TrueImage 8 vs. Ghost 9?

I'm about to trial these backup products one-by-one on an XP system (we kept an old system at home, my friend and I, and now we've found a use for it)
I'll do a check based on user friendliness mainly. What I need to know is, in case I want to buy a license do I need to redownload the whole package? Or can I convert the already installed trial product into fully functional? (I won't buy a product so hastily, but we have some people who like back up products as soon as they witness their first crash)
I'm referring to DI, TI and the new entrant RIT. FDISR doesn't support FAT32 and we'll skip that for now.

 

Is it possible to backup to an USB-drive?

Ciao,

Smokey

 

DI 5 is an older software, and since I don't have an external USB, I can't give you a definite YES answer. It will work with USB zip. Bootit will handle external USB.

 

Thanks.

Maybe other forum-members know the answer (or not)

Ciao,

Smokey

 

Well folks, it's time for me to eat humble pie, after cursing Ghost 9 over the last few weeks.

The culprit was my one of my RAM modules.

Thanks to Paranoid2000's suggestion of the excellent Memtest86, I was able to work identify the faulty module and -- with just two days left before the RAM guarantee expired!! -- get it exchanged. Bizarrely the problem with Ghost was the ONLY apparent effect of the faulty module. Everything else in the system had been running fine, and RAM checkers running within Windows hadn't detected the fault.

Sincere thanks to Paranoid2000 for the assistance.

p.s. to Smokey, don't forget that there is a huge speed difference between USB and USB2 (the latter of which is faster than firewire 400, in fact). Sorry if I am stating the obvious but do be aware that backing up to an older USB device may be excrutiatingly slow...

 

Glad you were able to isolate the hardware issue. Is this a Crucial and/or factory RAM module? Most value RAMs are craps. I'm sure others can learn from your experience.

 

Join the club iain.
I lost two months of learning time (never got around to completing ISO c++) because of faulty RAM. Howlong did it take for your test to complete? someone else tested for me (Memtest86 was used) and it showed multiple Read/write errors within 1 screenful of data!! I never found out if that Ram module had ANY operational areas.
It usually takes 6-8 hours for the test, right?

 

- referring to Drive Image 5


I just ran some tests on stuff I haven't done before and to satisfy Smokey's question and others. DI 5 has no trouble seeing my USB external drive or both my DVD/CDRW drives. It mounts all the compatible partitions for use whether they are hidden or not. I did a test and it burned an image to a CDRW no problem. One thing I didn't know it would do is make the CD bootable and install the restore utility of DI 5 on the disk to work with. I tried burning an image to a DVDRW but that didn't work. It didn't work in DI 7 either though it's supposed to. However, DI 5 does see the files on my DVDRW disks so one could create an image to the hard drive and burn it to DVD (in windows) and restore it from the disk when needed.

The only reason I moved to DI 7 is I thought being able to backup without dropping to DOS was a great feature. But it does require installing the .NET framework from Microsoft. I haven't researched why people don't like .NET.

I did some speed comparisons of the time it takes for these packages to do their work. I have a 2.4Ghz Celeron and I did the tests on a my C: partition on my Western Digital drive. The partition has 3.75Gig of data to image. NA is for not applicable, times were rounded to the nearest 10 seconds. True Image offers High and Maximum as top choices where Drive Image offers High. Final image sizes are noted next to creation times. The create image time column also indicates what operating system I was in when I created the image, if applicable or possible.

