Re: Backup Software rcommendation

"Bill in Co." <not_really_here@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:%2324SwlLjIHA.4076@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

No, what I said above was that one *could* choose to do this, if one wanted
to. NOT that one normally makes a clone TO do this!! BUT it IS an option IF
one so chooses, or at least it can be, right? Well, more on that below..

Before getting to the below, Yes, one could use a Cloned disk to Clone
another disk, yet I don't see any reason to do that to a failed disk.

Failed disk? No, not to a failed disk, but to a good backup HD, which could then be "restored" to the source drive (note: I am *not* talking about hardware disk failures here, just restoration for software failures).

As I mentioned previously, disk failure can be caused by any number of reasons, that would include software corruption. Perhaps I should have used: a disk that fails to properly boot the system which could be caused by any number of reasons. I still see no purpose, reason or otherwise to create a clone disk as a restore disk, that's what images are for, not clones, especially if the clone is an external USB drive. IMO external USB drives are problematic at best as backup media when it comes to crunch time in get a system back up and running.


Obviously if there were a hardware-failed disk, that disk would be junk, and the whole concept I'm talking about here makes no sense. In that case, a cloned disk would be the right option (pull it out afterwards, and put it in the failed drive's place).

When one uses an application such as ATI, Ghost or Casper to "Clone"
disk(s), all data ("information") on the disk(s) platters that are selected
to be cloned is written to the "recipient" disks platters. Depending on the
app used, *this has been a debate drudgery", the "Clone is a Sector x
Sector, Byte x Byte replica including the MBR//MFT of the "Donor" disk.
When the clone is completed, the "recipient" disk has the same data on it
that is on the "donor" disk and it should be stored in a what the user deems
a relatively safe haven. To minorly clarify, a cloned disk is an "exact"
replica of a "donor" disk, if the "donor" fails for any reason all one has
to do is shut down the PC, swap out the disks and reboot to be back up and
running again. *Keep in mind that any cloned disk(s) can be and are prone
to conditional issues already present on the "donor" disk at the point in
time the clone is created.

Yes, but I know this already - (UNLESS you are stating that the clone disk
must be exactly the same size as (identical to) the source disk).

Not at all, it makes what-so-ever no difference whether one clones a disk or
creates an image of the disk. Depending on the application used and the
knowledge on use of such application by the user, one can use a clone to
clone another disk or "Restore" an image to a disk\volume\partition which has
less free space then the clone/image, as long as there is enough free space
on that drive\volume to expand the volume\partition.

OR one could choose to "restore" the source drive (which had some software failure) by "restoring" the clone back to the source drive - that is, by cloning FROM the backup drive TO the source drive (the opposite direction, in other words) - if one so desired.

Actually, someone may WANT to do that, if the cloned backup drive is in an USB external enclosure (it can be a pain to swap it out!), and all they have is a cloned backup (because they didn't use imaging for their backups, in other words)


I wish anyone that chooses to do so good luck, it's still senseless IMO to use a clone as a restore disk in that manner.

I'm sure I have some
type of error in the use of terms drive\volume\partiton for this particular
post, but I'd rather swap out a cloned disk as apposed to waiting for an
image restore to complete so I could have at it.

Right, except that if we're just making system backups, and one of the drives (the backup drive) is in an USB enclosure, it's more convenient to leave it there.

But if that is not the case, then again I ask: but this does not necessarily
preclude one from doing the reverse operation, does it? That was my point.
IOW, one could use a cloned disk to (in effect) restore the source disk. If not, why not?

The only way I see it is to swap out the the failed disk with the clone to
expedite user production, otherwise it's senseless.

Wait - to "expedite user production" you say. What I see is a reverse operation being employed, and yeah, ok, perhaps that takes more time than simply doing a backup image restoration, but I don't see how it's so difficult. Granted, it may take longer - I don't know. However, there is ONE advantage (to the cloning backup approach), in that you have a bootable clone disk right there at your fingertips, IF the need arises - like a hardware disk failure of the source drive).

