Is there any "benefit" to incremental imaging?

We are unable to find any, since the incremental files are invariably the same size as the full original files. Would it no be better just to make original files?

 

timmy~ I sure don't understand why your incremental images are the same size as your original (full) image!

I use my system every day and create an image once a week. At most, my incremental images are about 1/3 the size of their associated full image. ~pv

 

If you've defragged and moved data on the hdd, then this is the "why" the size is about the same. If you haven't defragged, size should be significantly smaller.

 

My incremental images are around 3% of the full image. If I've defragged, the incremental images are up to 12% of the full image. Never any bigger.

I'm not using True Image however. I'll try it with TI.

Brian

 

Yes I have a program that defrag's once a day. I thought this was good? Did not know that defragmenting would harmfully effect the working of the True Image. This not so good, and not sure what to do about it. I don't understand also what the other fellow meant when he said his incremental images were not that large, and then he said he was "not" using the True Image. Then what was he using? And if he wasn't using the program, then how could his incrmental images exist at all, in any size?

 

I posted a similar question two days ago but got no response. When testing, I took a full image of a 11G drive, and the image was 4+G. I added a line to a one line text file in a folder on the desktop and took another image, that was also 4+G. Best I've seen is a 1+G image. No defragging going on and I suspected the 1+G image was the swap file or whatever it's caled these days. I would love to use incremental imaging but can't see how I could do it with the files this big, at least not to the hard drive.

To answer the question though, the benefit would be to have several scheduled images over a week's span in case the last one taken is no good.

 

Hello timmy,

Did you not read my reply to the second part of your question posed in the thread titled <poss to at least "look" in secure zone>?!!

Regards

 

Are your volumes NTFS?

If they are NTFS and you are NOT running a huge file server with 100s of 1000s of tiny files, defragmenting a HDD is useless (perhaps once a year would be OK). Read up on file system and LCN to find out why NTFS on a "normal" workstation makes defragmenting a thing of the past.

 

I decided to try using the secure zone to make my incrementals. Looks like the incremental is very small (based on the free space still remaining according to XP). So I'll keep playing with it. I have another question but will update the thread I started to ask it again...

https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=73406

 

Using TI my first incremental image was 8% of the full image size.

Brian