Would you have File History feature or both File History and Previous Versi


Would you have File History feature or both File History and Previous Versions  

12 members have voted

  1. 1. Would you have File History feature or both File History and Previous Versions

    • File History
    • File History but leave Previous Versions as it is


Recommended Posts

So by now you must have read that Windows 8 is going to have a File History feature (called History Vault in the earlier builds) but it's supposed to work only with external/removable drives. In comparison, Previous Versions works today with local drives including the installed Windows partition so you don't have to have removable drive attached to use this feature. In the Windows 8 Developer Preview, Previous Versions doesn't seem to exist. Now I know many bits and pieces are missing in this version, so we don't know if Microsoft is going to replace Previous Versions with File History but what would you rather have? Both or only File History? Because having a removable drive always attached is not always possible and especially if it's a flash drive, it will wear out over time.

  • 4 weeks later...

Bump in case no one has read this topic, this is a Windows 8 issue. Looks like Previous Versions is going away for local disks and replaced by File History (History Vault) but only for removable disks. Or is that no one uses Previous Versions because everyone is dual booting with XP (which makes Previous Versions not work) or everyone is stuck with Windows 7 Home Premium?

  • 3 months later...

Directly from Microsoft's Windows and Windows Server Developer Preview Compatibility Cookbook: http://www.microsoft.com/download/en/details.aspx?id=27416

Volume Shadow Copy Service UI Removed

Platform

Clients ? Windows Developer Preview

Servers ? Windows Server Developer Preview

Description

Earlier versions of Window employed the Volume Shadow Copy Service (VSS). VSS is a service that exposes a set of COM APIs that implements a framework to allow volume backups to be performed on file servers while apps on a system continue to write to the volumes. It does this by creating restore points or ?shadow copies? of file share data. In Windows 7 users could create and schedule shadow copies and later use them to restore previous versions of individual files from a shadow copy.

This feature was available in the Windows Explorer as ?Previous Versions?.

User triggered shadow copies were rarely used and negatively impacted the overall Windows performance. In Windows Developer Preview, the ability to create or schedule a shadow copy was removed. As a result the ?Previous Versions? feature in the Windows Explorer became obsolete and was removed too.

Thus, users can no longer create shadow copies from which to restore files.

Manifestation

The Previous Versions option no longer exists in the Windows Explorer Properties menu.

Windows 7 Backup and Restore Deprecated

Platform

Clients ? Windows Developer Preview

Servers ? N/A

Description

While there is no behavioral change to Backup and Restore, this function is being deprecated and will not be updated. It was rarely used and its functionality has been replaced by the new File History feature. It will ship in Windows Developer Preview and enthusiasts who upgraded from Windows 7 to Windows Developer Preview or depend on Backup and Restore or disk image backup will be still able to use it. However, all access points to Backup and Restore, with the exception of the Control Panel, have been removed

We do not recommend using both features at the same time. File History checks if Backup schedule exists and is active and if it finds one, it will not let users to turn it on.

Manifestation

Workflows may be interrupted and documentation that refers to the previous method for accessing the Windows Backup and Restore feature will need to be updated to reflect these changes.

Mitigation of Impact

Apps that might trigger Backup and Restore should be rewritten to check if File History is on and let users choose their preferred method.

The File History feature in the Developer Preview has replaced Previous Versions and it is once again a case of a feature replacing an existing one which worked nicely and the new one does only half the things of the old one. File History should have complemented Previous Versions. File History seems similar to OS X's Time Machine which *requires* an external drive whereas Previous Versions made use of local hard drive space where older shadow copies were created automatically and transparently and could be quickly deleted should disk space be required. Which means now anyone without a removable drive is going to lose the Previous Versions feature when he "upgrades" to Windows 8.

They say in the document above "User triggered shadow copies were rarely used and negatively impacted the overall Windows performance." which is simply not true or correct. User did not have to trigger shadow copies in the first place as system restore automatically created shadow copies at periodic intervals and I was able to restore any file from Previous Versions.

  • 4 weeks later...

Ugh I Just noticed this while trying out the Consumer Preview. This is one of the first removed features that xpclient complains about that I think is actually useful. I don't see why they had to remove this! It was invaluable. Playing with the CP, I am actually more inclined to leave my desktop running Windows 7 than before. I thought the Developer Preview was just missing things because it was such an early build, but it really doesn't seem that a whole lot has changed.

I don't want to use removable or network drives to keep file histories. My desktop has 4 internal drives, that's enough. Apparently you can use local drives if you refer to them using their UNC path, but that's still annoying. You can't keep file histories of files on their respective drives. You also need to keep all the folders you want backed up in a library. I never liked the libraries, I like using folders.

Windows 8 can access previous versions if you're browsing a Windows 7 shared folder. The Volume Shadow Copy service is still there, I wonder if someone can re-enable this functionality. It's a shame that Microsoft is dumbing down Windows. I usually quickly switch to the latest version but Windows 8 has worried and wondering if it's even worth the hassle.

EDIT: It seems that the volume shadow functionality is still completely intact! Using ShadowExplorer I can browse old versions and deleted files. So they only removed the tab used to browse previous versions. How stupid. This doesn't work perfectly, though. I tried copying a large folder out of a shadow copy onto the same drive the shadow copy was from, and in the middle of the process it seems the old shadow copy it was from was removed to make room. If you're going to be using this, export the files to a different drive so that they still exist while copying.

