226
General Software Discussion / Re: best image backup method with multiple partitions on a disk
« on: October 04, 2016, 08:51 AM »
Thanks, guys!
====
xtabber, your situation is very similar
when you image the c: do you bother with things like the small FAT and Recovery partitions with the C: OS?
===
Macrium apparently simply did not want to keep up with the Linux and liked extra functionality in using Windows PE (perhaps stuff like working with the saved files or restore alternatives?). However there are various flavors of PE for different Windows OS, so it does not make sense for the quick and simple restoring of an image. There seems to be more possibilities for glitching out in making the CD as well. They even inquired of their customer base, with mixed returns. They sort of said .. well use the older version 5.x but that is a kludge method AND every time I found what was supposed to be a 5.x version it started to install .. as 6.x. I really liked them otherwise.
===
The cloning idea is good. My fav local store in Hyde Park showed me how he does that for anything he sells (also he mentioned the Apricorn cable). However, a clone tends to require the same system, or one identical or close to identical, to be sure of working, so it does not seem to have much advantage for me over the simpler placing of an image on a Terabyte drive, or two. Wouldn't the burner test puter have to be pretty similar, more than just disk save?
Ideally, I will use redundancy, e.g two image programs, and two externals. Since the actual image can be done from Windows, the 15-30 minutes mean little, although I try to keep the system steady. They claim to be able to image while you work, (some sort of snapshot technology?) .. I am not sure if that is a fine idea. So far, I have not seen a need to shell out for actually making the image. Your thoughts?
====
xtabber, your situation is very similar
when you image the c: do you bother with things like the small FAT and Recovery partitions with the C: OS?
===
Macrium apparently simply did not want to keep up with the Linux and liked extra functionality in using Windows PE (perhaps stuff like working with the saved files or restore alternatives?). However there are various flavors of PE for different Windows OS, so it does not make sense for the quick and simple restoring of an image. There seems to be more possibilities for glitching out in making the CD as well. They even inquired of their customer base, with mixed returns. They sort of said .. well use the older version 5.x but that is a kludge method AND every time I found what was supposed to be a 5.x version it started to install .. as 6.x. I really liked them otherwise.
===
The cloning idea is good. My fav local store in Hyde Park showed me how he does that for anything he sells (also he mentioned the Apricorn cable). However, a clone tends to require the same system, or one identical or close to identical, to be sure of working, so it does not seem to have much advantage for me over the simpler placing of an image on a Terabyte drive, or two. Wouldn't the burner test puter have to be pretty similar, more than just disk save?
Ideally, I will use redundancy, e.g two image programs, and two externals. Since the actual image can be done from Windows, the 15-30 minutes mean little, although I try to keep the system steady. They claim to be able to image while you work, (some sort of snapshot technology?) .. I am not sure if that is a fine idea. So far, I have not seen a need to shell out for actually making the image. Your thoughts?