shadow protect desktop or paragon driver backup 8.0?

Discussion in 'backup, imaging & disk mgmt' started by lodore, Dec 11, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. lodore

    lodore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Posts:
    9,006
    Hi, I was wondering whart programs you would choose out of those two.
    I have acronis true image 9 i backup to an external usb hard drive. but i have heard about problem with acronis usb support and backup's failing.

    I know that shadow protect desktop uses Winpe which they have to pay ms for everycopy but its based on the good driver support of windows xp service pack2

    what does paragon use for the backup cd? winpe? bartpe? or something else.

    I just want a solution that is fast at backing up. ive got 62gb atm to backup.
    and i want to just boot from the rescue cd and restore the image by plugging in myb usb hard drive.

    I dont really trust ati 9 no one after hearing about there bad usb driver support on there rescue disk.

    ive heard that shadow protect desktop is really fast at backup and doesnt fail.
    ive heard good things about paragon as well.

    sure ati 9 might be fine if i ever wanted to restore images but im not sure if i trust it after the horror stories.
    i have noticed thgat ati9 has two of three background processes like ati image monitor and two others running all the time.
    does shadow protect desktop or paragon have background drivers liek that or do they only work when you want to create an image?
    Thanks in advance
    lodore
     
    Last edited: Dec 11, 2006
  2. Blackcat

    Blackcat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2002
    Posts:
    4,010
    Location:
    Christchurch, UK
    Seems like you have not really used ATI but are relying on hearsay. I have never had a problem in using ATI when imaging/restoring to an external hard-drive. Why don't you try the restore of ATI first before you state that you may have problems.

    One good feature about ATI is that you can simulate doing a backup restore through the various windows of the Rescue CD until you reach the end point where the next option reads "Proceed". If you can reach this final step without any errors then it would appear likely that you should be able to restore the Image successfully.
    I found both Paragon and ShadowProtect a lot slower than ATI in the total restore procedure.

    Personally I would confirm that ATI will not successfully restore your Image before looking for another Imaging solution.
     
  3. Peter2150

    Peter2150 Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2003
    Posts:
    17,049
    Hi Lodore

    You can ask, but in the final analysis, you will have to test, test, test.

    I have successfuly used Drive Snapshot, IFW/IFD, Acronis, and Shadow Protect, but until you test you won't know what works well on your box.

    On my older box IFD was the only thing that worked out of the box so to speak. None of the other rescue disks did, until I went to BartPE. Ironically even ShadowProtect under WinPE wouldn't work with the Nvidia Raid drivers.
    Under Bartpe all 4 worked well, and Shadow Protect was the fastest.

    However on the newest box, only Acronis, and IFW even worked. ShadowProtect and Drivesnapshot both hang. This was running under BartPe Again Nvidia drivers at work.

    So far Acronis hasn't failed, and the only real test I consider valid is a restore. I do restore every image.

    My point is asking is fine, but won't tell you what will work best on your machines. Test em.

    Pete
     
  4. Escalader

    Escalader Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Posts:
    3,710
    Location:
    Land of the Mooses
    Hi Lodore:

    I've just become a new user of Paragon Drive backup 8. So far it has succesfully restored 1 whole partition for me. That took 60 seconds. In creating the initial backup of C drive it took 25 minutes for 19 GB with check read/write OFF. I have a Dell 4700, pentium 4 cpu, 3.0GHz, 1.5GB RAM, dual processor. After the initial archive is made, you then can do differenial backups for it which as much faster.

    So, IF your processor is the same as mine (it isn't I know) you would take 3 times as long to back it up. If check read write were on it would be 6 times as long, or 2 hours plus! NOT fast. But if you as asleep during the work who cares?

    I have yey to try buring an image.

    You can download a trial for 30 days and test the image feature.
     
  5. wilbertnl

    wilbertnl Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2004
    Posts:
    1,850
    Location:
    Tulsa, Oklahoma
    It is my understanding that a differential image is not really faster to create or restore. But the image is significantly smaller.
    I have an OEM image, size ~1.2 GB, and I installed Office 2000, Image Suite 10 and Money 2004, the differential image including these applications takes only 300 MB.
     
  6. Escalader

    Escalader Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Posts:
    3,710
    Location:
    Land of the Mooses
    "It is my understanding that a differential image is not really faster to create or restore. But the image is significantly smaller.
    I have an OEM image, size ~1.2 GB, and I installed Office 2000, Image Suite 10 and Money 2004, the differential image including these applications takes only 300 MB."

    That's great! I'll time the next differential backup more accurately rather than rely on my flawed memory.

    I'm only concerned about accuracy not how much space and time they take but I do understand that others are concerned. What I want to do next is do a full c drive restore, but I must admit that idea scares me. There comes a point where it seems we do need faith! :doubt:
     
  7. wilbertnl

    wilbertnl Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2004
    Posts:
    1,850
    Location:
    Tulsa, Oklahoma
    Oh, excuse me, Escalader,
    I quit relying on my flaws long time ago, I simply read available information:

    http://www.geocities.com/wilbertnl/images/differential.png
     
  8. Escalader

    Escalader Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Posts:
    3,710
    Location:
    Land of the Mooses
    Okay, I see it now. I'm still not convinced it takes longer but never mind.

    Thanks for the reminder, I should read the manual more! I just went ahead and did the differentials without reading the section you pointed out.

    Good stuff, thanks again.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.