude any locations on the volume.

Jacosi (talk) 22:40, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

restore point redirects here

I think it must be a mistake. There are a number of other softwares that create restore points (even by calling them restore points, & not even a differnte (trademarked)name). To create a page at restore point would allow the arti to address any types of restore points (full restore(every file),selected files, or even a full partition restore(which would erase any files added by crapware,malware,spyware,or any other (unwanted) installs), as well as restoring any file to its pervious state), also wich software can use what type of restore point. This update to talk could be coppied over to restore point talk page.76.122.166.200 (talk) 16:19, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Contradiction in article: volume shadow copy vs file types

The introductory paragraph claims that Vista ("and later" should be added) uses Volume Shadow Copy to maintain restore points, which affects all files and all file types, but the Overview says only certain file types are monitored. Seldenball (talk) 13:21, 19 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

RPLifeInterval (Time to Live - TTL)

"Restore points over 90 days old are automatically deleted, as specified by the registry value RPLifeInterval (Time to Live - TTL) default value of 7776000 seconds."

This sounds innocent enough. Many users prefer to adjust this so that old restore points are not kept so long. However, this only has the intended effect of just reducing the clutter of old copies when the computer is used on a regular basis. If a computer is stored, turned off, for months or years, when it is first turned on it would immediately delete all of the old restore points! This could be very unfortunate, when dealing with an old computer. To avoid this, it is necessary to adjust RPLifeInterval before storing the computer, or set the date/time clock back when first turning the computer on before Windows starts, or use special forensic LiveCD tools to boot the computer and adjust the RPLifeInterval in the registry on the hard drive before booting Windows.

Name: RPLifeInterval Type: REG_DWORD Data:
RPLifeInterval = 0x0076a700 (7776000)

To keep Restore Points as long as possible, the default 0x0076a700 value can be increased to 0x7976a700, or even 0xFF76a700.-96.233.20.116 (talk) 13:47, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"In Windows XP, System Restore can be configured to use up to a maximum of 12% of the volume's space for most disk sizes;[5] however, this may be less depending on the volume's size. Restore points over 90 days old are automatically deleted, as specified by the registry value RPLifeInterval (Time to Live - TTL) default value of 7776000 seconds. In Windows Vista and later, System Restore is designed for larger volumes.[10] By default, it uses 15% of the volume's space.[7]"

In Windows7, RPLifeInterval does not exist in the registry. Does this mean Restore Points are never deleted due just to age?
A new Win7 HomePremium 64bit system with a 1TB drive comes with the max System Restore storage space set at 10GB, about 1%. (Is there a way to set this in the registry?)

-72.93.40.130 (talk) 22:13, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on System Restore. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080327064609/http://bertk.mvps.org:80/html/q_a.html to http://bertk.mvps.org/html/q_a.html#16

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 16:18, 11 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

System Volume Information

Is the System Volume Information really the "system restore", as the redirection seems to suggest? --Alien4 (talk) 08:42, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]