___________________Drive Image 5_____Drive Image 7___True Image 8
Create image time
________Dos Max:_______NA______________NA_________40:20(1.93GB)
________Dos High:_____25:00(2.09GB)______NA_________11:00(1.98GB)
______WinXP Max:_______NA______________NA_________19:20(1.92GB)
______WinXP High:_______NA__________14:00(1.94GB)____9:00(1.97GB)

Restore image time
_________PQI file:______22:20____________5:40____________NA
_________V2i file:________NA_____________6:00____________NA
_________TIB file:________NA_____________NA___________6:00(max)
____________________________________________________6:20(high)

Utility Boot Time:________1:20(diskettes)____3:30(CD)______0:39(CD)
______________________0:36(bootable backup image CD)

Drive image verifies images by default before restoring but can be unchecked. I think it's good practice to check them. True Image doesn't by default but I checked the box to do it. It added about 1:50 to the restore time. My boot time with the DI 7 CD may be slowed since it can't seem to find my ethernet chip integrated into my motherboard. I get several errors before it gives up and tells me it can't find a network interface card.

PQI is the extension for DI 5 images, TIB is for True Image and DI 7 restores both the older PQI files and the newer V2i files but creates V2i files when it does images.

True Image crashed once while it wasn't really doing anything in Windows and I was off checking something in Windows Explorer. The one incremental backup I did with True Image after installing a few programs took about
5 minutes. Neither Drive Image package has this feature.

 

My experience of both these apps is that anything Norton is a nightmare to re-install if it goes belly up.
I recently had some serious PC woes and my Norton Firewall, AV and Ghost 9 gave me error after error when tryting to re-install.
I gave up in disgust as this was not the first time I had had problems which is what brought me to NOD32 which I love. I replaced the Firewall and also moved to True Image.
True Image was a breeze to install, set up and use and has ran trouble free ever since.

 

I like to keep it simple. Programs that must use .NET add another layer of complexity to the system.

Back to DI 5. Did you write the image file to another partition (same HD) or to an external HD? 25 min to image a 3.75 GB partition is way too slow for your system. My 600MHz PIII with DI 5 could process a 700MB WXP boot partition in under 3 min (same HD, different partition). That would translate to about 14 min to image a 3.75 GB partition.

DI 5 reports an average process time at the completion of the image file. It is normal for a Dell 4600 to hit an average speed of 1.6 GB/min during image creation. An old 266MHz PII Gateway would yield somewhere between 130 and 150 MB/min.

 

Thanks for the answer!

Ciao,

Smokey

 

Hope no one gets upset, but I don't like the backups to CD/DVD, tried it, but I have found a really good alternative. It does cost a bit extra, but my payback is that I no longer worry about recovering from anything... and I can recover verrry quickly. So here goes...
----------------------------------------------------
Layers of protection:
1) Hardware backup
a) Raid 1 provides protection from failure of a single drive
b) Western Digital 36GB Raptors, 5 year warranty, reliability
c) a spare drive in case one of the Raid 1 drives fails, installed
immediately in array awaiting replacement of failed drive
d) Copy Raid 1 image to bootable IDE HDD of 'same' size (40GB),
weekly, in case both Raid drives fail at the same time or
malicious code corrupts entire Raid array contents.
Power OFF, connect IDE backup, insert V-Com diskette or CD
Power ON, (change BIOS to boot from CD if appropriate),
run Copy Commander (DOS MODE app) and
copy (my time=45 minutes, total=7.4GB for 4 partitions
c:=4.5GB, d:=692MB, e:=2.2GB, f:=64MB)
Power OFF, disconnect IDE,
Power ON to a normal session
Recovery to IDE:
Power OFF, disconnect Raid drives, connect IDE backup,
Power ON and your up and running. Time=5 minutes.
Reverse the process if you need to copy the IDE to the Raid.
e) sensitive data is stored on a USB Flash memory stick
f ) extremely sensitive data is stored on a second PC that is
nor connected to the primary PC.
2) Software 'backup' on Raid 1
a) First Defense snapshots allow safe recovery to a previous
state when 'sandbox' testing of new/beta software or when
malicious code infects the current snapshot. Automatically
boots to backup if current snapshot is corrupted (no BSOD).
3) Security software
a) IP provider provides anti-virus and anti-spam filters
b) Firewall Zone Alarm Professional
c) Anti-virus PC-cillan
d) Anti-trojan TDS-3 scanner
e) Execution filters Process Guard, PrevX, TDS-3, Worm Guard
f) Download filters AdWatch, Spyware Guard
f) Site filters Spyware Blaster. Zone Alarm, IE Restricted sites
AdWatch
g) Content filters AdSubrtact, Proxomitron
h) Monitors BHODemon, RegProtect, PrevX, Port Explorer,
Spy Bot Search and Destroy-TeaTimer,
WormGuard, TDS-3 for port 5000 alerts
DCS APM and APT, RegMon
i) Scanner/Cleaners PC-cillan, TDS-3, AdAwareSE, SpyBot S&D,
MRU Blaster, Crap Cleaner
j) Scanners Hijack This, DCS AutoStart Viewer
k) Killers DSC Advanced Process Termination
(which I've never had to use, thankfully)

