Best Backup Program
in [Windows XP Basics]
|
From: Ken Blake, MVP on 11 May 2010 21:04 On Tue, 11 May 2010 20:21:11 -0400, "Daave" <daave(a)example.com> wrote: > Yeah, I saw that. > > But I don't think he intended to be belligerent. I think he was confused > and meant to say he was interested in not just copying data but having a > perfect copy of the hard drive. To him, this (incorrectly) meant the > word "mirror." > > We'll see what he really means if makes another reply. ;-) Glad to hear you say that, and I hope you're right and I was wrong. > Ken Blake, MVP wrote: > > On Tue, 11 May 2010 19:31:09 -0400, "Daave" <daave(a)example.com> wrote: > > > >> The term "mirror" is used for RAID technology: > > > > > > I tried to tell him that, but since he just wanted to argue with me, I > > didn't bother replying to his second message, quoted below. > > > > > > > > > >> http://www.bestpricecomputers.co.uk/glossary/raid-1.htm > >> > >> http://www.recoverdata.com/raidfaq.htm > >> > >> This does not sound like what you were asking about. > >> > >> From your description below, you are referring to cloning. Is your > >> external hard drive specifically an eSATA hard drive? Does your > >> motherboard support eSATA hard drives. If you answer yes to both, > >> then you can use a cloning program to accomplish what you want. > >> > >> Also know you can create an image of your hard drive and then restore > >> that image to the same or a different hard drive and your new drive > >> is *effectively* a clone of the original. It takes longer, but it > >> still safeguards all your data and allows you the luxury of not > >> having to reinstall the OS, updates, applications, etc. > >> > >> Or you can choose to clone directly. Your choice. > >> > >> > >> David wrote: > >>> Ken: > >>> > >>> I do mean mirror, not copy. > >>> > >>> Unless I am mistaken, when you copy one drive to another, you get > >>> the contents of the first drive copied to the second. This means > >>> that the contents are the same, but the location on the second > >>> drive may not be the same. > >>> > >>> Mirroring a drive (at least to me) means just that. Not only are > >>> the contents copied, but the exact locations on the second drive > >>> are the same. Mirroring, I believe, also copies the boot tracks > >>> which is essential if the mirrored drive is to be used as a > >>> replacement boot drive in the event c: fails. > >>> > >>> I have an external USB hard drive. the bios on my workstation > >>> allows the external USB drive to be bootable (assuming I read the > >>> manual correctly). I want the c: drive to be mirrored to the > >>> external USB hard drive so I have a functional backup hard drive in > >>> case c: fails. > >>> > >>> David > >>> > >>> On Tue, 11 May 2010 08:04:26 -0700, "Ken Blake, MVP" > >>> <kblake(a)this.is.an.invalid.domain> wrote: > >>> > >>>> On Tue, 11 May 2010 05:18:18 -0400, David wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> I am looking for recommendations on the best backup program > >>>>> available. > >>>>> > >>>>> My workstation is currently running XP PRO/SP3, but may eventually > >>>>> upgrade to Windows 7, so compatability with both is a plus. > >>>>> > >>>>> I would like the ability to mirror my main c: drive to a bootable > >>>>> external drive. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> What do you mean by "mirror." That term is normally used just for > >>>> RAID1, which is very different from backup. > >>>> > >>>> But if you just mean something like "copy," no problem. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> I would like to be able to backup an entire internal or external > >>>>> drive to a different external drive. > >>>>> > >>>>> I do not plan on backing up to DvDs or optical disk. > >>>>> > >>>>> Being able to backup individual directories/files would be a plus. > >>>>> > >>>>> Compression is unimportant. My external drive is 1TB & I have 150 > >>>>> GB internal capacity. I'd prefer to have a plain vanilla backup - > >>>>> that is I'd be able to use Windows Explorer to view the backup & > >>>>> retrieve a file if I choose. > >>>>> > >>>>> Quality, reliability, and ease of use take precedence over cost. > >>>>> If I can not accomplish what I want with one program, multiple > >>>>> programs are fine. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Acronis True Image. > -- Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP (Windows Desktop Experience) since 2003 Please Reply to the Newsgroup
From: Andy on 12 May 2010 01:55 Norton Ghost properly set up :) -- AL'S COMPUTERS <David> wrote in message news:cb7iu55mn3j8dh3r4vr6jl4o5ai2655dk4(a)4ax.com... >I am looking for recommendations on the best backup program available. > > My workstation is currently running XP PRO/SP3, but may eventually > upgrade to Windows 7, so compatability with both is a plus. > > I would like the ability to mirror my main c: drive to a bootable > external drive. > > I would like to be able to backup an entire internal or external drive > to a different external drive. > > I do not plan on backing up to DvDs or optical disk. > > Being able to backup individual directories/files would be a plus. > > Compression is unimportant. My external drive is 1TB & I have 150 GB > internal capacity. I'd prefer to have a plain vanilla backup - that > is I'd be able to use Windows Explorer to view the backup & retrieve a > file if I choose. > > Quality, reliability, and ease of use take precedence over cost. If I > can not accomplish what I want with one program, multiple programs are > fine. >
From: Stan Brown on 12 May 2010 10:02 Tue, 11 May 2010 22:00:03 +0100 from ANONYMOUS <ANONYMOUS(a)EXAMPLE.NET>: > > David wrote: > > I am looking for recommendations on the best backup program available. > > > > > > Norton Ghost 15 or Norton 360; highly recommended by professionals in > the know. Translation: POSes that *no one* without an ax to grind would recommend. I'd go with Acronis True Image, but I bought my copy in 2005, which is about a century ago in computer years, so I don't know if the current version is still as good. -- Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA http://OakRoadSystems.com Shikata ga nai...
