Well, for what is worth: I can say that for me personally, I prefer the more controlled reversion to correct one specific problem with one program ... because a reversion to a more general state of affairs may include reverting to a situation that I may have forgotten I do not want to return to.
Probably a good practice to follow, particularly if the restore point was dated - several days, weeks, ..., old.
In this case, my most recent restore point [pre-QW R2] was less than 24 hrs 'old'.
Learned something else in this drill FWIW - out of curiosity, tried a re-install of QW over the top of R2 [no uninstall] and it stayed at R2.
Notan
"System Restore Points" are created, primarily, to go back to an older/recent version of the registry and specific other files.
They *do not* do "roll-backs" to older/recent versions of installed software. There are programs that are/were specifically designed for this purpose and, unfortunately, SRPs isn't one of them.
Notan
As originally stated, last check point (restore point) was dated day before -- also less than 24 hrs -- w/only data changes & restores do not affect data. I too am also back at r1. Have uninstalled/reinstalled earlier qkn versions many times due to program corruption & find in a pain. Had the checkpoint been 48 hrs earlier, I might have thought twice.
See in the q forum that they are looking at this problem -- hope they do a fix soon as this type report is 1 I use frequently.
It's *very* possible that something ran amuck in the registry.
This topic has certainly wandered!
I am not going to argue the deep-down secrets of Windows with you - I am at best an 'intermediate level tinkerer' and likely to get myself in trouble with some of my tinkering. BTW using Win XP, SP2.
But ... your categorical statement that it 'does not do roll-backs' is seemingly false based on first-hand experience!! I'm certainly getting the symptoms I would expect for a roll-back.
I will assure you that the Restore function does indeed permit me to switch back and forth between versions of QW as I stated earlier. I verified this occurred by opening the 'About' window and I see R! has changed to R2 and vice-versa. It was further confirmed as the behavior problems of the alternate versions was repeatable as I switched. At least one other poster has indicated, as an aside, that it worked for him.
This may not have been the intent of Restore. It may not be recommended. But it works for me.
If you're going to use it for for that purpose, one suggestion...
Do system backups on a regular basis, just in case SRP fails, one day.
Good Luck!
Notan
Do a weekly to another HD.
While my needs are such, that I do daily backups, a weekly backup is certainly *way* better than what most people do, which is *no* backup(s)!
Notan
True enough.
The roll-back of newly installed applications seems to be the logical consequence of the above - especially in Windows as many application "adjust" the system (e.g., the registry) during installation.
Funnily enough, the Crystal Reports example in your referenced article shows the specifically designed uninstaller failing to remove a registry change and the use of system restore to resolve the problem.
That said, I would probably try the uninstaller first as the system restore seems to have a lot more things that could go wrong than the uninstaller would.
Mike
An update from the forum moderator was just posted in the Quicken Users Forum:
I also "updated" to r2 last night and noticed that certain reports now cause crashes. In particular right clicking on any category in category list and clicking report will bring a crash 100% of time. Some saved reports now crash also. I will also enter bug report ... is it me or has Quicken been slowly getting less stable every year since the late 90's! Have used it religiously since q1 for DOS but I am getting to point where I dread having to upgrade [skipped 05 as was concerned with that years reliability and starting to regret my 06' upgrade :( ].
I was able to delete one of the reports that was causing a crash and recreate it and it seems fine now. Not sure why, might be sorting or subtotaling new report differently than prior report ...
Tim
BeanSmart website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.