Disk Imaging Software

I don't know because I don't trust it and never use it.

I use the Acronis boot option to do all my imaging from Linux, or whatever
they are using as their kernal.

I've restored several times from my "Acronis Secure Zone" without issues.

-Larry

"Peter" > wrote in message
.uk...
> In article .com>,
> says...

> I know people are mentioning good things about True Image, but I
> wondered if anyone here had actually managed to re-install from an image
> that was created of an O/S that was running at the time. What I mean
> is, I have a copy of True Image 8.0 and have a dual boot system which
> has meant that, prior to version 8 I had always created the image of one
> O/S whilst running from the other one because the imaging software just
> wouldn't let me do it any other way.
>
> So V8 doesn't have this problem, and so I tried creating an image of XP
> whilst running XP and everything went ok. However, when I came to
> restore said image when I changed my HD it installed but failed to run,
> stopping at the XP Welcome screen and, despite even trying a repair
> install over the top, eventually I had to restore from one of my
> previous backups that was created through the old method.
>
> So, anyone actually managed to do this without issue using any Version
> of True Image?
>
> --
> Pete Ives
> Remove All_stRESS before sending me an email

As long as the new HD is at least as large as the original, this should not
be an issue. I've been doing it for years.

-Larry

"Andrew MacPherson" > wrote in message
ddress_disguised...
> (Peter) wrote:
>
>> However, when I came to restore said image when I
>> changed my HD
>
> I find Trueimage is as fallible as the rest if restoring an old setup to
> a new hard disk. The "shape" of the HD needs to match the shape of the
> old one in order for XP to work properly from the start. You'd think by
> now they'd have got round that problem. Still, at least the old backup
> can be mounted later on and critical files copied over.
>
> Andrew McP
>

> Is there a recommendation for the software to do this? Norton Ghost 10
> and True Image 9.0 seem to the be most frequently mentioned titles. Any
> upside/downside to these programs that anyone wants to comment on?

Ghost 2003 was the last reliable version of Ghost. The newer ones are just
rebadged Powerquest Driveimage which runs in Windows and hence aren't
anywhere near as reliable.

Oh, man. You mean they took Drive Image 7, which I think is a pathetic
product, and turned it into Ghost ?

Yuk!

Thank goodness they haven't screwed up the corporate version.

-Larry

"Steve Simpson" > wrote in message
...
>> Is there a recommendation for the software to do this? Norton Ghost 10
>> and True Image 9.0 seem to the be most frequently mentioned titles. Any
>> upside/downside to these programs that anyone wants to comment on?
>
> Ghost 2003 was the last reliable version of Ghost. The newer ones are
> just rebadged Powerquest Driveimage which runs in Windows and hence aren't
> anywhere near as reliable.
>
>

Steve Simpson wrote:
>> Is there a recommendation for the software to do this? Norton Ghost
>> 10 and True Image 9.0 seem to the be most frequently mentioned
>> titles. Any upside/downside to these programs that anyone wants to
>> comment on?
>
> Ghost 2003 was the last reliable version of Ghost. The newer ones
> are just rebadged Powerquest Driveimage which runs in Windows and
> hence aren't anywhere near as reliable.



I have not had any issues using Drive Image 7, and I have used it to
restore a working image.
Perhaps I just got lucky...



--
Don Burnette

(Larry) wrote:

> As long as the new HD is at least as large as the original, this
> should not be an issue.

I agree. I speak only from experience.

Andrew McP

>> Ghost 2003 was the last reliable version of Ghost. The newer ones
>> are just rebadged Powerquest Driveimage which runs in Windows and
>> hence aren't anywhere near as reliable.

> I have not had any issues using Drive Image 7, and I have used it to
> restore a working image.
> Perhaps I just got lucky...

It's not -unreliable- but it's not bulletproof either.

In article
ss_disguised>,
says...
> (Peter) wrote:
>
> > However, when I came to restore said image when I
> > changed my HD
>
> I find Trueimage is as fallible as the rest if restoring an old setup to
> a new hard disk. The "shape" of the HD needs to match the shape of the
> old one in order for XP to work properly from the start. You'd think by
> now they'd have got round that problem. Still, at least the old backup
> can be mounted later on and critical files copied over.
>

Well, to be on the safe side I'm only going to image one O/S partition
whilst using the other O/S partition. Even if it was a one off problem
before I'm not prepared to take the chance. Luckily for me there wasn't
much missing between the 2 XP backups program and data wise.

Actually, when I think back, perhaps I'm being unfair to True Image.
The HD had started to develop errors and that's why I replaced it and,
although no actually problems occurred whilst using the XP O/S, the data
partition on the same HD also turned out to be a wee bit shagged in
certain parts with some folders completely irretrievable.

I may try making 2 backups of XP to test things out. One from the other
O/S and one from within XP itself. That way, if I try to restore from
the XP running image and it fails I still have the image that was
created outside of XP and that will be an almost exact replica. Those
HD image backups have always restored flawlessly.

--
Pete Ives
Remove All_stRESS before sending me an email

This is getting more difficult. With all these negative experience
stories (and a few good ones, I guess) I don't know what to do. I'm not
in a rush, as I will probably hold off until the next official rFactor
patch is released and then do the total reinstall, but I don't want to
buy any software and then have major problems down the road. I suppose
it's like any issue of Windows, it's the latest and greatest, but still
contains major flaws that will need to be addressed.

I am not super concerned with data backup per se, it's a gaming
computer, so important docs, apps and etc. are not a real issue. I want
convenience and ease of use along with some semblance of reliability. I
simply want to be able to wake up one day and say, "let's roll out a
spring fresh copy of my computer" and have it be like the day I first
installed everything.

I do appeciate all the input and it is making me think a bit more about
which to go.

Once a month I let TrueImage re-image the machine to it's SecureZone. Of
course I have base and full images stored on the server as well.

I can recover from a cat-tastrophe in 20 min.

-Larry

"Darus" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> This is getting more difficult. With all these negative experience
> stories (and a few good ones, I guess) I don't know what to do. I'm not
> in a rush, as I will probably hold off until the next official rFactor
> patch is released and then do the total reinstall, but I don't want to
> buy any software and then have major problems down the road. I suppose
> it's like any issue of Windows, it's the latest and greatest, but still
> contains major flaws that will need to be addressed.
>
> I am not super concerned with data backup per se, it's a gaming
> computer, so important docs, apps and etc. are not a real issue. I want
> convenience and ease of use along with some semblance of reliability. I
> simply want to be able to wake up one day and say, "let's roll out a
> spring fresh copy of my computer" and have it be like the day I first
> installed everything.
>
> I do appeciate all the input and it is making me think a bit more about
> which to go.
>