Macrium Reflect or Shadow Protect Win 8

[pandlouk]

Originally Posted by andylau

Mounting image to use such as robocopy to copy files to a partition is inconvenient to users.

For some users it is. For some others it's not.

Originally Posted by andylau

Both Acronis and Symantec Ghost are needed not to mount image to restore to smaller partition.
They can restore image to both formatted and unformatted partition directly. I think Macrium also can do that.

I think you have not used either one of them before, right?

I have used and purchased every version of ghost from 3.1 to 9 (2003). And tested every later version of ghost. And I also had purchased licenses of acronis TI 8 and 9.
So yes, I know how they perform the file/based restores (ghost actually started as file based imaging app and moved to sector based when symantec acquired powerquest in 2003).
They open the image/archive, then create/format a new partition and in the end they restore the files/permissions (but the user sees only the final result).

Panagiotis

[andylau]

Originally Posted by pandlouk

For some users it is. For some others it's not.

You have pointed out that it is inconvenient to SOME users.

Originally Posted by pandlouk

I have used and purchased every version of ghost from 3.1 to 9 (2003). And tested every later version of ghost. And I also had purchased licenses of acronis TI 8 and 9.
So yes, I know how they perform the file/based restores (ghost actually started as file based imaging app and moved to sector based when symantec acquired powerquest in 2003).
They open the image/archive, then create/format a new partition and in the end they restore the files/permissions (but the user sees only the final result).

Panagiotis

I think users do not care it is backup by files or backup by sector, they just want it can be more flexible and convenient to use.
Generally, users do not care the processes, they concern the result.
Macrium Reflect can do something that ShadowProtect cannot do. And some people are needed this, especially when restoring image to SSD.

As I know, if an imaging software is backup by sector, it cannot restore image to smaller partition. I mean the last sector in source partition is greater than the size of target partition.

I think I should say clearly, I am talking Symantec Ghost, not Norton Ghost. It is still backup by files.

[Brian K]

Andy,

The big disadvantage with file based restores is the files are restored in a compacted state. All squashed together. You have already expressed your dislike of compaction yet you are happy to accept compaction for all image restores, not just for restores to smaller partitions. Some folks prefer to have their OS defragged so recently changed files are in one area of the partition while older files are in another and the page file is in the middle of the partition. This is said to improve performance. Compaction would spoil this layout and a defrag would have to be done after the restore.

With sector based restores you might have to defrag after restoring to a smaller partition but not after restoring to the same sized partition and restores to the same sized partition are by far the majority.

[andylau]

Brian,

With file based restore, after restoration partition will not have fragments or just has very few fragments, so need not to defrag again.
HDD is slow, no matter how to allocate the position of sector, still very less in the improvement of performance. If you are using SSD, you need not to defrag.

As I say I do not want to resize/compact/defrag/shrink both source and target partition/image, I just lazy to type too much words. The whole sentence is "I do not want to resize/compact/defrag/shrink source partition/image and I do not want to resize/shrink target partition/image." I think you know it because with file based restore, no compact/defrag is needed.

The disadvantage of sector based imaging is that if you want to make sure your image is more flexible, you may need to resize/compact/defrag/shrink source partition before you make an image. It is in order to gain the least required partition size to restore an image to target partition if you want to restore to smaller partition, especially for SSD.
As for HDD, if your source partition has fragments, you also need to defrag again after image is restored.
If sector based restore can restore to a smaller partition, I think the sector structure will not change, just as the same in the source.

[Gorkster]

Originally Posted by pandlouk

(ghost actually started as file based imaging app and moved to sector based when symantec acquired powerquest in 2003)

I, too, have used Ghost since MSDOS days. That aside, I do not believe even 3.1 was file based... ?? Even if I'm wrong, it would allow you to copy the necessary sectors to make a bootable copy of an OS drive (and later partition even.) I seem to recall these old versions giving the user feedback in sector counts (or something similar) as opposed to file counts.

I remember in order to image or clone a drive you had to create a boot floppy (and later a boot CD) to boot from. That wouldn't have been necessary in the MSDOS days for a file based backup solution. I 'spose I may be thinking pre 3.1 days, I don't recall what version they started using a Windows app. But I don't understand why they'd go backwards from file based to sector based then go back to sector based later on... Windows Ghost versions I've used since the acquisition of PowerQuest (at least) let you set up a "file backup" or an image backup and I've always either assumed or known the image backup is sector based... This document seems to indicate otherwise and, at least as of 2003, you have the choice when imaging to either use a sector by sector backup or a "native backup" which is described thusly: "Native cloning is much faster because Ghost recognizes the file system and clones only the disk structure information and the files."

