Macrium Reflect or Shadow Protect Win 8

Hey Guys,

I'd be glad to take a stab at this question. Oh, and just for the record, I'm all about convenience which means that this isn't the only solution with ShadowProtect, it's just the simplest.

Ok, let's say I have a 500G hard drive in my PC with 200G data and I've backed up using StorageCraft ShadowProtect so that my full image file (.SPF) is around 90G with compression. I decide that I want to migrate my PC's backup to my laptop which I can do very easily with Hardware Independent Restore (HIR). Essentially I'm migrating (or cloning?) my desktop PC on my laptop and in the process the HIR technology takes care of the difference in environment, drivers, etc. The problem is that my laptop only has a 400G drive.

Now if my laptop had a 100G drive I would obviously not expect to transfer 200G of system files and data from my old system over, but in this case the 400G drive on my laptop should be ample space to recover 200G of data.

What I would do is boot to the StorageCraft ShadowProtect Recovery Environment (basically your ShadowProtect CD, USB or ISO) and then I would mount my backup as a WRITEABLE volume. I would then dismount the volume with the "Shrink" option selected. What this does is it instructs ShadowProtect to count back from the end of the backup image to the first written data. This is typically Microsoft's MFT bit which should be around 250G in this example. Microsoft uses this same MFT bit in their shrink process. Defragging the drive before doing the above steps my set the MFT bit even closer to the front but I don't know that it's worth the effort.

At this point I have mounted (as writeable) and then dismounted (with the shrink option) the backup image and ShadowProtect has created a new branch with what should be about a 250G (based on MFT bit placement) drive. I'm still in the Recovery Environment so it's a simple matter at this point of starting the Restore Wizard and using the 250G branch to restore to my 400G laptop drive.

So... basically there were three steps to this: mount, dismount, and then restore. ShadowProtect automatically shrinks the image in the dismount process and creates an appropriate backup file that I can use to restore to the new 400G partition. And all this with very little effort on my part: no re-partitioning, no compressing, no shrinking. Like I said, I like easy solutions.

Cheers!

 

Mounting or browsing image seems a basic function of imaging software.

To home users, only backup files/folders to image is not useful, I prefer use sync software to sync/backup files/folders.
Most of home users are using imaging software to backup OS partition.

 

Steven Snyder,

What I mean is need not to shrink, no extra steps!
What you are talking is still inconvenient to users.

As some imaging software can restore image to smaller partition automatically without any extra steps, such as Macrium Reflect, Acronis, Active@ Disk Image and so on. Some of them also provides FREE version.

In addition, you still cannot explain why people need to pay six time more money to buy ShadowProtect, which is asked by aladdin.

 

And, this Mumbo Jumbo, Steve still have failed to answer Raza007, others and my simple question, why Shadow Protect is six times more expansive than Marcium Reflect?

Still waiting for his response.

Best regards,

 

Steve, I understand this but sometimes a person needs to backup only one or two folders on the entire partition. Wouldn't it be great that your trusty imaging software will be able to this too. For example, I image my C: partition regularly using disk imaging. I have moved my documents, my pictures and my videos folders to my D partition. On D partition these are the only folders that are important enough to backup. Now if I purchase SP, I am stuck with backing up the entire 150 GB (80% full) partition, just to backup these three folders (approx 15 GB).

And yes I can use a sync software to make a 1:1 copy of these folders or I can just manually copy them to make a backup, but using Macrium, I can back these folders up into a single archive, with excellent compression and an option of encryption. Furthermore, I can just create a task once and then run the task whenever I want to automatically backup these folders.

This is something I cannot do with SP, even though SP costs 5-6 times more than Macrium.

And this is exactly what this thread is all about. Why would one recommend SP over Macrium? There has to be a very good reason for choosing SP over Macrium. Which is.......

 

Excellent Points above.

Best regards,

 

Personaly, I do not recommend to backup important files/folders into one image.

It may have higher risk of total loss when image is broken caused by unknown or unexpected reasons.

 

On the subject of balancing my users' needs and getting the job done; I'm continuing recommending Macrium free edition and FreeFileSync in my lectures. I keep hearing many-a good things about these. And have used them enough to trust them.

Both are priced right for the newbie and simply work. They aren't "heavy" and don't require excessive background processes. Nor do they have imposing DRM. I've said it before, and I'll say it again - DRM has absolutely NO place in backup/restore operations.

