Backup/Restore suggestions for XP, and Vista
Anonymous
Pro? And that can be eventually migrated to Vista?
I need "complete" backup/restore for data retention, image
recovery, boot restore, (int)(ext)ernal large HD, and (E)-
SATA support.
The obvious answers, Acronis and Ghost, seem not to have
unanimously glowing feedback on Amazon.
Or, are the feedback just flawed?
Thanks you very much,
Gary
db.·.. ><))) ·>` .. .
glowing feedbacks
from many users
that have successfully
used those software's
are rarely posted.
in doing so, there
would likely be thousands
of postings, perhaps
millions.
there is no perfect
backup solution nor
should you believe that
there is one.
however, an ideal solution
would be the methodology
you build that is perfect
for your situation/scenario.
perhaps, you might want
to look into Microsoft's
home server technology.
if anything can be considered
reliable enough to protect
your operating system and
data, it should be from the
makers of that operating
system.
--
db·´¯`·...¸><)))º>
"Anonymous" <c...@com.com> wrote in message
news:CsEWj.3224$7k7....@flpi150.ffdc.sbc.com...
Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]
I don't know about the Amazon reviews, but I've been using Acronis for years
and have been universally pleased. Get the full workstation (not home)
version with universal restore.
Anonymous
I'd read/heard many accolades for Acronis on various sites/
NG's. That's why I was quite surprised at the Amazon criti-
cism's. I've actually been very happy with Ntbackup, despite
what other's may say. I guess that's an accurate example of
the non-glowing feedback ratio you describe.
Thanks.
" db.·.. ><))) ·>` .. ." <databaseben.public.newsgroup.microsoft.com> wrote
in message news:uleVZZet...@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
Anonymous
Thanks for the tip. Maybe the workstation version is my
answer.
Thanks again....
"Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]"
<lanw...@heybuddy.donotsendme.unsolicitedmailatyahoo.com> wrote in message
news:esmsGhet...@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
Big Al
I use two backups. JUST TO MAKE SURE.
I use Acronis True Image Home to do an image, this copies everything.
(and it seems to work for me okay, of course I'm not crossing between XP
and Vista). Then I use stomp soft backup to backup just files. I've
learned what I need and it does a small 2-3 gig backup of my 'I need
files'. Between the two I can restore my system without more than a
few settings. And those I'm working on too.
PD43
>Lanwench [MVP - Exchange] wrote:
>> Anonymous <c...@com.com> wrote:
>>
>> I don't know about the Amazon reviews, but I've been using Acronis for years
>> and have been universally pleased. Get the full workstation (not home)
>> version with universal restore.
>>
>>
>Again this is the "what works for you" story.
>I use two backups. JUST TO MAKE SURE.
>I use Acronis True Image Home to do an image, this copies everything.
>(and it seems to work for me okay, of course I'm not crossing between XP
>and Vista). Then I use stomp soft backup to backup just files.
Why don't you use ATI for both? It will DO both.
Big Al
to make a config file listing just what I want to backup. Not sure ATI
does that. I've only had ATI for 4 months and only use it to make
clones so far. I've used ATI to restore files from the clone, as I
forgot a file on my last backup that was only on the clone. Anyway the
stomp 'file' backup is a one click and its done.
If I can config ATI, I'll look into it and yes, one less program on the
machine.
Anonymous
"Big Al" <Bi...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:vFGWj.7942$Uz2.2016@trnddc06...
As I stated in another reply, I've always been quite happy
simply using Ntbackup. However, I break out in sweats
everytime I consider the work necessary to recover a
dead system with only an Ntbackup image available.
Thanks.
Bill in Co.
Still haven't used TI to make a backup "clone" of the system, when an
"image" backup to an external USB HD enclosure drive does the trick for me.
(I never pull out that drive - it's a pain to do, so a "clone" won't work
well for me). Anytime I want to restore the backup, I just restore the
image to the source drive. Works fine here, and the source drive stays
put (no swapping of drives).
Anonymous
Thanks.
"Bill in Co." <not_rea...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:%23PAHERk...@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
Anonymous
I posted this text here recently, soliciting various backup
and restore product experiences.
