Hi,

I've Googled the following volsnap errors and still don't have an answer.

I'm not dual booting and I'm not running any Norton products. I am running
Acronis TrueImage Home 11 which is the likeliest suspect.

Each time I reboot, I get one or more of the following errors in Event Viewer:

The shadow copies of volume C: were deleted because the shadow copy storage
could not grow in time. Consider reducing the IO load on the system or
choose a shadow copy storage volume that is not being shadow copied.

The shadow copies of volume C: were aborted during detection because a
critical control file could not be opened.



Any ideas?

thanks.

System restore points are a great idea in theory.
Once in a while they actually work if you need to restore your system to an
earlier state.
The problem with System Restore, and this has plagued earlier versions of
Windows as well as Vista, is that there are many, many circumstances where
system restore points will not be created or will be destroyed.
Essentially it is a crapshoot whether or not a viable system restore point
will be available when you really need it.
Look at this way--Microsoft made the deliberate decision to destroy system
restore points for anyone who dares dual boot with XP.
There is no technical reason why that has to be, it was a deliberate
decision by Microsoft to discourage dual booting, and they have never
changed it. Microsoft is not a user friendly company, they don't even
pretend to be. unlike Apple, which pretends to be but in many ways is far
worse than Microsoft in terms of customer abuse.
So how much does Microsoft value System Restore since they have never even
tried to make it bullet proof and purposely crippled system restore in Vista
to discourage dual booting between Vista and XP?

On Thu, 12 Feb 2009 18:42:29 -0800, "semoi" <fac_187@xxxxxx>
wrote:

>System restore points are a great idea in theory.
>Once in a while they actually work if you need to restore your system to an
>earlier state.
>The problem with System Restore, and this has plagued earlier versions of
>Windows as well as Vista, is that there are many, many circumstances where
>system restore points will not be created or will be destroyed.
>Essentially it is a crapshoot whether or not a viable system restore point
>will be available when you really need it.
>Look at this way--Microsoft made the deliberate decision to destroy system
>restore points for anyone who dares dual boot with XP.
>There is no technical reason why that has to be, it was a deliberate
>decision by Microsoft to discourage dual booting, and they have never
>changed it. Microsoft is not a user friendly company, they don't even
>pretend to be. unlike Apple, which pretends to be but in many ways is far
>worse than Microsoft in terms of customer abuse.
>So how much does Microsoft value System Restore since they have never even
>tried to make it bullet proof and purposely crippled system restore in Vista
>to discourage dual booting between Vista and XP?

Your tinfoil hat needs new batteries.