I also present Acronis TI, Dirsync, Rsync, Allway FileSync, Synkron, OneSync, MS SyncToy, Robocopy, Syncblaze, Paragon, Driveimage XML, Ghost, Image for Windows, Windows built-in utilities, and others as alternatives. Each with their own set of advantages and disadvantages.

Choices! Always have multiple choices available.

 

I'd agree to a point. But file based backups have their place too. In addition to image based backups I perform file based backups on my most irreplaceable files such as photos of the kids, data documents from letters received, executables which install software I've purchased etc. Things that if I were to lose they'd be either irreplaceable or at the very least extremely expensive to replace. File backups have saved my behind in certain situations where image backups have failed me. I can't imagine picking one OVER the other, however.

Your instruction indicates one thing that I, personally, like better about ShadowProtect's software. I HAVE MORE CONTROL over options and switches to be able to do exactly what I want to do. As someone into "IT" and the like, this is something I appreciate. This, however, was not enough to win me over in the end.

Kudos to you @stevesnyder for being willing to jump into these types of discussions. People can be BRUTAL when representatives of software companies are willing to step forward and take the heat. I don't know why that is, exactly, but I see it time and again. Most eventually bow out, and understandably. I hope you stick around through it all. (The whole thing reminds me a little of kids/playground - I guess we all have a little bit of that left over which comes out from time to time.)

 

Hi Steve,

1) How do you set the 'shrink' option?

2) What can you/we do if a big 'shrink' is required? I had to shrink a 120GB partition on an HDD (with about 40GB of data) three times in order to get a 60GB partition before I could use SP to backup and restore to a 60GB SSD. This was using SP v 4.1.5, back in 2009. (Windows imposes some limit on how far it will 'move' the MFT in a single 'shrink', hence the need for multiple 'shrinks'.)

J

 

Hi J,

Yeah, I remember one of your earlier posts about multiple shrinks and the pain they caused. Your comments were in the back of my mind when I was looking at ways to get the most out of shrinking an image file. The issue is that we have to work within the rules Microsoft has established for their file system. In this case, the placement of the MFT bit my Windows is one of those rules. This bit is typically the last piece of data in the drive image and everything after should be free space.

ShadowProtect determines the amount of space it can shrink by looking at the end of the disk image and reading backwards towards the front of the image until it finds written data. This is the MFT bit (Microsoft's file table reference) for the end of the image. So wherever Microsoft places this bit will mark how much the partition can be shrunk.

I mentioned that it's possible to move the MFT bit closer to the front of the drive by running the defrag utility. This should allow Windows to re-index the drive and to consolidate file fragments to the front of the disk and free space to the back. I believe this is where you will get the most leverage when you shrink a partition because if all of the free space is pushed back after a defrag then your partition shrink utility will be able to free up that space.

ShadowProtect's shrink option is in the Recovery Environment (not the ShadowProtect Application or the Windows Explorer smart menus for mounting images). You will need to boot to this WinPE Recovery Environment and mount the backup as writeable. Then when you dismount the drive you will see the checkbox option to shrink the image. PM me if I'm still confusing and I'll take a few screenshots and send them over.

Cheers!

 

Dear Steve,

Maybe, you should open a new thread and discuss problems and solutions with Shadow Protect. So, not to hijack this thread.

This thread is for, "Macrium Reflect or Shadow Protect". And, is Shadow Protect worth six times more than Macrium Reflect for the benefits it provides.

So far, you have avoided the question and not answered it after several attempts from quite a few members requesting this information from you.

BTW, if you are not capable to answer the above question, then maybe you should request someone from StorageCraft to answer this for you.

Cheers!

 

Hi Aladdin,

Sorry, I thought I answered your question earlier

Ok, let me try a new angle on this explanation because we seem to be circling without ever meeting in the middle. Here goes:

Macrium's low end product is free. Macrium doesn't provide support for this product because they would lose money staffing a support desk when the product is free. Also, this product is stripped down to just the basic features needed to run a full backup and a recovery. Assuming that the underlying technology is good, home users get a free product that will back up and recover their important files. Right?

On the other hand, as you mentioned earlier:

Our main customers are MSP/VAR and Channel Distribution companies selling our product to SMB's, SOHOS, and Enterprise partners. Our technology has been around a long time and our snapshot driver is used in other industry-leading applications (think Symantec Ghost). Our technology does backups but it also does so much more (retention policies, backup chain management and replication, virtualization, Hardware Indepedent Restore, HeadStart Restore). This technology is used for critical business systems like SQL server and Exchange and we are closely partnered with industry leaders like Microsoft (we're a Gold Development Partner), VMWare, Intel, and others. This product is rock solid with 24/7/365 support for anyone that has a license. We have to be great because our customers rely on us to make money providing business continuity solutions to their customers.