Thanks to all who provided helpful replies.
Additionally, during my recent 5/15 reply to:
http://groups.google.com/group/microsoft.public.windowsxp.general/browse_frm/thread/9dc13c9126832009?hl=en#
it caused me to recall a product that I'd used in the past be-
cause it was provided with an ExHD product I purchased.
The company is CMS Products:
http://www.cmsproducts.com/
and they provide competing backup/restore systems along
with various optional hardware. My experience with their
backup/restore software was positive, but it was just an
entry level product shipped with a piece of hardware that
I bought.
Their site uses some youtube video to demonstrate some of
their product operations. I'm going to look closer, and I sugg-
est those here still looking for backup/restore/recovery solu-
tions take a look also.
As usual, my disclaimer is that I have no personal/business/
financial interest in this CMS products, or anyone in/around
their organization. My only interest is as a former user.
Thanks again, for all the helpful comments.
Gary
"Anonymous" <c...@com.com> wrote in message
news:CsEWj.3224$7k7....@flpi150.ffdc.sbc.com...
Colin Barnhorst
and x64) compatible. You can't miss.
"Anonymous" <c...@com.com> wrote in message
news:PdQWj.108$Q57...@nlpi065.nbdc.sbc.com...
Anonymous
Thank you.
"Colin Barnhorst" <c.bar...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:378AA5DE-6F6D-4F86...@microsoft.com...
dadiOH
Another alternative. Better than the others IME.
http://www.paragon-software.com/home/hdm-personal/
--
dadiOH
____________________________
dadiOH's dandies v3.06...
...a help file of info about MP3s, recording from
LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that.
Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico
Big Al
Anonymous
"dadiOH" <dad...@invalid.com> wrote in message
news:Ot2vzSnt...@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
Thanks, I'll look there also.
Tuttle
From: "Anonymous" <c...@com.com>
Newsgroups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2008 12:35 PM
Subject: Re: Backup/Restore suggestions for XP, and Vista
>
> "dadiOH" <dad...@invalid.com> wrote in message
> news:Ot2vzSnt...@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> > Anonymous wrote:
> >> Any suggestions for "complete" backup/restore SW for XP
> >> Pro? And that can be eventually migrated to Vista?
> >>
> >> I need "complete" backup/restore for data retention, image
> >> recovery, boot restore, (int)(ext)ernal large HD, and (E)-
> >> SATA support.
> >>
> >> The obvious answers, Acronis and Ghost, seem not to have
> >> unanimously glowing feedback on Amazon.
> >>
> >> Or, are the feedback just flawed?
All backup software will have some negative feedback, imaging software even
moreso.
I've used several tools over the years. My current favourite is Acronis True
Image Home.
Acronis True Image Home can do a complete image of your drive, so in the
event of a drive failure you just install a replacement drive and restore
your recent image to the new drive. Everything will be exactly as you left
it before the old drive failed: Windows (or whatever OS you use), all
applications, all your settings and config, all your data.
Or, you can use Acronis True Image Home to backup just your documents and
settings, or just specific files, or whatever you want. You can schedule
automated backups, can do full, incremental and differential backups, etc.
It's a great tool that has saved me a few times.
Anonymous
"Tuttle" <nospa...@notarealaddressnospam.gs> wrote in message
news:OcOY39rt...@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
I've had similar replies, including the suggestion to use the
Acronis Workstation version, rather than Home.
Like you, my years of Ntbackup usage have been quite
positive, meeting all my needs for a backup.
However, although Ntbackup will easily protect against
accidental loss, it is either unable, or quite cumbersome
at providing recovery, or bare metal restore.
I have to admit that the backup product from CMS looks
quite attractive though. Because I like the idea of simply
rebooting the backup image for a quick recovery. Watch
this video:
http://www.cmsproducts.com/video/desktop_backup.html
Unfortunately, I'm not familiar with E/SATA, and support
would require my upgrade. But, I'd get the functionality
described, in addition to the significantly higher speeds.
One of the Amazon reviewers complaints on Acronis TI
Home was that E/SATA was not currently supported. I
guess I would've thought a backup product would simply
rely on the OS for peripheral access.
