I'm sorry, but my aging brain still cannot grasp the real difference between creating a system backup (complete backup) vs. creating a clone. If I have a blank internal hard drive, and all I'm interested in doing is restoring after a disaster, could I just create a clone periodically and use that as a backup. I read this in a FAQ: 'When you use the "Disk Clone" tool, you effectively copy/move all of the contents of one hard disk drive onto another hard disk drive. This function allows you to transfer all the information (including the operating system and installed programs) from a small hard disk drive to a large one without having to reinstall and reconfigure all of your software. The migration takes minutes, not hours, but it is not generally used as a backup strategy." This statement does not explain *why* a clone is not generally used as a backup. I understand that a lot more space is required for a clone, but that is not my issue. Could I just use a cloned drive, and create another updated clone periodically? For the most part, I just want to create something simple for disaster restore which includes my OS, so I don't have to rebuild my entire system. I think I understand if I do a complete backup, assuming I have the Windows XP disk, I would still have do all the Windows updates and then add my Acronis backup. It just seems to me that short of RAID (which I don't understand either), I could just use Clone for an "instant" restore. Please advise.