Alternative to True Image (nervous nellie)

Good to know! In other words, I could use IFW to boot from my external USB drive G, and then copy the good image from drive G over to drive C and -- POOF! things are all fixed, right?

{Assuming, of course, that I'm recovering from a software screw-up,
& not a hard drive failure.}

 

When using BING you can backup/restore the MBR with one push of a button

 

Yes, most folkes want to just image and restore.

But mounting provides a means to check the integrity of the archive without relying on the backup program to self-check. And you can do such a check independently of the restore operation.

In addition, folkes can use mounted volumes to fix an archive that may have been infected by malware. The alternative is to ditch the entire archive and start anew, resulting in the loss of archives that may need to be retained.

 

I'm quite sure that the average housewife knows what a MBR (More Butter Required) is.

 

That is not neccesarily so.

If I have understood your question:...That is a complex question and you may have made some leaps there.

That may not be possible

You are not be able to boot with IFW alone.

IFW can create bootable discs with an image to recover.
You would need to have created bootable discs (CD, DVD ) and have your bios boot sequence set to check where to boot from.

You would need your bios to be able to boot from whatever drive you have your bootable IFW/IFD discs loaded into.

It is possible to create boot discs with IFW as stand alone or IFD as stand alone to do what you want.

IFW will recover images stored by BING or IFD or itself but only from functional OS or as part of PE with Bart disc and plugin.You can use BartPE discs and IFW plugin to restore in PE from hard discs that can be seen with the PE disc.

IFD will boot into DOS and can be used to access images on drives it sees.

If you are going to have external HD with usb connection, to use existing image after software flop, you would be better off using BING floppy or CD to boot with, then access HD set-ups with "work with partitions" and reload image from external HD to internal partition as required, reset boot partition with BING, reboot to test, reboot with BING and delete "messed up" partition, reboot to "new" primary partition.

I can assure you it is not hard to do that sequence.

All the terabyte apps will recognise and can use images created by each other (follow DOS naming for IFD to recognise images from IFW or BING)

You can COPY your required partition to external HD and recopy back. (wiil erase all data as part of copy) but very time consuming.


Truly, KISS, create images of any partitions with IFW and Phylock, or with BING preboot options from floppy or CD. Put them on external HD.
Use IFD if happy with DOS.

Restore with BING in event of software flop to either wiped or new partition that can also be created with BING. Reorder boot sequence with BING if required.

If there are problems rebooting, use BING to sort them out.

1 floppy with BING can do it all.
Despite all our jocularity, BING and IFW et al are very serious, powerful utilities, with very serious purposes . I have found them easy to use and utterly reliable (after experimenting and reading) without any ridiculous pretty shells. The support is good and the price unbeatable. For more power users there is considerable expandability and configurability.

Brain hurting again
Regards

 

If you look around online you can sometimes get very good deals on SystemWorks 2003 which has the older version of Norton Ghost (you don't have to install the other junk if you don't want to). A while back we found it for around $12.00 including postage. I've never had a problem with this version of Ghost, it works very well for me and I found it to be much faster than TrueImage. With TI I often had problems with the boot CD not working three out of four times. Ghost is real simple and straightforward.

 

I cannot afford to be lazy when it comes to data protection. I can wait 24 seconds for the PC to reboot. IFW must achieve a "lock" on the partition before it can image that partition. I don't have the time to verify that "PHYLOCK" is okay each time I add a new application to the PC. That's the biggest disadvantage with a windows-based imaging software. Note that you still need to use a boot disc if you want to restore a partition that is in use by windows. What happened to KISS?

With BING, there is only one logical path...no "PHYLOCK", no boot disc, no need to check for image stability with the addition of new windows software. There are no other task running at the same time to compete with the imaging software. Again, KISS.

I believe the older version of Ghost requires the use of a boot disc.

 

Here:

 

I'm almost certain he is, as that's the ONLY "recent" Ghost version worth using -- emphasizing reliability at least.