How is the user going to get that external USB so called "bootable disk" to boot if the OS itself won't boot? Are they going to boot with a type of recovery disk for the backup application with hopes of USB support working?


You mentioned you use
ATI, check into Acronis Snap Deploy. Although I believe it would be an extra
cost at the moment, in the long run it could/would be a godsend to some. Ooops, sorry, they now call it Snap Restore:
http://www.acronis.com/homecomputing/products/trueimage/tour/6/


Heck, I *know* I can do that - by booting up on a floppy in BootitNG (BING),
which does a low level, partition copy, between two disks of any size (but
NOT in windows). So is that an image copy or a clone copy? Somewhat
ambiguous. What is NOT ambiguous is that it does a disk partition copy
operation.

From what I've read by others BING creates an "Image", not a clone, in the
way you mention. As I mentioned before, a clone is a sector x sector/byte x
byte transfer from one disk to another without compression, I did however
fail to mention about the compression. An image is created where the user
chooses to place it and it is compressed.

I think the terms are still a bit confusing here, but to clarify, what BING does do is a *partition to partition* copy. There is no ambiguity of terms at this level. (And there is no compression). It's just a fundamental, sector-to-sector, copy of any partition you choose. (If you want to copy two partitions, you'll have to run it a second time for the second one, and so on). And of course, when you are in BING, you can't see anything (except at the sector level) - files, per se, are not defined at this level.


I'll take your word on that sincer I don't and never have used BING to create a backup.


Although not scientifically exact in a manner of my wording, an "Image" is
an exact copy of all data ("information") on the disk(s) platters that are
selected to be cloned is written to the "recipient" disks platters.
Depending on the app used, *this has been a debate drudgery", the "Image is
a compressed Sector x Sector, Byte x Byte replica including the MBR//MFT of
the "Donor" disk.. Think of an "Image" being like that of a Zip file.

(But (in some cases) still accessible, in that the files inside can be
accessed, as I mentioned before). But yeah, in a sense it is like a zip file.

The files of a cloned disk can be accessed at the point it is connected and
the OS is up and running, whether it be connected as a Master or Slave drive.
An image can only be accessed via the software which created it unless it's
not proprietory.

Yup. The True Image disk image is indeed accessible (to a limited extent) in Windows Explorer, but only through a low level running background service provided by True Image. I say to a limited extent, because while you can copy from it, you can't copy to it (which seems expectable).


I'd have to look into that for ATI, yet I know Ghost, at least 2003 and ver. 9 can do exactly that.


--


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


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: OT-True Image Backup
    ... Make sure the USB drives file system is NTFS and not FAT32.. ... Jaymon is correct in that the disk image you create and save to the D: ... partition of your USB external HDD will have no effect on the other ... Step-by-Step Instructions for Using the Acronis True Image Program to Backup ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support)
  • Re: OT-True Image Backup
    ... Make sure the USB drives file system is NTFS and not FAT32.. ... Jaymon is correct in that the disk image you create and save to the D: ... partition of your USB external HDD will have no effect on the other ... Since the disk images you will be creating (at least the initial backup ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support)
  • Re: Replacing Notebook Hard Drive
    ... both the disk cloning & disk imaging capabilities of the ATI program. ... Step-by-Step Instructions for Using the Acronis True Image Program to Backup ... can take to back up the entire contents of one's day-to-day working HDD, ... With both hard drives connected, ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware)
  • Re: Acronis and new disk
    ... with using the disk copying/disk cloning programs such as the MaxBlast ... contents of your 40 GB HDD to your new 120 GB HDD rather than creating a ... Step-by-Step Instructions for Using the Acronis True Image Program to Backup ... With both hard drives connected, ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware)
  • Re: Need help backing up my C: drive
    ... I tried using Windows' backup and restore which works for important data ... consider a disk imaging program such as ... Acronis True Image to clone the contents of your day-to-day working HDD onto ... With both hard drives connected, ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
Quantcast