I'm currently investigating this "boot from backup" on an
external drive issue. What it takes? (E/SATA, Firewire,
etc?), and what I've have to upgrade. But, I like the idea.
Not only is it easier, but simple testing of a crash recovery
requires no intermediate restore. Much less exposure to
error.
Additionally, because the backup image is stored in native
format(non-composite), even lost file restores are easier.
And FAT limitations are avoided for users of that archi-
tecture.
Thanks.
Anna
I'm sure you understand that when we talk about eSATA or just plain SATA in
this context of backup programs, we're simply talking about the HDD that
will be involved in the backup and/or restore process. And that HDD will be
a SATA (not a PATA) HDD. The distinction between SATA & eSATA is simply the
connector that a SATA HDD will be connected to. The "e" in eSATA stands for
"external". A number of motherboards are equipped with an eSATA port and a
number of desktop computer cases are similarly equipped. The eSATA port is
considered a more secure SATA connector than the "regular" or "normal" SATA
connector and the eSATA data cable will be equipped with an eSATA connector,
not a "regular" SATA connector. But for all practical purposes a SATA HDD
will perform just as well connected to either type of port - SATA or eSATA.
The important point to remember here is that connecting a external SATA HDD
to *either* a SATA or eSATA port will give the user SATA-to-SATA
connectivity (as opposed to USB connectivity for example). Obviously we're
presuming that the PC has SATA capability, i.e., it supports SATA hard
drives.
Having SATA-to-SATA connectivity is most advantageous when using an external
SATA HDD as the recipient of the backed up contents of one's internal
day-to-day working HDD. There are two significant advantages...
1. The data transfer rate is considerably higher than, for example, a USB
external HDD device.
2. Assuming the SATA HDD contained in a SATA external enclosure is the
recipient of the cloned contents of the user's internal HDD through the use
of a disk-cloning program, e.g., the Acronis one that has been mentioned,
the SATA HDD will be a bootable device even though it's being used in an
external capacity. The system will treat that drive as an *internal* HDD
because of its SATA-to-SATA connectivity notwithstanding the fact that it is
physically external to the machine.
(BTW, that CMS device you mention is really nothing more than an external
enclosure that provides both USB & SATA connectivity. There are scores of
similar enclosures on the market. You can simply install your own SATA HDD
into the enclosure.)
The Acronis True Image program that has been recommended to you is a fine
program with many satisfied users. You should consider it, especially since
there's a trial version available.
However, for a variety of reasons, the disk-cloning program we greatly
prefer is the Casper 4 program. If you (or anyone coming upon this thread)
want some details about that program I'll post such.
Anna
PD43
>The Acronis True Image program that has been recommended to you is a fine
>program with many satisfied users. You should consider it, especially since
>there's a trial version available.
>
>However, for a variety of reasons, the disk-cloning program we greatly
>prefer is the Casper 4 program. If you (or anyone coming upon this thread)
>want some details about that program I'll post such.
>Anna
<sigh>
Here we go again! <g>
Bill in Co.
You don't want to stay in this thread, PD. It's too long for you to
follow.
Bill in Co.
Just to be complete, Anna, you should point out that he doesn't HAVE to use
SATA or eSATA for backups, however. He could instead just use his
existing setup, and get an external USB HD enclosure (containing a regular
PATA hard drive) for backup purposes too (i.e., for storing and restoring a
backup image). That's what I'm doing over here, and it works great.
Granted, it's not as fast, but it doesn't really take me that long, either.
Anna
"Bill in Co." <not_rea...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:u6jcxcvt...@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Just to be complete, Anna, you should point out that he doesn't HAVE to
> use SATA or eSATA for backups, however. He could instead just use his
> existing setup, and get an external USB HD enclosure (containing a regular
> PATA hard drive) for backup purposes too (i.e., for storing and restoring
> a backup image). That's what I'm doing over here, and it works great.
> Granted, it's not as fast, but it doesn't really take me that long,
> either.