To use a metaphor, you wouldn't swat a fly with a sledge hammer. You would use a $.49 fly swatter. So if what you really want is a free product then please, use Macrium. I don't want to haggle about price when the value prop for each product is apples and oranges. On the other hand, if you want to talk technology and the benefits of doing a backup one way over the benefits of doing it another then I'd be glad to get into the gritty details. I think our tech is amazing, and I've only been with the company 3 months. Before this I was working for the largest VoIP provider in the US with customers like ViaSat and OpenRange. And before that I was building high availability trading systems for the stock market. I've been around the block and I know what it means to be able to sleep at night knowing that your business systems (OS, services, applications, data, and custom configs) are 100% securely backed up. ShadowProtect offers this level of reliability. Hopefully, Macrium can offer you this level of reliability as well. If it does, then I think you're right in going with a free product over a paid product any day. If it doesn't, well... you get what you paid for, right?

Hopefully this answers your question about the value behind the price, or at least my perspective on that value. I doubt I've convinced you so I will respect your different opinion.

Cheers!

 

stevesnyder,

To be honest, we are HOME users, we do not care how good of ShadowProtect in business market.
Home users need simpleness and convenience.
I do not mind to pay for a imaging software, but I still cannot find any reasons to spend six time more money to buy ShadowProtect as it is inconvenient to me.
P.S. I do not use Macrium


I know your are talking symsnap.sys in Symantec System Recovery 2011 and Symantec Norton Ghost 15. But as I know, Symantec System Recovery 2013 is used VTrack.sys to replace symsnap.sys. Is VTrack.sys StorageCraft's technology?

 

Again, you didn't answer my question and beat around the bush.

I didn't compare the price of Free version of Macrium Reflect, where there is no support to your product. So, you shouldn't rank Macrium Reflect for providing a Free version, where your greedy company doesn't do one at all.

What I compared the best version of Macrium Reflect for home user where support is provided versus your best version for home user where support is provided. Your product is six times more than Macrium Reflect, and I need an answer to this? WHY? Please answer this? Don't beat around the bush.

BTW, I am a CPA since 1983 and have license to practice in USA. So, don't give me stupid metaphor, and treat people with respect and they have brains. I know you are used to treating your customers, who provide your food, like thieves when it comes to activating your product.

As far corporation are concerned, to whom you charge outrageously, we consumers have to finally pay for these outrageous prices. It is like "Too Big To Fail". If Bill Clinton has kept his in his pants, we wouldn't have "Too Big To Fail" and gone against the wishes of Founding Fathers. Who remember the Founding Fathers, that was 1776 and was long, long time ago. We the tax payers not only had to take the tab for these failures of "Too Big To Fail", but had to further pay outrageous bonuses to the management of "Too Big To Fail". So, if you are charging outrageous prices to the corporations and Uncle Sam, at the end we consumers are taking the tabs for these outrageous prices.

Cheers!

 

aladdin,

In free economic market, companies have right to set their products in any price.
Users only have choices to choose buy or not buy.
If users think its price is not reasonable, then just do not buy it.

 

Very true. And, this was the answer I was expecting from Steve, rather than beating around the bush. An intelligent answer where other are respected too.

However, if someone is selling their products outrageously, then the consumers will leave en masses, if they won't see the benefits for these outrageous prices.

However, the corporation will buy even with these outrageous prices when they are wined and dined as eventually they will pass on these outrageous prices to the consumers.

Best regards,

 

Aladdin, I do not think Steve is responsible for setting the high price. The price is usually set by the management, who are mostly MBA's and I am sure if they had felt that their product was not selling, they would have reduced the price.

Steve is probably unable to answer our questions because he probably does not understand the high price himself, but is still unable to say anything because if his management found out, he will most likely be out of a job tomorrow.

So, Steve cannot say that he does not find anything in SP, in comparison to Macrium, that would account for its high price. This is why he is beating about the bush, talking about SP being Microsoft Gold Partner or SP using Microsoft's established backup strategies etc. to try to justify the higher price tag. So, there is no need to get angry with him.


EDIT:
I failed to take into account Steve's signature that says that he is a technical marketing manager at SC. So he might well be the MBA who decides the price of SP. I had originally assumed that he was a software developer.