From: David on 12 May 2010 16:28 Ken: Perhaps you just wanted to argue with yourself. I don't know. In any case, I used the wrong term. Does a mistake like that constitute an arguement? The whole point that I tried to make is I want my external USB drive to boot Win/XP PRO in case the main hard drive fails. I had thought an image would require a second hard drive exactly the same. I am not sufficiently well versed to know. In any case my main hard drive is 150GB and the USB drive is 1TB. The 150GB drive is listed in my paperwork as serial-ATA. The 1TB USB drive is an IOMEGA eGO desktop USB drive in its own case, type unknown. Perhaps we could reinitiate this conversation in a more amiable manner. I was hopeful you might have a solution to my real problem - making the USB drive XP/PRO bootable. On Tue, 11 May 2010 16:50:32 -0700, "Ken Blake, MVP" <kblake(a)this.is.an.invalid.domain> wrote: >On Tue, 11 May 2010 19:31:09 -0400, "Daave" <daave(a)example.com> wrote: > >> The term "mirror" is used for RAID technology: > > >I tried to tell him that, but since he just wanted to argue with me, I >didn't bother replying to his second message, quoted below. > > > > >> http://www.bestpricecomputers.co.uk/glossary/raid-1.htm >> >> http://www.recoverdata.com/raidfaq.htm >> >> This does not sound like what you were asking about. >> >> From your description below, you are referring to cloning. Is your >> external hard drive specifically an eSATA hard drive? Does your >> motherboard support eSATA hard drives. If you answer yes to both, then >> you can use a cloning program to accomplish what you want. >> >> Also know you can create an image of your hard drive and then restore >> that image to the same or a different hard drive and your new drive is >> *effectively* a clone of the original. It takes longer, but it still >> safeguards all your data and allows you the luxury of not having to >> reinstall the OS, updates, applications, etc. >> >> Or you can choose to clone directly. Your choice. >> >> >> David wrote: >> > Ken: >> > >> > I do mean mirror, not copy. >> > >> > Unless I am mistaken, when you copy one drive to another, you get the >> > contents of the first drive copied to the second. This means that the >> > contents are the same, but the location on the second drive may not be >> > the same. >> > >> > Mirroring a drive (at least to me) means just that. Not only are the >> > contents copied, but the exact locations on the second drive are the >> > same. Mirroring, I believe, also copies the boot tracks which is >> > essential if the mirrored drive is to be used as a replacement boot >> > drive in the event c: fails. >> > >> > I have an external USB hard drive. the bios on my workstation allows >> > the external USB drive to be bootable (assuming I read the manual >> > correctly). I want the c: drive to be mirrored to the external USB >> > hard drive so I have a functional backup hard drive in case c: fails. >> > >> > David >> > >> > On Tue, 11 May 2010 08:04:26 -0700, "Ken Blake, MVP" >> > <kblake(a)this.is.an.invalid.domain> wrote: >> > >> >> On Tue, 11 May 2010 05:18:18 -0400, David wrote: >> >> >> >>> I am looking for recommendations on the best backup program >> >>> available. >> >>> >> >>> My workstation is currently running XP PRO/SP3, but may eventually >> >>> upgrade to Windows 7, so compatability with both is a plus. >> >>> >> >>> I would like the ability to mirror my main c: drive to a bootable >> >>> external drive. >> >> >> >> >> >> What do you mean by "mirror." That term is normally used just for >> >> RAID1, which is very different from backup. >> >> >> >> But if you just mean something like "copy," no problem. >> >> >> >> >> >>> I would like to be able to backup an entire internal or external >> >>> drive to a different external drive. >> >>> >> >>> I do not plan on backing up to DvDs or optical disk. >> >>> >> >>> Being able to backup individual directories/files would be a plus. >> >>> >> >>> Compression is unimportant. My external drive is 1TB & I have 150 >> >>> GB internal capacity. I'd prefer to have a plain vanilla backup - >> >>> that is I'd be able to use Windows Explorer to view the backup & >> >>> retrieve a file if I choose. >> >>> >> >>> Quality, reliability, and ease of use take precedence over cost. >> >>> If I can not accomplish what I want with one program, multiple >> >>> programs are fine. >> >> >> >> >> >> Acronis True Image. >>
From: Anthony Buckland on 12 May 2010 16:31
"Stan Brown" <the_stan_brown(a)fastmail.fm> wrote in message news:MPG.26547ef4640b69e198c1f7(a)news.individual.net... > ... > I'd go with Acronis True Image, but I bought my copy in 2005, which > is about a century ago in computer years, so I don't know if the > current version is still as good. > ... I continue to use TI, but am careful about new versions. Acronis tends IMHO to let loose beta versions loose on the public for them to find the last few bugs, which can be risky for the one program you have to be able to rely on in a disaster. I wouldn't do anything irrevocable to my system until after I'd created an image, verified it, and made a recovery, which is a time-consuming checkout. I'm currently using version 9, build 2337, and have made a successful recovery during the last 12 months. "A century ago" indeed, but a byte is a byte regardless of the versions of everything else on my machine, and I continue to rely on that build. |