Bill:
True enough and it's a virtual certainty that the great majority of users
like yourself who already use a disk-cloning program as a comprehensive
backup tool do indeed use a USB-connected external HDD as the recipient of
the cloned contents of their day-to-day working HDD. I wouldn't dispute that
for a moment.
But...
In my view the superiority of using a SATA-to-SATA connection for that
purpose via a SATA/eSATA external enclosure as I have described above
warrants its use rather than a USB connected HDD wherever that inherent SATA
capability exists. Obviously the user must have a SATA-capable system and a
SATA or eSATA port to which the external device is connected. In that
connection I might add that many, if not most, of the SATA/eSATA external
enclosures now come with an auxiliary eSATA bracket that is affixed to the
backplane of the computer case and the attached (inner) cable is simply
connected to one of the motherboard's SATA connectors. And, of course, more
& more desktop cases (as well as more & more motherboards) are now coming
equipped with an eSATA port
(We're talking about desktop machines here, not laptops/notebooks. While the
SATA-to-SATA connectivity can be established with those latter machines the
component to do so is different.)
So, as in the OP's case where a user is considering the possibility of using
a disk-cloning program as a comprehensive backup system, and his or her
system supports SATA capability, I believe they should give serious
consideration to what I've suggested.
Anna
Anonymous
I'm not fully up to speed on E/SATA, but I've been reading.
Your comments/explanations will help with that understanding.
I think it was another thread of yours where I read about
the interface being "glitchy". Or, at least, the interface when
added with a upgrade card, I think.
The thread concerned another's question concerning whether
a 3.0 ATA unit would synchronize at the existing 1.5 level.
As I said, I'm researching the details. But, that was the first
indication I'd seen of any faults.
> Just to be complete, Anna, you should point out that he doesn't HAVE to
> use SATA or eSATA for backups, however. He could instead just use his
> existing setup, and get an external USB HD enclosure (containing a regular
> PATA hard drive) for backup purposes too (i.e., for storing and restoring
> a backup image). That's what I'm doing over here, and it works great.
> Granted, it's not as fast, but it doesn't really take me that long,
> either.
>
I do currently have two external drives in use for backup via
a usb2.0 interface. I'm researching a new strategy because
I don't have a viable crash recovery solution(at least not with-
out a ton of rebuild work involved). And while researching
the new path, thought I'd upgrade to an ATA interface to
gain the extra speed. Although, I'm not unhappy with the
usb throughput.
Thanks.
Tuttle
As far as I know, Acronis True image supports SATA drives. In fact I have a
SATA drive in my new external USB drive.
Bill in Co.
And I'm using TI to backup my internal SATA system drive, to an external USB
enclosure (with an older PATA drive inside) without problems. But as Anna
has said, the newer, all SATA approach, is preferable, but not a necessity
(for just backing up via imaging, at least).
Anna
Anna wrote:
I'm sure you understand that when we talk about eSATA or just plain SATA in
this context of backup programs, we're simply talking about the HDD that
will be involved in the backup and/or restore process. And that HDD will be
a SATA (not a PATA) HDD. The distinction between SATA & eSATA is simply the
connector that a SATA HDD will be connected to. The "e" in eSATA stands for
"external". A number of motherboards are equipped with an eSATA port and a
number of desktop computer cases are similarly equipped. The eSATA port is
considered a more secure SATA connector than the "regular" or "normal" SATA
connector and the eSATA data cable will be equipped with an eSATA connector,
not a "regular" SATA connector. But for all practical purposes a SATA HDD
will perform just as well connected to either type of port - SATA or eSATA.
The important point to remember here is that connecting a external SATA HDD
to *either* a SATA or eSATA port will give the user SATA-to-SATA
connectivity (as opposed to USB connectivity for example). Obviously we're
presuming that the PC has SATA capability, i.e., it supports SATA hard
drives.
Having SATA-to-SATA connectivity is most advantageous when using an external
SATA HDD as the recipient of the backed-up contents of one's internal
day-to-day working HDD. There are two significant advantages...
1. The data transfer rate is considerably higher than, for example, a USB
external HDD device.
