TeraByte Product Release Thread

* The image file created by this version requires an Image version 2.77 or later to restore.

is the one thing that drives me nuts about ifw. i am not sure why they do this but this is one thing i hate when companies do this especially to a imaging program they should be able to make it compatible.

 

zfactor,

It doesn't bother me but you can use this...

But of course you then miss out on the new image format. I always use the latest version so the changed format isn't an issue. The latest version will restore all previous images. It's only if you try to restore a 2.77 image with say a 2.75 disk that you strike a problem. Really, you should have a 2.77 disk anyway.

 

Hello,

A couple of observations:

I notice now that a shortcut is placed on the desktop for the 64 bit version (as also the TBWinRE uses the 64 bit version) with the 2.77 update Nov-17_2012. I know previously TB was not recommending to use the 64 bit version (I believe it was created initilally for the 64 bit version of TBWinRE for 64 bit OS/RE). Does anyone know if this postion from TB has changed with the appearance of the link on the desktop? To me, it appears TB considers the 64 bit version ready for general use.

With the version 2.77 update (Nov-17_2012), the scripts/binaries for TBWinRE have been updated to include Windows 8 (both 32 and 64 bit) reflected in tutorial HERE.
I just finished creating and testing both a USB boot medium and modifying the RE to add IFW to the RE boot options. Both are working flawlessly here.

 

I use IFW x64 for probably around half my backups and restores. I've never noticed any difference or had any problems with it.

 

Thanks MudCrab,

That is good to hear and I think I will switch over to the 64 bit version then (especially since my version of TBWinRE is using it. I was just curious as previously the 64 bit version was just more or less left sitting in the program folder, but with this new release TB has now provided shortcuts (both desktop and start menu).

Thanks again as hearing your success with the 64 bit version gives me added confidence to start using it full-time on my system.

 

i do generally use the newest one but there have been times when in a hurry i grab a older version of the disc out of my book and go to do the restore and realize i cant use that one. i just find it odd that they are one of the only ones that do this all the time. other companies have done it but i see terabyte do it very often with their updates.

 

I can understand zfactor's frustration.
If for any chance you miss to read the changelog and forget to update the recovery media you are unable to restore. But at least for this version TB had to change the structure of the format since they included the ability to exclude files/folders that need to be deleted after restoring.

Panagiotis

 

just tested the latest version of IFL and IFD to restore a Linux Mint image.

on a SSD, it took 1 minute 58 seconds to restore the image with IFD for a 6 GB image (not the size of the image file itself, but what's reported inside IFL/IFD).
with IFL; 46 seconds.

it's really worth it to test all version of Images For/ because the time saved can be substantial.

i don't have a WinPe disk with IFW to do the test above.
beside, it probably would take more time for the WinPe CD to load than to restore the image itself.
----
edit:
got 1 minute and 05 seconds launching imagew.exe from a Windows Command prompt at boot time.

 

Long time IFL/IFD user here, is it possible to backup a system in virtualbox/vmware and restore it to a physical system?

 

It's not really that different from going the other way -- all the same procedures apply.

 

Can an IFL Boot Cd v.2.77 restore a backup made with prior IFW versions? Another thing i always wanted to ask, does IFW support Hardware Independent Restore? If yes does it need any special settings in the Backup/Restore process to make it work?
Thx

 

Yes, you can restore older backups with the current version. If you create a new backup with 2.77 you would need 2.77 to restore it. IFW/IFL/IFD all create/restore the same images.

You don't need any special settings in the backup for a new hardware restore (just make sure to back up the partitions that you'll need). When restoring, it's fairly normal with any minor adjustments needed (for example, if restoring separate partitions, which is Active). Then you can use OSDTOOL to add/remove drivers for booting on the new system. You could also use the TBIDTOOL script to deploy an image (the script prompts you through the steps). Note that, depending on the actual hardware changes and version of Windows, you may not need to make any changes (Windows may be able to adjust by itself).

 

When restoring image, IFW will also restore partition table?
If yes, how to not restore partition table??

 

The partition table is updated as required when a partition is restored. There isn't an option to restore a partition and not update the partition table since it needs to be correct for the partitions that exist on the drive.

Are you trying to accomplish something specific?

 

I think I should say clearer, I mean not to change partition table after restored image.

It's nothing special
I have used such as Acronis and Active Disk Image, they will not change parition table after restored
I think IFW is quite strange

 

What do you feel IFW is doing strangely?

 

Why it must change partition table but others do not?
Why I need partition size as source partition size?

 

TB products do not modify the partition table unless they have to. If you restore an image of same size with the partition your partition table will remain as is. (They do not modify/touch the partition table even when you restore the mbr or the first sector of the disk).

Where did you get the info that IFW modifies the partition table?

Panagiotis

 

I made an image on a 10GB partition, then I resized the 10GB partition to 6GB , and restored the image. The 6GB partition became 10GB again.

Any settings can prevent this happening?

 

You'll have to enter manually the size that you want (not available in automatic mode).
IFW will restore by default the exact size of the partition (when it was imaged) if it finds more space, or will try to use as much of the free space if you restore to a smalller size.

Panagiotis

 

pandlouk,

I got your meaning and thanks for your answer. That means IFW could not keep the target partition's original size automatically.

It is the second thing that I do not like IFW.

 

Andy,

We still don't understand your situation. If you image a 10 GB partition it will restore as a 10 GB partition (automatically) if restored into unallocated space. But you can also choose to make the restored partition smaller or larger. So the restored partition can be smaller, the same, or larger than the original. That covers all possibilities.

 

Brian,

I just want to keep target partition size without any changes to target partition size.

I made an image on a 10GB partition(partition only, not a volume), then I resized the 10GB partition to 6GB, of course there are 4GB unallocated space. Next , I restored the image to the 6GB partition, the 6GB partition became 10GB again, that meant the 6GB partition mixed with 4GB unallocated space.

Doing the same steps, as for Acronis, the 6GB will not mix with the unallocated space. Active Disk Image has an option to choose keep partition size. These imaging apps are just examples only, there are another imaging apps also can keep partition size automatically.

 

Andy,

All you had to do was put 6 GB in the final IFW options screen and your restored partition would have been 6 GB and not 10 GB.

 

Brian,

Pandlouk has said this, but I do not want to enter manually
In fact, it can do this automatically, but IFW could not.