This page seems to indicate the initial Ghost release could do sector by sector copies too: "Initially, Ghost supported only FAT filesystems directly, but it could also copy (although not resize) other filesystems by performing a sector copy."

If all that's true, you at least taught me something new. When what Ghost refers to as a native cloning process (where file system is recognized and used) it is only a file copy along with the sectors needed for the file system and booting. It makes me wonder if pretty much all cloning programs work the same way.

One thing that confuses me is that I asked Macrium if I used the sector by sector option in Reflect if I could clone or image the hard drive in my Tivo device which uses a proprietary file system. They told me it would not be possible because Reflect needs to be able to parse the partition table and the partition table on the Tivo hard drive isn't recognized by Reflect. (here) I probably show my lack of knowledge by saying I always assumed a sector by sector copy should be able to image a drive regardless of the partition table. I suppose on some level it makes sense that the partition table defines the sector layout though.

Sorry, thinking out loud and am obviously way off topic.

[stevesnyder]

Originally Posted by andylau

You have pointed out that it is inconvenient to SOME users.



I think users do not care it is backup by files or backup by sector, they just want it can be more flexible and convenient to use.
Generally, users do not care the processes, they concern the result.
Macrium Reflect can do something that ShadowProtect cannot do. And some people are needed this, especially when restoring image to SSD.

As I know, if an imaging software is backup by sector, it cannot restore image to smaller partition. I mean the last sector in source partition is greater than the size of target partition.

I think I should say clearly, I am talking Symantec Ghost, not Norton Ghost. It is still backup by files.

Hi Andy,

I agree that users care about convenience, but don't you think they also care about content? I mean you can use a convenient software all you want but if it doesn't backup the content you want then convenience is useless. In this case a byte/sector backup will contain the OS, installed applications, running services, configuration settings, as well as the data. File/folder backups are designed to allow someone to backup specific files/folders (e.g. a user's folder or just the /My Documents sub folder) which is often more useful to home users. Several comments in this thread have discussed how all the home user is doing is backing up family pictures, personal documents, and etc. In this case a file/folder backup provides the necessary content while a byte/sector backup provides the content and more. Convenience would seem to be only an issue of personal preference rather than a performance measurement in this example.

I have to disagree on your second point. An image based backup can restore to the image to a smaller partition. I've written several examples in this thread on exactly how to do this using StorageCraft's ShadowProtect. This is especially useful to home users (and businesses) which upgrade from a HDD to a SSD. When comparing equally priced SSD's and HDD's most people that buy the SSD trade the extra storage an HDD has for the faster performance an SSD has at the same price. This often means buying an SSD with less storage but faster read/write than the existing HDD in the system... and it means that an image-based backup of the existing system will have to fit on a smaller partition on the new SSD. This shows why the ability to easily transfer OS, applications, services and data from a larger HDD to a smaller SSD is important and why an image-based backup that can make this transfer is necessary.

Cheers!

[andylau]

Originally Posted by stevesnyder

Hi Andy,

I agree that users care about convenience, but don't you think they also care about content? I mean you can use a convenient software all you want but if it doesn't backup the content you want then convenience is useless. In this case a byte/sector backup will contain the OS, installed applications, running services, configuration settings, as well as the data. File/folder backups are designed to allow someone to backup specific files/folders (e.g. a user's folder or just the /My Documents sub folder) which is often more useful to home users. Several comments in this thread have discussed how all the home user is doing is backing up family pictures, personal documents, and etc. In this case a file/folder backup provides the necessary content while a byte/sector backup provides the content and more. Convenience would seem to be only an issue of personal preference rather than a performance measurement in this example.

I have to disagree on your second point. An image based backup can restore to the image to a smaller partition. I've written several examples in this thread on exactly how to do this using StorageCraft's ShadowProtect. This is especially useful to home users (and businesses) which upgrade from a HDD to a SSD. When comparing equally priced SSD's and HDD's most people that buy the SSD trade the extra storage an HDD has for the faster performance an SSD has at the same price. This often means buying an SSD with less storage but faster read/write than the existing HDD in the system... and it means that an image-based backup of the existing system will have to fit on a smaller partition on the new SSD. This shows why the ability to easily transfer OS, applications, services and data from a larger HDD to a smaller SSD is important and why an image-based backup that can make this transfer is necessary.

Cheers!

Steven,

Imaging software is backup by files does not mean it is backup files/folders only. It can be used to backup an OS partition which is also can be included such as MBR. If you have tried backup by files' imagaing software such as Symantec Ghost or Acronis, I think you will know what I mean beacuse they are not designed for backup specific files/folders only. Therefore, I do not explain more.