I classified the software according to my own opinions, actually there is
overlap in functionallity amongst many of the applications.

The sequence of the list is arbitrary and isn't meant to indicate preference
or priority.

There may be other applications that perform the same functions but I have
not tried them because I have found that these do have satisfy my needs.
I use V-Com's Partition Commander package which includes:
Copy Commander, which I use to copy the HDD images and
System Commander, which I cannot use (for multi-booting)
because both it and First Defense (by Raxco) want to 'own' the MBR.
(Thus GoBack also can't be used, but First Defense is, in my opinion, best
suited for my needs and objectives. )

I purchased the above applications, where commercially offered, in order to
support the vendors and 'ensure' continued support.
I have not contributed to any 'freeware' due, in my opinion, to the lack of a
secure, yet easy, method of funds transfer.


Jim

 

It was, unfortunately, a s**t one from PC World. I am not sure if you are based in the UK and are familiar with this terrible "computer superstore" -- staffed seemingly entirely by people with no knowledge of computers -- but I had run out of money and time when I bought the RAM and it was the most convenient place to buy it from. It was definitely the weakest link in the system. The other RAM module from there has worked OK. My two further modules are by Crucial but have a lifetime warantee, so that's relatively OK. I agree that ideally I'd use a much better brand. Next time...

Actually it was pretty quick to run its default tests. The deceptive thing is that it will keep re-running the tests until you tell it to stop, so it might appear to be taking longer. About 5 mins on 512Mb of DDR400 with an 800FSB, and about 20 mins on 2048Mb. No doubt the extended tests take longer, but I was more than content to work on eliminating my 136 errors before letting it look in more depth for any more!

 

I wrote it to a different partition on the same drive. Actually the partition size was 15 GB. Remember I was backing up 3.75 GB of ACTUAL data. I don't know if I've ever experienced DI 5 too speedy in Dos. I've used it on different hard drives, different motherboards etc. Also I was using the highest compression for most the tests. I'm sacrificing a lot speed waiting for DI to figure what and how the data can be compressed. I want small files so I don't fill up my backup partition too quickly.

 

DI 5 will use Caldera DOS with WXP. DI 5 will only image the actual data in the 15 GB drive to end up with in image file that's approximately 2 GB. It's very strange that your system and DI 5 can only process data at a speed of 150 MB/min. I also used HIGH compression! Is your WD HD running in DMA mode 4 or 5 in the BIOS?

I've used DI 5 on HPs, E-machines, Dells, Compaqs, and Gateways. The 266 MHz PII Gateway was the only machine that posted a speed lower than 150 MB/min. Windows cannot affect the speed of DI 5 because the program does not run in windows.

Perhaps you could test Bootit ng (another non-windows imaging software) and post Bootit's speed.

 

Until you pointed it out, I hadn't really considered it slow. I usually leave the BIOS for auto detection. I also tested DI 5 with using a win98 boot disk and then running pqdi.exe from a separate partition. I keep a folder of utilities around if trouble should arise. Then I can get DI and partitionmagic going to start fixing things without having a stack of disks around. Anyway, while the utility boot time was faster, the image creation time was the same whether I used windows dos or the Caldera Dr Dos.

