Re: Backup Software rcommendation

Brian A. wrote:
"Daave" <dcwashNOSPAM@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:umprgQBjIHA.484@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Anna wrote:
Anna wrote:
So should "PT" or for that matter anyone else desire more detailed
information as to why I believe the Casper 4 program is the superior
way to go, I'll provide add'l info on the program.


"Daave" <dcwashNOSPAM@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:eMegOf6iIHA.5280@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I'm all ears.


Daave:
Well, we'll assume you're also all eyes...

The following is predicated on the basis that a user is seeking a
reliable program to backup his or her *entire* day-to-day booting
HDD, including the XP OS, all the user's programs & applications, as
well as user-created data, in short - *everything* that's on one's
"source" HDD. And wants an effective simple-to-use program to do this
on a systematic routine basis and do so reasonably quickly. So that
if & when the day comes when the user's primary HDD fails to boot or
otherwise dysfunctions because of a corrupted OS or becomes
physically/electronically defective the user will be able to easily
and reasonably quickly restore his or her system. To that end we've
found this Casper 4.0 program really fills the bill in this regard.

This type of comprehensive backup system can be achieved through the
use of a disk-cloning (or disk-imaging program). A backup program
that one could use on a daily basis should the user want. A program
that will create a precise copy of one's day-to-day HDD so that
should that HDD fail or the system becomes unbootable because of a
corrupt OS, the user would have the wherewithal to restore his/her
system to a bootable, functional state with a minimum of fuss. What
better backup system can one have?

The disk-to-disk cloning program we greatly prefer is the Casper 4
program - see
http://www.fssdev.com

The program is extremely simple to use even for an inexperienced user,
reasonably quick in operation, and quite effective. There's virtually
no learning curve in undertaking the disk cloning process as one
navigates through the few easy-to-understand screens with a final
mouse-click on the button on the screen which will trigger the
disk-cloning process. After undertaking one or two disk-cloning
operations it should take the user no more than 20 seconds or so to
get to that point.

But the truly significant advantage of the Casper 4.0 disk cloning
program compared with other disk cloning programs that we're familiar
with, e.g., Acronis True Image, is its ability to create
*incremental* disk clones following the creation of the original
(first) disk clone. Employing what Casper calls its "SmartClone"
technology the program can create subsequent disk clones of the
source HDD usually at a fraction of the time it takes to create a
"full" disk clone. This results in a decided incentive for the user
to undertake frequent complete backups of his or her system knowing
that they can create "incremental" disk clones in a relatively short
period of time. Understand that this "incremental disk clone" is a
*complete* clone (copy) of the "source" HDD.

So, as an example...

Let's say the user's interest is in backing up their system on a
daily basis or perhaps every two or three days or so. Following the
first time the user would use the Casper 4 program to clone the
contents of their internal (boot) HDD to another HDD (internal or
external), it would probably take no more than three minutes or so to
thereafter perform the disk-cloning operation. Obviously the amount
of time would, of course, be dependent upon the amount of data being
cloned. But because of Casper's "SmartClone" capability the amount of
time to complete the disk-cloning operation is extremely short in
comparison with other disk-cloning programs such as the Acronis one.
Again, bear in mind that the recipient of the clone - the
"destination" HDD (internal or external) - would contain the
*complete* contents of one's internal HDD (presumably the boot
drive). Since that destination drive would be a copy of the source
HDD, its contents would be immediately accessible and potentially
bootable. Naturally its contents could be cloned back to a internal
HDD should a restoration of the system be necessary. Again, what
better backup system can one have? And again - because the Casper 4
disk-cloning operation takes a relatively short period of time to
complete there's a strong incentive for the user to more frequently
keep their backups up-to-date than they might otherwise do.

The Casper 4.0 program is also capable of scheduling the disk-cloning
process on a daily, weekly, or other time period selected by the user
so that should the user prefer he or she could arrange for automatic
backups at pre-determined times.

There's a trial version available (see above link) although it's
somewhat crippled but it should give one a good idea as to how the
program works.

The downside to the Casper 4 program as compared with the Acronis and
most other disk-cloning programs is the cost of the program which
comes to $49.95 for the program + $9.95 for the "Casper Startup Disk"
(the program to create the bootable CD containing the Casper program
- needed to access the program in the event of a failed HDD). So it's
more expensive than the others. But in our view, well worth the
additional cost considering its overall effectiveness and the fact
that one will be using the program many, many times over the weeks &
months ahead. We've introduced the program to many users and I can't
recall a single person who regretted his/her purchase. AFAIK, the
program is available only through download from the developer.

Another possible downside to the Casper 4 program (depending upon
one's interests) is that it's really not designed to create
"generational" copies of one's system. Some users like to maintain
complete copies of their system at various points in time. To that
end a disk-imaging program (such as the Acronis one) is more
practical since to accomplish that objective using a disk-cloning
program such as Casper 4 the user would obviously need a fair number
of HDDs to serve as the recipients of the clones at these various
points in time. But based on our experience I would say that the vast
number of users are simply interested in maintaining only a current
up-to-date copy of their system and have little or no interest in
maintaining "generational" copies of such. But that may be a
consideration for some users.

So I would recommend that any user who is interested in a
comprehensive backup program should try the Casper 4 program to
determine if that program meets their needs.

I always thought the reason to choose cloning was it would give you a
perfect copy of the hard drive on another hard drive that you could
simply swap. If instead one chooses to clone those contents again back
to the original drive, I'm not quite sure how this would be seen as
preferable to restoring an image.



IMO it's a stack of Casper hype. Both Acronis True Image and Norton
Ghost
can do the same job and much more for an approximate same cost. Cloned
drives are not meant to be used as restore/recovery disks. They are as
stated by many, an "exact" disk copy of another disk that is
interchangeable
"of the moment" should the original fail for any number of reasons. It
would
be a senseless waste of time to use a cloned drive for restore.

Perhaps, but I'm not sure that is necessarily true, is it? It depends on
the time involved in making and restoring the clone back to the source
drive, doesn't it?
OR one could do the same thing (probably more expediently) by just imaging
it instead of cloning it (which is what I've been doing with TI)

I believe Casper can also do an image operation too, like TI can, so in that
one sense, they're comparable.

But I guess one difference might be that Casper allows you to clone the
drive, and very quickly as changes are made on a day to day basis, which I
don't think TI can do.

Again, I only have only been using Acronis True Image 11 up to this point,
and doing the full image/restore bit for my system drive (using an external
USB hard drive enclosure for backup), with good success, although I'm
tempted to consider trying Casper too.

Images are created for the purpose of restoring a disk volume, partition,
directory, folder or file should the need arise for any number of reasons.
One doesn't need more than a single disk volume/partition with enough
space to
accommodate 2 copies of an image while it is being created. One can
choose
if they so wish to replace aka overwrite a present image with one they
manually start or one that's scheduled, which brings it to the reason for
space accommodation. The previous image is left untouched until the new
image is created, once the new image is completed the previous copy is
deleted to accommodate space for the next replacement aka overwrite.


--


Brian A. Sesko { MS MVP_Windows Desktop User Experience }
Conflicts start where information lacks.
http://basconotw.mvps.org/

Suggested posting do's/don'ts: http://www.dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
How to ask a question: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/555375


.