As for the second point, I mean restoring image to smaller partition automatically without any manual steps.
Yup, you let me know ShadowProtect's image can be shrink. It seems not many backup by sector imaging software can do this. But it is strange that this process can be done in recovery environment only.

[pandlouk]

Originally Posted by andylau

You have pointed out that it is inconvenient to SOME users.

Yes, and I also said that it's not for some others.

Originally Posted by andylau

I think users do not care it is backup by files or backup by sector, they just want it can be more flexible and convenient to use.
Generally, users do not care the processes, they concern the result.
Macrium Reflect can do something that ShadowProtect cannot do. And some people are needed this, especially when restoring image to SSD.

As I know, if an imaging software is backup by sector, it cannot restore image to smaller partition. I mean the last sector in source partition is greater than the size of target partition.

I think I should say clearly, I am talking Symantec Ghost, not Norton Ghost. It is still backup by files.

But users care about the speed. File based imaging is much much slower than sector based imaging. So for the majority of the users sector based imaging is more convenient.
Also during the file based image restores, the apps have to restore correctly:
-the files
-the long file names
-the short file names (8.3)
-the permissions
-the junction points
-the metadata
Have you ever checked all those parameters before and after your restores to see if they really restored an exact image/clone of your system and not a somewhat close replicate?
Acronis, Macrium, norton/symantec (not ghost32.exe or ghost64.exe) and Paragon use sector based imaging for the backups and sector based or file based imaging during the restores (depends from the users settings and/or operations).
Both sector based and file based imaging have their pros and cons. Depends on the situation and what the user is trying to achieve. But for the vast majority of imaging operations sector based is better and faster and this is why almost all the imaging apps use it.
Personally the only imaging app that I trust for file based imaging backups/restores is imageX of microsoft.

Panagiotis

[andylau]

Originally Posted by pandlouk

But users care about the speed. File based imaging is much much slower than sector based imaging. So for the majority of the users sector based imaging is more convenient.
Also during the file based image restores, the apps have to restore correctly:
-the files
-the long file names
-the short file names (8.3)
-the permissions
-the junction points
-the metadata
Have you ever checked all those parameters before and after your restores to see if they really restored an exact image/clone of your system and not a somewhat close replicate?

I have used Symantec Ghost from Windows XP to Windows 7.
But I do not find any problems.
As Symantec Ghost is slow in speed, therefore, I switch to Acronis.

Originally Posted by pandlouk

Acronis, Macrium, norton/symantec (not ghost32.exe or ghost64.exe) and Paragon use sector based imaging for the backups and sector based or file based imaging during the restores (depends from the users settings and/or operations).

As for "sector based or file based imaging during the restores", if what you are talking is right, you have pointed out the flexibility and convenience of such imaging software. And it is really what I want! Fast in speed and more flexible and convenience in usage.
But I cannot find any settings and/or operations in Acronis can choose sector based or file based imaging during the restores.

[pandlouk]

Originally Posted by Gorkster

...This page seems to indicate the initial Ghost release could do sector by sector copies too: "Initially, Ghost supported only FAT filesystems directly, but it could also copy (although not resize) other filesystems by performing a sector copy."

If all that's true, you at least taught me something new. When what Ghost refers to as a native cloning process (where file system is recognized and used) it is only a file copy along with the sectors needed for the file system and booting. It makes me wonder if pretty much all cloning programs work the same way.

One thing that confuses me is that I asked Macrium if I used the sector by sector option in Reflect if I could clone or image the hard drive in my Tivo device which uses a proprietary file system. They told me it would not be possible because Reflect needs to be able to parse the partition table and the partition table on the Tivo hard drive isn't recognized by Reflect. (here) I probably show my lack of knowledge by saying I always assumed a sector by sector copy should be able to image a drive regardless of the partition table. I suppose on some level it makes sense that the partition table defines the sector layout though.

Hi Gorkster,

Yes, ghost always supported sector by sector (=copy all sectors) imaging.
Sector based imaging (where the app. reads the partition's filetable and then identifies and copies only the sectors where the files reside + the sectors occupied by the file table structure/files) is very different to sector by sector partition imaging.
About your macrium problem: it seems that (at least at the time) macrium did not support sector by sector disk imaging (=copying the disk as raw).

Panagiotis

[pandlouk]

Originally Posted by andylau

I have used Symantec Ghost from Windows XP to Windows 7.
But I do not find any problems.
As Symantec Ghost is slow in speed, therefore, I switch to Acronis.

