Need advice - Terabyte BING/IFD

[tepe2]

I have spent a lot of time to decide which disc imaging software to use. I have come to the conclusion that BING and/or IFD would be right for me. I will only be using BING/IFD to create/restore my C-partition (Windows XP and programs/applications).

My internal hd contains:
C: Windows XP, programs/applications 40 GB, 34 GB free
D: My Documents 425 GB, 83 GB free
Unassigned 698 MB

Backup to:
1. Ext firewire hd 500 GB which now has 4 partitions (considering reformat and make one big partition)

2. A second 250 GB internal hd

3. DVD+RW

My WinXP partition C: will soon contain a lot more data, because I have re-installed XP, but only a few applications. I will use my ext. hd for backup of My Documents and image of C: My second int hd is not connected yet, but when connected this will only be used for image of C:

Except for the partition utility and the multiboot thing (I only run one OS), is there any reason to use BING instead of IFD?

When it comes to the imaging, are they exactly the same? No difference? Except from what I already know, that with IFD you have to use a cd to boot, and with BING you can install in a small FAT-partition or use cd. I want to know if one of them has an advantage that the other one has not when it comes to size of partition to restore to, or anything else.

Any reason to use both? The price/money is not an issue.

Any disadvantage to have only one big partition on the two hd's I backup to?

Im happy for any advice. But please dont advice me to use other, like Acronis TI, N Ghost or any else, because I have made up my mind

[ErikAlbert]

If BING/IFD/IFW allows you
- to backup all your harddisks without problems
- to restore all your harddisks without problems and gives you exactly back what you had before.
- to restore file-by-file.
I don't see any problems using BING/IFD/IFW.
The name of the Image Backup software isn't important, reliability and basic features are important. My next backup software will be ShadowProtect, because that is the most attractive and professional one in reliabilty, features and speed, better than the one I use (Acronis).
BING/IFD/IFW aren't really userfriendly and somewhat archaic too (Peter will tell you why), if that is not a problem, just use it.

I don't see any Immediate System Recovery software ?
This type of softwares are real troubleshooters, not in words but in DEEDS and faster than Image Backup.

[ErikAlbert]

You separated your data from your system. That's very good.
It would have been safer, if you would have used two physical harddisks, instead of two partitions on the SAME harddisk.
The smallest harddisk for system and the biggest harddisk for data.

An external harddisk (500gb) for backup is the very best, you can keep it off-line and you have elbowroom to manipulate your internal harddisks, if that would be necessary.
An internal harddisk is always on-line, not so good.
CD/DVD's are not recommended for backup, they can't be trusted and are too slow. That is BEGGING for problems with backup and certainly with restoration (the most important one). Period.

[tepe2]

I know that BING/IFD is not the most userfriendly alternative, but I believe it is reliable. ShadowProtect - dont know much about it.

I dont think I will backup my OS-partition very often, so it doesnt matter if it takes an hour or two.

It would be safe enough for me to backup OS-partition to second internal hd and to one external hd. I know image to DVD is considered not to be safe, but I probably try some time and see how it works.

Thank you ErikAlbert

I wait for more replies

Also would like to know: Let's say OS-partition is 40 GB and contains, say 15 GB, and the last data is stored close to the end of the partition. Does BING/IFD backup 15 GB of data or 15 GB of data and empty space?

If I choose to compress, is it as safe as uncompressed backup?

With Windows defrag utility, is it safe to defrag the partition even if the analyze says it is not necessary?

I believe that when I have installed all of my programs there will be 15 GB of data on partition. I could resize this partition from 40 GB to 30 GB with BING, and the programs should still work perfect. Is'nt it true that at least 30% of partition should be unused for programs to run OK? If so I still have 5 GB left for more programs.

[sukarof]

I know that BING/IFD is not the most userfriendly alternative, but I believe it is reliable. ShadowProtect - dont know much about it.

I have not used Bing (actually I dont really know what it is. Isnt it a partitioning tool?)
I know that IFW//IFD is not the most user friendly alternative for some, but the job it does is really reliable. I use IFW/IFD regularly and you cant find a more reliable and robust software imo. Sure, the interface takes a couple of minutes to figure out but once you have done your backup the backup is extremely robust..

I have tried Shadow protect too and it is as reliable as IFW/IFD but with a bit more user friendly interface and you can do incremental backups with it plus it is lightning fast when creating and restoring images compared to IFW/IFD.
But since time wasnt an issue for you and you dont do many restores and images I guess IFW/IFD is better since it costs less. There is no point in paying the extra money if you dont need what it offers.
IFW/IFD has the advantage that it works on Vista, but I am sure Shadow protect will do that soon too (or so I hope coz I am gonna buy it when it does )

If I choose to compress, is it as safe as uncompressed backup?

Oh yes. I do nothing but compressed images. Atleast when talking about IFW/IFD

[tepe2]

Yes, BING is a partition tool, but you can also create/restore disc images as you can with IFD. I believe BING has all that IFD has, and more, but not sure. Im interested in differences between those two when it comes to create/restore images.