2. Assuming the SATA HDD contained in a SATA external enclosure is the
recipient of the cloned contents of the user's internal HDD through the use
of a disk-cloning program, e.g., the Acronis one that has been mentioned,
the SATA HDD will be a bootable device even though it's being used in an
external capacity. The system will treat that drive as an *internal* HDD
because of its SATA-to-SATA connectivity notwithstanding the fact that it is
physically external to the machine.
(BTW, that CMS device you mention is really nothing more than an external
enclosure that provides both USB & SATA connectivity. There are scores of
similar enclosures on the market. You can simply install your own SATA HDD
into the enclosure.)
The Acronis True Image program that has been recommended to you is a fine
program with many satisfied users. You should consider it, especially since
there's a trial version available.
However, for a variety of reasons, the disk-cloning program we greatly
prefer is the Casper 4 program. If you (or anyone coming upon this thread)
want some details about that program I'll post such.
Anna
> "Bill in Co." <not_rea...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:u6jcxcvt...@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> Just to be complete, Anna, you should point out that he doesn't HAVE to
>> use SATA or eSATA for backups, however. He could instead just use his
>> existing setup, and get an external USB HD enclosure (containing a
>> regular PATA hard drive) for backup purposes too (i.e., for storing and
>> restoring a backup image). That's what I'm doing over here, and it
>> works great. Granted, it's not as fast, but it doesn't really take me
>> that long, either.
"Anonymous" <c...@com.com> wrote in message
news:Mj7Xj.931$qH4...@nlpi061.nbdc.sbc.com...
> I'm not fully up to speed on E/SATA, but I've been reading.
>
> Your comments/explanations will help with that understanding.
>
> I think it was another thread of yours where I read about
> the interface being "glitchy". Or, at least, the interface when
> added with a upgrade card, I think.
>
> The thread concerned another's question concerning whether
> a 3.0 ATA unit would synchronize at the existing 1.5 level.
>
> As I said, I'm researching the details. But, that was the first
> indication I'd seen of any faults.
>
> I do currently have two external drives in use for backup via
> a usb2.0 interface. I'm researching a new strategy because
> I don't have a viable crash recovery solution(at least not with-
> out a ton of rebuild work involved). And while researching
> the new path, thought I'd upgrade to an ATA interface to
> gain the extra speed. Although, I'm not unhappy with the
> usb throughput.
>
> Thanks.
First of all, understand that the SATA/eSATA interface is not "glitchy". By
& large it makes for a day-in day-out stable connection between the HDD and
the system (the motherboard) and yields the advantages I have enumerated.
That previous thread you referred to re possible incompatibilities between
the older SATA HDDs (with the 1.5 Gb/s data interface) and the newer
(so-called) SATA-II HDDs (with the 3.0 Gb/s data interface) is of no
relevance re the issue under discussion here. So put any of your doubts to
rest as to any "faults" re using an external SATA HDD for backup purposes.
Since you already have USB external enclosures I would see no reason why you
shouldn't use them as recipients of the disk clone (or disk image) assuming
you would be using a disk cloning or disk imaging program in establishing &
maintaining a comprehensive backup program. This would be the same setup as
the one "Bill in Co." is using (as well as many other users) and it would
basically serve the purpose.
My recommendation for using an external SATA HDD with SATA-to-SATA
connectivity for that purpose would yield the advantages I detailed above,
but obviously it would entail an add'l cost to the user should the user
already have a USB (or Firewire) external enclosure containing an existing
HDD. Whether the user would want to incur the add'l expense in purchasing
the components I have indicated to secure the advantages I've indicated is
obviously a decision that would have to be made by him or her.
Anna
Anonymous
"Anna" <myn...@myisp.net> wrote in message
news:OkiSLg3t...@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
Yeah, I assumed that there were other vendors, beside CMS,
with a similar offering.
The usb externals have performed well for me over the years.
I just agonize over the work that will be required for a bare
metal recovery. I just think it's time for me to address such
a possibility/eventuality.
I was steering toward an external ATA solution because it is
bootable, and for a speed increase. (although the speed is
not really an need issue).
I like the CMS product because the backup image looks
identical to the source drive. IOW, it's natively organized,
as opposed to a single extent composite. In the time of a
failure, this swap seems like a much better solution to gain
lost access quickly. Without fumbling/waiting for a recov-
ery.