As for "sector based or file based imaging during the restores", if what you are talking is right, you have pointed out the flexibility and convenience of such imaging software. And it is really what I want! Fast in speed and more flexible and convenience in usage.
But I cannot find any settings and/or operations in Acronis can choose sector based or file based imaging during the restores.

Hl, Andy.
This is why, I told you in my initial post in the thread, that if you believe that ghost or acronis who offer this ability are superior programs or better suited for you, just use them and move on. No need to keep whining about it because not all imaging programs support it. Not every program is for everyone.
e.g.(1) Shadow Protect excels at fast continuing incrementals and hardware independent restore, for their customers those are the needed/wanted features, not file based restores.
e.g.(2) "Image for Windows" excels in high(extreme?) customization/control over the backups/restores and in compatibility (supports FAT16, FAT32, NTFS, HFS+, Ext2, Ext3, Ext4, ReiserFS, and XFS partitions). Is it for everyone? No. It is ideal for me though, but I do not pretend that all the imaging apps should support all those file systems because for me is convinient.
---end of rant----
In Acronis you cannot control it. It desides automatically what strategy to use when you perform a restore (e.g. when resizing to a smaller partition).

Panagiotis

[andylau]

Acronis, Macrium, norton/symantec (not ghost32.exe or ghost64.exe) and Paragon use sector based imaging for the backups and sector based or file based imaging during the restores (depends from the users settings and/or operations).

But are you sure this saying is right?
I mean backup OS partition and restore the whole image , not individual files/folders only.

Originally Posted by pandlouk

In Acronis you cannot control it. It desides automatically what strategy to use when you perform a restore (e.g. when resizing to a smaller partition).
Panagiotis

Acronis needs not to resize partition to restore an image to smaller partition.

[alternety]

A quick note about a recommendation in an earlier post. UltimateDefrag was suggested. It sounded interesting so I looked. It does not have a Win 8 version.

[stevesnyder]

Originally Posted by andylau

Imaging software is backup by files does not mean it is backup files/folders only. It can be used to backup an OS partition which is also can be included such as MBR. If you have tried backup by files' imagaing software such as Symantec Ghost or Acronis, I think you will know what I mean beacuse they are not designed for backup specific files/folders only. Therefore, I do not explain more.


As for the second point, I mean restoring image to smaller partition automatically without any manual steps.
Yup, you let me know ShadowProtect's image can be shrink. It seems not many backup by sector imaging software can do this. But it is strange that this process can be done in recovery environment only.

Hi Andylau,

Yes, I've tried imaging software such as Symantec Ghost or Acronis. They use the same technology we offer (and in some cases actually license our snapshot drivers to do it). So I'm very familiar with the benefits of image-based backups vs file/folder backups.

One of the drawbacks to file/folder backups is that they typically don't backup an ACL, byte/sector backups do. This isn't a big deal for home users but it is very important for permissions in any kind of networked environment.

Another drawback is that file/folder backups look at changes at the file level. Again, home users may not care as much, unless they run SQL or do graphic design or basically anything that involves large file sizes. In this example a large file (like a 200MB database, image, or video) would prompt the file/folder backup software to backup the ENTIRE FILE every time a minor change is made. A byte/sector backup will only backup the few changes at the disk level saving a LOT of backup storage and time.

Another drawback is that file/folder backups usually take a flat copy of the files on the system. This makes a bare metal restore difficult because the installed applications, services, configuration and etc will need to be recreated. Most people who use file/folder backups end up creating a vanilla OS install and copy back their files/folders. With an image-based backup you get EVERYTHING making it very easy to recreate your system from the backup disk image file.

There is definitely a difference in the two backup strategies and it's important to know how each works.

As for the needed Recovery Environment, I don't see anything strange about it. It makes complete sense that you would initiate an operating system from a flash drive or CD/DVD so that you could mount your hard disk and manipulate its contents as you shrink it. Most backup solutions out there offer recovery disks for this very purpose.

[pandlouk]

Originally Posted by andylau

But are you sure this saying is right?
I mean backup OS partition and restore the whole image , not individual files/folders only.

Yes, I am, but as I already said the user has no control over it; Acronis decides automatically what strategy will follow (sector or file) depending form the last sector that contains data and the targeted size of the partition (if the end of the partition is after the last occupied sector it will perform a sector based restore, if the end of the partition is before the last occupied sector it will switch to file base restore).

Originally Posted by andylau

Acronis needs not to resize partition to restore an image to smaller partition.

Restoring to a different size (smaller or larger) = resizing
http://kb.acronis.com/content/2770

Panagiotis