Browsing the Windows 8 computer over the network and going to previous versions does not show any previous versions, though.

Really dumb IMO. Windows 8 was designed to support tablet devices, but by removing previous versions, now you have to carry an external storage device to get the same functionality. Tablets are meant to be portable, who the heck wants to carry an extra drive around so they can recover an old version of a file?

I just realized that a nice workaround for this is you can share the local volumes and then point the File History feature to use the locally shared volume. So it's not really a removed feature as long as it works for shared local volumes. Share permissions can be locked down to only "System".

You can't choose to have the files backed up on their respective drives, though, can you? You have only one repository used for file history, and using a UNC path that "network" location can be the very same computer. It really bugs me that the shadow copies are still completely there, they just don't let you retrieve old files from them. You can get the files out using ShadowExplorer, though.

What's weird is according to Microsoft the shadow copies are not persistent and the volume shadow copy service can only be used to create a backup. But without persistent shadow copies, how is system restore supposed to work? I hope they gimp it no further between now and the release.

It looks like File History is only for certain file types (documents, music, videos and pictures) in Libraries and desktop and browser favorites. Previous Versions worked for any generic file type in any folder. One annoyance though of Previous Versions was that if you dual booted with XP (for whatever reason), they would all be deleted (because of an incompatibility with NT5.x and NT6.x).

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Not a single company as small or large it may be is obligated to subsidize its products and sell them at a loss. Your way of thinking is socialist and as a West German with a German brother state but impoverished by state dictatorship and a socialist command economy situated to the East i can tell you - this kind of thinking very quickly leads to products not being produced anymore at all.
    • Apple reportedly has a second-generation iPhone Fold planned for 2027 by Hamid Ganji The iPhone Fold is one of the most anticipated tech products expected to debut this fall. It will be Apple’s first foldable iPhone, ushering in a new product category for the company. While the first generation has yet to hit the shelves, a new leak suggests Apple has already begun work on its successor. Chinese leaker Digital Chat Station claims that the second-generation iPhone Fold has already been confirmed, meaning Apple could launch a successor in fall 2027. The foldable iPhone is also reportedly referred to as the “iPhone Ultra,” though it remains unclear whether Apple will ultimately choose that branding, especially as Samsung is rumored to rename the Galaxy Z Fold 8 as the Galaxy Z Fold Ultra this year. The leaker also claims that the second-generation foldable will feature a wider folding display while reusing the same screen found in the first generation. Apple’s first foldable iPhone is expected to feature a 7.8-inch inner display and a 5.3-inch outer screen in a passport-style form factor. It has already been reported that Apple plans to change its iPhone release cycle in 2026 to spread launches throughout the year. Under this strategy, the iPhone Fold is expected to debut this fall alongside the iPhone 18 Pro and iPhone 18 Pro Max. The standard iPhone 18 and iPhone Air 2 are expected to arrive later in 2026 or in early 2027. Speaking of the iPhone Air, Digital Chat Station says Apple remains undecided about a third-generation model. The company is reportedly waiting to see how the iPhone Air 2 performs in the market, and if sales disappoint, a successor may never materialize. As we reported this week, the iPhone Air has not been scrapped from Apple’s plans. The second-generation model is reportedly scheduled for spring 2027 and could introduce upgrades such as an additional rear camera for ultrawide photography and improved battery life.
    • ahh yes the good old your opinion differs from mine so you are therefore insane lol destiny 1 had no agenda pushing and was a massive success of a game, if you clearly look online the team for some reason thought they had too many men on the team and went on a woman and dei recruitment drive and we all know how destiny 2 performed from then on in
    • The limited imaginations and business acumen of non-dominant players is simply that: the abject lack of creative business acumen. Businesses often want to operate in a financially-rewarding marketplace (free market economics) and/or exit/cash-out at maximal financial recompense. Money is their incentive; regulations are both their obstacles and their tools; politics is their means of influencing the marketplace. Google, in this story's example, is crying that AWS and Azure are "too dominant" -- cuz Google Cloud is not printing as much money as Alphabet wants (although it is still dramatically more than they actually need). The EU DMA should truly follow-the-money and treat the EU as its own sovereign nation in order to protect European market players: Domestic entities are exempt from market-influence regulations until absolute monopoly is achieved; Foreign (non-EU/non-Euro) entities are all regulated via stricter DMA measures whereby regulated partnership with independent domestic entity becomes the only way for foreign entities to 'tip the scale' for favorable financial remunerations. Basically create a dual-track aligning with China's foreign investment models. In my eyes, this is the only way to properly protect the European marketplace beyond the current dot-com/ai-bubble/social-media crazes.
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Year In
      Vistor earned a badge
      One Year In
    • First Post
      kinowa earned a badge
      First Post
    • Rookie
      krychek57 went up a rank
      Rookie
    • Grand Master
      Jaybonaut went up a rank
      Grand Master
    • One Year In
      Philsl earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      406
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      172
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      131
    4. 4
      Xenon
      72
    5. 5
      Michael Scrip
      69
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!