Dont know if BING/IFD can do incrementals. But it doesnt really matter to me. Time and cost...no issue. Reliability...very important.

Another reason for me to choose BING/IFD is that it works outside Windows.

[ErikAlbert]

Originally Posted by tepe2

With Windows defrag utility, is it safe to defrag the partition even if the analyze says it is not necessary?

I've done this many times, even one defrag after another. Why should this be a problem anyway, it wouldn't be very logical if it was a problem.
It defrags, even when it isn't necessary, in that case the defrag will end quickly. That's all.

[sukarof]

Dont know if BING/IFD can do incrementals. But it doesnt really matter to me. Time and cost...no issue. Reliability...very important.

Ok I see. IFD is reliable, no doubt about that. IFD can not do incrementals, but I believe will do so in version 2 (read something about that on TB forum.)

[tepe2]

Thanks to both of you

Its late now, so I wait at least until tomorrow before I download a trial. Also hope to see replies from other users, maybe someone who has used both BING and IFD.

Im reading the BING-manual right now, and watching some tutorial videos. Dont look very userfriendly, but I think I can learn how to use it.

[tepe2]

I read in a post by furballi that you should install BING in a small 8 MB Fat16 partition at the END of the hd.

As I have a C-partition, a D-partition and 698 MB which is not partitioned, how can I make sure that BING will be installed at the END of hd? The BING-installation will take care of it itself?

In the installation-video he choose a BootIt EMBRM-partition instead of a FAT-partition. Whats the difference? I suppose this BootIt EMBRM-partition is an FAT-partition. Right?

I found out this:

If you backup a 15 GB partition with 4 GB of data on it, and the data are spread over the first 10 GB of the partition. Then, with BING, you cannot restore to a partition less than 15 GB. The partition you restore to must be at least same size as the partition you backed up. But with IFD you can restore to a partition of 10 GB. So thats one difference between those two. But what if you backup with BING and restore with IFD, will you need 10 GB or 15 GB partition to restore to?

[aigle]

Originally Posted by tepe2

Yes, BING is a partition tool, but you can also create/restore disc images as you can with IFD. I believe BING has all that IFD has, and more, but not sure. Im interested in differences between those two when it comes to create/restore images.

Dont know if BING/IFD can do incrementals. But it doesnt really matter to me. Time and cost...no issue. Reliability...very important.

Another reason for me to choose BING/IFD is that it works outside Windows.

I will not go for BING as u can,t restore a partition image on a smaller partition as far as I know.
IFD is OK but why not go for SP, seems more better.

[Peter2150]

Originally Posted by aigle

I will not go for BING as u can,t restore a partition image on a smaller partition as far as I know.
IFD is OK but why not go for SP, seems more better.

Aigle, he has already made up his mind. IFD is reliable especially if you image with it. Only real drawback is time. I can image my 19g drive in 5 minutes to an external usb drive. Same image with IFD is at least 3 hours if not more. BUt if as tepe2 says time doesn't matter then it doesn't matter.


Only other big big difference to me was IFD gives you virtually no control over what and how happens with the MBR and track 0. Again this might not matter.

Pete

[aigle]

I know but I just could not stop myself. I will like, even for myself, to be diverted to a better decision, even at the last time.

[tepe2]

When I create image of C: the image cant be bigger than my C: which also is the partition I will restore to if something goes wrong. And with BING I can resize the partition. If IFD is easier to use than BING, then IFD would suite me better for imaging. But I would like the partition tool BING has.

I also believe that you have control of MBR with BING.

Dont know anything about SP. Maybe I should have a look. I know you like it, but do other users too?

Is it safe as Terabyte software?
How does it work? Outside Windows? Bootable CD?
If you read several posts about BING, you get the idea nothing could go wrong. Is it the same with SP?
And...important...is it a lot more userfriendly?

[aigle]

Originally Posted by tepe2

Dont know anything about SP. Maybe I should have a look. I know you like it, but do other users too?

http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showt...=ShadowProtect

See last few pages of this thread.

http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showt...=ShadowProtect

I believe it to be one of the best though I am not using it( just my impression form the posts here). The rest I will leave on Peter.

[HAN]

Originally Posted by tepe2

When I create image of C: the image cant be bigger than my C: which also is the partition I will restore to if something goes wrong. And with BING I can resize the partition. If IFD is easier to use than BING, then IFD would suite me better for imaging. But I would like the partition tool BING has.

I also believe that you have control of MBR with BING.

Dont know anything about SP. Maybe I should have a look. I know you like it, but do other users too?

Is it safe as Terabyte software?
How does it work? Outside Windows? Bootable CD?
If you read several posts about BING, you get the idea nothing could go wrong. Is it the same with SP?
And...important...is it a lot more userfriendly?

I have used IFD for nearly 2 years. Very reliable and once you are used to it (which doesn't take long), pretty simple to use. I never considered BING because it was more money and I didn't want/need it's other features.