 

It's more like 5 seconds for me. I don't see it as a big time waster either, and I typically just keep on using the computer usually with no noticeable performance hit.

 

If you want to confirm that a newly added application does not interfere with "PHYLOCK", then you must create and restore the image file. This would certainly take more than 10 seconds to verify.

Normally, there are three things that can damage BING:

1.The BING primary partition is compromised (use BING installation disc).
2.The EMBR has changed (restore the good EMBR with BING installation disc).
3.The BIOS is compromised (reflash BIOS or buy a new MB).

When BING is active, all partitions on the HDD are dormant, so there is no chance of "software contamination". If you can load BING, then you should be able to create and restore an image file.

If you don't do anything else on the PC during the imaging process, then why not reboot the PC so that you don't have to deal with another variable, PHYLOCK?

 

Surprised to see only one mention of Drive Snapshot, a 193KB application that can backup your disk (even the Windows system partition) in the background while you work. Most other imaging software requires you to take your PC off-line while backing up, which provides a significant disincentive to a critical task.

It can also verify images, take differential backups and mount backups as virtual drives allowing you to view and retrieve individual files.

For those not wishing to purchase, the trial download has time-limited (30-day) backup capability and unlimited restore making it ideal for "once-off" backups prior to major system upgrades.

 

I second your opinion of Drive Snapshot. I use it on our server and all of our workstations, and have installed it on various clients' servers and workstations too, and it has behaved flawlessly at all times, incl. quite a number of selective file restores and full system restores, both in the lab and 'in anger'.

Not only that, it backs up and restores far quicker than IFW and others (ATI's backup performance is comparable with DS's). Highly recommended.

 

You're right to a point, but irrespective of which imaging program you choose I would highly recommend having a PE boot disk around to aid in recovery. BartPE is one option, but the Ultimate BootCD for Windows (UBCD4Win) is the best around (it's like BartPE on steroids). Then add the imaging program's BartPE plug-in to the disk and you're set to go. For instance, with DS you then get its Windows interface after booting from the UBCD4Win CD, and that's easy-peasy to use. The same applies to ATI. I guess there is an IFW plug-in, too (but I haven't checked this out - IFW was just too damned slow to be of use to me).

 

You don't have to use the command-line interface - I use a separate disk with a cut-down Windows install from which I can use Drive Snapshot's Windows GUI to do the restore (covered here).

However if you do use a boot disk with the command line, there are options for checking the contents of each disk prior to doing a restore (detailed here).

 

Yes, Ghost 2003, on SystemWorks 2003. I believe after that what's called Ghost is actually the old PowerQuest DriveImage.

 

There is no guarantee in the software business. How do you know that a FUTURE software XYZ is fully compatible with your copy of IFW unless you run and restore the image file? You are placing a lot of faith in PHYLOCK being able to anticipate what can happen in the software industry several years from now.

Reliability is all about eliminating possible failure mode. BING is OS independent. That's the most valuable feature. A deficiency in the OS cannot compromise the performance of BING.

I constantly image/restore my primary C action partition to evaluate hardware/software. Why mess around with boot disc when I can hit one button to reboot windows and access BING?

 

Therefore, if reliability was ALL THAT MATTERED, there would be many more of us using BING.

 

A "windows" imaging program cannot not operate without windows unless you use a boot disc. That's the key disavantage with a windows-based imaging software. There are many variables that could affect the ability of the imaging software to "lock" a partition. These variables will change as you add new and untested programs to your PC. Poorly coded imaging programs are constantly patched to address these new compatibility issues.

BING is OS INDEPENDENT. It doesn't care about the contents of the OS partition, because when BING is ACTIVE, the partitions are INACTIVE. Worst case, the new windows application may alter the EMBR. In such an event, use the BING installation disc to restore a good EMBR.

FACT: A windows imaging program must "lock"/"snapshot" a partition before it can create the image file. That's one more step that COULD go wrong.

For me, reliability should be the only variable when it comes to data backup. I cannot speak for others.