I also do not understand why he insists on comparing SP with the free version of Macrium, whereas we are all comparing SP with Macrium Professional.

 

Hi Steve,

Thank you very much for detailed explanation and references - this was an interesting reading. However this made me even more confused.

You are referring to Agent vs Agentless backups. My undestanding is that you consider ShadowProtect an Agent-based solution and Macrium an Agentless.
But considering that Macrium gets installed on the machine that needs to be baked up, it is technically also an Agent based solution.

So from my point of view both ShadowProtect and Macrium are working with VSS in a similar fashion. Am I missing something? Thank you

Regards,
Isso


Mohamed, thanks for introducing me!

 

That's the answer, which means that if an extra shrink was necessary, it's a bit late during the Restore process. That's not a problem if planning for the transition but no good for a BMR. We'd have to take that into account and have a sufficiently large drive available. Still doable if a spare intermediate HDD is available, i.e. do the restore, shrink as many times as required and then back up and restore the 'shrunk' partition to the small SSD.
Multiple shrinks aren't actually painful, as long as someone knows that they're the solution and how to do it.
Thanks for confirming my suspicions,

J

 

Hello Mohamed,

Sorry for the confusion. I have found that a useful criteria for agent-based and agent-less backups is whether or not the backup software requires a system reboot after installation. An agent-based solution requires a system reboot. This is because the specific code of the agent must be loaded into the stack on system start up and this code "lives" at or near the Hardware Application Layer (HAL) allowing it to monitor the hard disk and changes at the byte/sector level.

On the other hand an agent-less backup does not require a system reboot. It injects code directly into the stack (possibly creating a crash risk) which code is able to traverse the file system and determine changes to the hard disk. This injection doesn't require a reboot, and the traversal allows the agentless software to mimic an agent without residing at or near the HAL. This is a big selling point because agent-less backups can be distributed over a network to target systems and perform backups without ever requiring system reboots.

So, a backup software installation on a computer may not be the best criteria to determine whether the application is agent-based or agent-less. Both ShadowProtect and Macrium are installed on a system. I don't know if Macrium is agentless, just that a previous poster said it didn't require a reboot which is why I said it sounds like Macrium is agentless.

Hopefully this clears up any confusion. Thanks for following up with comments on this topic. It seems to me that the only real difference is that Microsoft recommends agent-based and warns against stability issues with agent-less.

Cheers!

 

Hey J,

Glad that helped. Just to clarify, you can restore a larger drive to a smaller drive using the Recovery Environment shrink option. This can be done after the backup occurs. The process is limited by Microsoft's file system, but as long as the data on the source drive doesn't exceed the space on the destination drive you should be able to do it.

Cheers!

 

Steve, I think it's OK to ask this question about the SP shrink process. Diskpart can only shrink to the last unmovable sector. Does the SP shrink do this or does it shrink to the last sector in use? I found your Knowledge Base articles a little confusing regarding the shrink process.

For example, if the last sector in use in your Post #101 example was at the 450 GB mark then there would be a problem.

 

Hello Brian,

You are correct that if the last sector in use in my Post #101 example was at the 450 GB mark then there would be a problem. Hopefully Microsoft's file system will never let this happen. This is why I mentioned that running a disk defrag may help consolidate fragmented files. Microsoft's engineers have really improved the defrag process in Windows 7 and I would recommend that the defrag utility be a regular part of your backup and recovery plan.

Assuming that the data on a disk drive is properly recorded in the sectors at the front of the drive you should always see my example of a 500G drive with 200G of data fitting easily on a 400G through implementing a good "shrink" utility. I say "properly" because physical disks access space at the front of the drive faster than at the end of the drive. A Solid State Drive (SSD) will rely heavily on the drive manufacturer's implementation and their drivers and the speed of an SSD doesn't require all the files to be stored at the front of the drive. A defrag utility should still improve performance but data can be spread out over the SSD which would imply data appearing closer to the end of the drive and possibly reducing the effect of a shrink utility that reads from the back of the drive towards the front.

As it was explained to me the technology behind ShadowProtect will shrink to the last sector in use, which typically will be the MFT bit. I hope this helps.

Cheers!

 

Steve, thanks for clearing the confusion in my mind.

Personally, I think the difficulty of restoring an image to a smaller partition is overplayed. It's easy to do with some planning.

By the way, my Win8 partition is 60 GB with 30 GB of data. The last sector in use is at the 60 GB mark and that is after running the Win8 defragger. I've never been impressed with defraggers making much difference to the sector spread.