I recently tried out and then bought Shadow Protect. It can be either installed or ran solely from a boot CD. Since I was used to running IFD from a boot CD, I stayed with that method for SP. (Plus it means just that much less installed on my PC, which is something I am fairly picky about.) I have ran SP several times and restored with it twice so far. It seems every bit a solid as IFD but it is MUCH faster. I can image to or restore from an external USB hard drive at around 1 GB per minute. IFD to/from a USB hard drive is closer to .3 GB per minute.

At this point, I will still use IFD occasionally because it natively supports DVD burning. SP does not. And I like keeping around more than one option in case I have "issues". But other than that, SP has replaced IFD for me.

(FWIW, you could burn the SP images to DVD at some point but it's not as simple as just doing it thru IFD. And I like simple!)

[Peter2150]

SP has replaced everything for me. WHen I spoke of IFD not having much MBR control, you can add a switch that will cause it to write back a standard windows mbr. With SP, I have the option of doing nothing with the MBR as in IFD, or adding a standard Windows MBR, or restoring the MBR from the image.

Reliablity wise I've probably restored over 200 images since I"ve been using SP(I restore every image I take) with no issues. And that is restoring the system, not a second drive. If your interested go to Storagecraft.com and request the evaluation link. THe trial doesn't included the recovery CD iso

Pete

[lodore]

THe trial doesn't included the recovery CD iso

Pete[/quote]
it does if you fill in the request full evaluation form
lodore

[huntnyc]

Originally Posted by Peter2150

SP has replaced everything for me.

Pete

Same here Pete and looking forward to version 3. I also was former IFD/IFW user as well as BING. Still use BING from CD when I need to partition but not for images anymore.

[tepe2]

Thanks to all of you

If I like reliability and speed - SP
If I like reliability and partition tool - BING

I must admit speed would be very nice, but I know I will get use of the partition tool. And if Im only going to create an image every 3 or 4 months or so...

I "know" more about BING. Have read more about it, and had a look at the tutorial videos. Hey...I almost feel like an advanced BING-user already, before even downloading

Think I go for BING (and perhaps IFD too)

There are still a lot of questions I would like answers to about BING (and SP). But I think it would be best for me to download and try, and then post more questions if needed.

SP sounds like a great product, so if Im unhappy with BING I know what to do.

[ErikAlbert]

Originally Posted by tepe2

Thanks to all of you

If I like reliability and speed - SP
If I like reliability and partition tool - BING

I must admit speed would be very nice, but I know I will get use of the partition tool. And if Im only going to create an image every 3 or 4 months or so...

I "know" more about BING. Have read more about it, and had a look at the tutorial videos. Hey...I almost feel like an advanced BING-user already, before even downloading

Think I go for BING (and perhaps IFD too)

There are still a lot of questions I would like answers to about BING (and SP). But I think it would be best for me to download and try, and then post more questions if needed.

SP sounds like a great product, so if Im unhappy with BING I know what to do.

Trial BING/IFD/IFW and then SP and you will see the difference yourself.

Terabyte is a collection of reliable softwares and you have to find out how to use each of them and that was a problem for me. I want software that speaks for itself. BING/IFW/IFD are a typical programmer's product, developped without an application analyst.

[tepe2]

Is SP really that much easier to use? Does it speak for itself?

It works inside Windows when installed rigth? But outside Windows if you use CD, right?

I visited storagecraft.com last night, only for a couple of minutes. Had a look at the user-manual. 100 pages.

If something could change my mind, it would be if SP was much easier to use. Any tutorial videos?

[ErikAlbert]

Originally Posted by tepe2

Is SP really that much easier to use? Does it speak for itself?

It works inside Windows when installed rigth? But outside Windows if you use CD, right?

I visited storagecraft.com last night, only for a couple of minutes. Had a look at the user-manual. 100 pages.

If something could change my mind, it would be if SP was much easier to use. Any tutorial videos?

I've only experience with ATI. In one day, I did a backup and a restoration with ATI without reading any manual.
I never got that far with Terabyte, no backup and no restoration either.
I assume that SP has the same userfriendliness of ATI with minor differences.

[aigle]

Hi tepe, download the trials and try urself. The best way to go.

[HAN]

Originally Posted by tepe2

Is SP really that much easier to use? Does it speak for itself?

It works inside Windows when installed rigth? But outside Windows if you use CD, right?

I visited storagecraft.com last night, only for a couple of minutes. Had a look at the user-manual. 100 pages.

If something could change my mind, it would be if SP was much easier to use. Any tutorial videos?

IMO, SP is a great deal easier to use. I use the restoration CD for both imaging and restoration. With it, you just fire up a wizard for either task and follow along.

But as I said above, IFD is not bad once you've used it a time or two. (Although I've never used BING, it looks harder to use than IFD does to me.)

SP can indeed be permanently installed and work from within Windows for both imaging and restoration (with the exception being that you cannot restore the working Windows partition while running inside of that Windows partition.) (Which makes sense to me... )