TeraByte Product Release Thread

Andy,

Your idea of automatic is different from mine. If I image a 10 GB partition I want it to restore automatically as a 10 GB partition. I think most people would regard this as logical. If I want a different restore size I use a manual option.

 

Brian,

Sorry, I do not think so.
Source partition is 10GB does not mean target partition size need to equal to source size.
Size between source and target do not have a direct relation.
People are restoring their data to target partition do not mean they also need to restore as same size as source.

You may think about that why some imaging apps do not do so(without changing partition size) like Symantec and Acronis. They are illogical?

 

That's why IFW has two settings. Automatic to restore an original sized partition and Manual that will restore a smaller, same size or larger partition. In most cases a restore is done into the original partition. 99% of mine are. But I have no difficulty in the other 1%.

 

I'm not sure (since I have not tested it) but I believe that the setting you are looking for is "Align MBR Ending HS"; and maybe combine it with "Align MBR HS when Truncated".

If you enable this IFW should restore your image to the same position/size of your current, to be deleted, partition.

Panagiotis

 

pandlouk,

Just the same

 

Do you think all new users/newbies will know this?

If source HDD has two partitions, then restoring to a HDD with three partitions. The restored HDD will also become two partitions, newbies will confused this. I mean if they do not know they need to manual enter partition size.

What I request is not unreasonable demands, as for Symantec, Acronis and others are already had this feature/ability.
Developers should think users know nothing, they just like a white paper.
Developers should provide a better user experience to users.

 

Andy,

Sorry but I don't follow this. IFW won't delete partitions without asking.

 

Which one do you mean?


OR



or another?


Brian,

I think IFW is not suitable me only.
I will switch back to my previous imaging apps.

 

That's the one. If you put 6151 MiB in the Resize after Restore field the restored partition will be 6151 MiB. The same as your current partition.

 

Andy,

I just did a test with imaging Win7. The partition was 20 GB. The HD was 40 GB. The partition was imaged with Norton Ghost 15 and IFW. The partition was then resized to 12 GB.

Norton Ghost gave the following restore resize options....
10925 to 38166 MB

IFD gave the following restore resize options....
9279 to 38165 MB

 

As for Norton Ghost, you can choose target partition, just press "Edit" button


Choose 6GB one, no need to resize
Disk 1, 3.99GB is unallocated space



My previous imaging apps are Symantec Ghost 11 not Norton Ghost 15, and Acronis
Of course, I also have Norton Ghost 15

 

Andy,

Nice screenshots. One refinement we do but it isn't essential is to click Delete Drive. This enables "Resize Drive after recover" so you can choose the restored partition size.

 

Brian,

It is no needed to click Delete Drive, just selecting the correct target partition, and pressing "OK". I edit it because the default target partiton chose by Norton Ghost is not corrected(it chose the 3.99GB one).
Therefore, no resizing is needed.

 

released today:

 

BootIt Bare Metal 1.14 was released.

Changes:

 

Another image format? I think I'll wait and see how this plays out. I don't have the time to test.

 

Woot incrementals. I just hope it continues to be lightweight like before.

 

I think TBU products are some of the best, and I use IFL and BIBM most of the time. For what I use it for, for now, I am going to stay with 2.77. Honestly, as much and as good as TBU is at keeping their products updated in order to offer best support for current hardware, etc., I do not find I need some of these new features with what I work with.

I am very impressed with their consistent updates, but I also understand for my hardware and backup needs, I personally only upgrade if a serious bug may be found in what I use or some other issue that may cause an unstable backup or restore. 2.77 has been flawless for me, but so were the earlier versions. If one has the latest hardware, etc., then I can see the need to upgrade as they offer better support, etc., such as UEFI/GPT, etc.

Thanks for the heads up

Jim

 

i kind of agree .... im hating this constant updating of the format

 

Same here for the imaging progs, but I find the BIBM update definitely worthwhile as it fixes some Partition Work bugs.

TS

 

Indeed TS. BIBM is a small and extremely powerful utility, and I still have yet to really understand all the features LOL Also nice that it has built in IFD also, although I have had some odd issues with IFD in regards to how it reads from BIOS, and would freeze up on me at first, until i learned to use 'BIOS direct' and that seemed to do the job. IFL is the one I find to be a remarkable imaging app with all the features, and the fastest i have used as far as image creation.

Have a good day TS

Jim

 

Jim, I still don't understand some of the implications of the many Terabyte imaging and partition-work options but thankfully there's always our forum gurus (Brian, MudCrab, and Pandlouk) who usually have the answers. I still don't understand the difference between BIOS and BIOS Direct. I guess I'm just going to have to find the time to RTFM(s)!

Happy new year.

 

BIOS accesses the drives using the BIOS routines. Basically, if the BIOS can see the drive BIBM/IFD should be able to access it.

BIOS (Direct) attempts to access the drive directly via the drive controller. This can be faster on some systems, but may have problems. If direct access isn't possible, then BIOS mode is used. On those systems you wouldn't see any difference between them.

Kind of like with USB drives, if accessed via the BIOS bus they're being accessed via the BIOS. If you access it via the USB bus then it would be direct.

When I use IFD I usually use BIOS mode because it seems less problematic and is really quite fast on newer systems.

 

Why is there such a large difference in the IFW installer exe file size? (~50 MB for version 2.78 versus ~15.5 MB for version 2.77)

 

TheKid7,

Mine is 16 MB. You must have downloaded the one that also contains IFL.