But, your explanation/comments have helped me understand
some of the issues, and technicalities behind the curtain.
One thing that I'm still stuck on though. Assuming an EHDD
boot for recovery, how are all OS C:\ references resolved
subsequently. Is the EHDD assigned C:\ as the boot drive?
Or, are all C:\ references resolved on the fly?
Thanks....
Anna
>> By & large it makes for a day-in day-out stable connection between the
>> HDD and the system (the motherboard) and yields the advantages I have
>> enumerated. That previous thread you referred to re possible
>> incompatibilities between the older SATA HDDs (with the 1.5 Gb/s data
>> interface) and the newer (so-called) SATA-II HDDs (with the 3.0 Gb/s data
>> interface) is of no relevance re the issue under discussion here. So put
>> any of your doubts to rest as to any "faults" re using an external SATA
>> HDD for backup purposes.
>>
>> Since you already have USB external enclosures I would see no reason why
>> you shouldn't use them as recipients of the disk clone (or disk image)
>> assuming you would be using a disk cloning or disk imaging program in
>> establishing & maintaining a comprehensive backup program. This would >>
>> be the same setup as the one "Bill in Co." is using (as well as many
>> other users) and it would basically serve the purpose.
>>
>> My recommendation for using an external SATA HDD with SATA-to-
>> SATA connectivity for that purpose would yield the advantages I detailed
>> >> above, but obviously it would entail an add'l cost to the user should
>> the user >> already have a USB (or Firewire) external enclosure
>> containing an existing HDD. Whether the user would want to incur the
>> add'l expense in purchasing >> the components I have indicated to secure
>> the advantages I've indicated is obviously a decision that would have to
>> be made by him or her.
>> Anna
"Anonymous" <c...@com.com> wrote in message
news:VkkXj.4757$nl7....@flpi146.ffdc.sbc.com...
> Yeah, I assumed that there were other vendors, beside CMS,
> with a similar offering.
>
> The usb externals have performed well for me over the years.
> I just agonize over the work that will be required for a bare
> metal recovery. I just think it's time for me to address such
> a possibility/eventuality.
>
> I was steering toward an external ATA solution because it is
> bootable, and for a speed increase. (although the speed is
> not really an need issue).
>
> I like the CMS product because the backup image looks
> identical to the source drive. IOW, it's natively organized,
> as opposed to a single extent composite. In the time of a
> failure, this swap seems like a much better solution to gain
> lost access quickly. Without fumbling/waiting for a recov-
> ery.
>
> But, your explanation/comments have helped me understand
> some of the issues, and technicalities behind the curtain.
>
> One thing that I'm still stuck on though. Assuming an EHDD
> boot for recovery, how are all OS C:\ references resolved
> subsequently. Is the EHDD assigned C:\ as the boot drive?
>
> Or, are all C:\ references resolved on the fly?
>
> Thanks....
When you use a disk-cloning program such as Acronis True Image, or
Symantec's Ghost, or our favorite, the Casper 4 program, and you use that
type of program to clone the contents of your "source" HDD to a USB external
HDD as apparently you intend to do...
For all practical purposes, the USBEHD - the recipient of the clone - will
be a precise copy of the source HDD, however, it is ordinarily not a
bootable device although some users have indicated they have been able to
boot to a cloned USBEHD. We have never achieved that capability (at least in
an XP environment).
If & when the time comes that you wish to restore your system to a bootable,
functional state (presumably because the internal source HDD has become
defective or the OS has become corrupt & dysfunctional), then you would
simply clone back the contents on the USBEHD to the internal HDD. The system
would retain the C: letter drive assignment. It is immaterial as to the
drive letter designation on the cloned USBEHD while it is merely functioning
as the repository of the cloned contents of the internal (source) HDD.
You're using that device basically as a retainer of the contents of your
internal (source) HDD and ultimately as a vehicle for cloning the contents
on the external HDD back to your internal HDD for restoration purposes. As
I've indicated, under those circumstances you will thus have a bootable,
functioning system with the C: drive letter assignment.
Anna