I have a Maxtor drive as a slave and the only thing that's been consistent since I've been using DI 5 is Maxtor drives being in the system somewhere. Though when I think on it, back in the day when I was imaging win98 chock full of programs, I remember the times only taking 15-20 minutes. Restore times were rather fast, usually only 10-12 minutes.

I'll have to do some more tests.

 

You're right. I found a setting in my BIOS that was disabled by default. Specifically the IDE Bus Master. I re-ran the image creation by DI 5 and it only took 5:23. I'm going to rerun the other packages to see what happens.

 

Thanks for the feedback. Non-windows imaging software are very simple and robust. They should work well if the BIOS and HDs are properly configured.

You can use DI 5 to create two 3.5" boot floppies. The only time that you would need to use the boot floppies is if you cannot boot into windows. I always click on the DI icon from windows if I want to run DI. The program will reboot the PC and launch the DI menu screen. The whole procedure takes about 30 seconds. The speed of image restoration is always faster (by approximately 70%) than image creation.

 

Could you please help me out here. Running the same config I cant get ghost9 restore to work cause it doesn't find my 2 hard drives.(maxtor sata 120GB in raid0). What could be going on here, same mobo, same raid, saim hdds, perhaps jumpering the sata drives or using the wrong connectors on the mobo?

 

In my p4c800e (maxtor 2x120 raid0) i can't get ghost 9 recovery see my ntfs partitions. Right now using the promise controller but having identical probs with the intel ich. Is this a bios setting or perhaps sata drive jumpering? I think i've tried all bios setting combinations, could someone help me out perhaps?

 

Hey -- My vote would be for True Image, except for one ANNOYING PROBLEM. TI always restores images into a 4K cluster size format. If you image a small partition, say 750 MB that has a 2K cluster size, get ready, 'cause it's gonna come out 4K. Acronis says that TI is just using the "optimal cluster size," which is just plain not true. I KNOW 'cause I directly compared the exact same partition at 4K & 2K cluster sizes: The smaller cluster saved me almost 3 MB on about 400 MB of data.

Maybe Acronis thinks this is too small to worry about. But then I wonder, why would they even include the "Change Cluster Size" option in Partition Expert, if their other product, TI, just changes it back?"

 

It's called POOR PRODUCT DESIGN. The sole purpose of an imaging software is to copy exactly all the contents in each partition/hard drive. That includes the cluster size! I discovered the cluster size issue with TI 6 server.

 

I just now got a reply from Acronis saying: (quote)

"Thank you for interest in Acronis software!
Please be sure that the cluster size of a restored partition is the same as the cluster size of original partion."

I think they're trying to say, "Please BE ASSURED that the cluster size won't change..." Otherwise it makes no sense. Then they say:

"You can download Acronis True Image 8.0 trial version at http://acronis.com/download/trueimage/ in order to make sure it will work on your computer."

Maybe they corrected the cluster problem in v8 (I was using v7). I'll give it a try, but I'm skeptical. And of course I'll have to crack it, because Acronis says right on their download page that you CANNOT RESTORE images with the trial version, in which case I wonder, HOW CAN I "Make sure it will work on my computer!!?"

 

Mr

I used Drive Image &.3 without any problems for about a year but recently after installing Windows XP Pro Service Pack 2 DI 7 became very unreliable, either not finding my drives or finding them and then giving an "object not found error message" and closing down. So I upgraded to Ghost 9, and found it to be a really bad program. It had the same problems as DI 7 but worse. When it did work, I created a system backup as an image of my 120GB SATA system drive on an Iomeg external 160Gb HDD.

I tested the Recovery rocedure from the Ghost 9 CD it found the image OK but reported that the image had been vreated by an earlier version of Ghost and that I would need ghosr.exe to restore the image.

It seems that Ghost 9 is a despaerately bad program for SATA drives and that true Image though less sophiostecated is mcuh moe reliable.

John