Evaluation of Karen's Replicator 3.5.1
in [Freeware]
|
Prev: DVD-RAM freeware?
Next: 1st Page 2000 free edition
From: John Corliss on 16 Aug 2007 08:51 ms wrote: > John Corliss <jcorliss(a)fake.invalid> wrote in news:13c61ebpgic5c20 > @corp.supernews.com: > >> I downloaded and installed this program, hoping it would be something >> that could clone my main hard drive's main partition to my backup hard >> drive's backup partition and do it incrementally. >> >> Good news is that it's incremental, bad news is that it doesn't do a >> genuine clone on my XP Home SP2 computer. This is because the following >> files couldn't be copied because of Error 32 - "The process cannot >> access the file because it is being used by another process": >> > snip >> This failure to copy the registry, AFAIK, would mean that the backup >> partition would be unable to start Windows, at least without more than >> the default registry settings. >> > John > > Karen has alway been IMO one of the most competent freeware authors. You > might contact her with the above, long ago she answered me, may not these > days due to spammers, but your comment may improve the product. The > recent updates in Replicator may indicate response to user comments. Pretty sure the updates are dealing with Vista compatibility issues. -- John Corliss BS206. I try not to reply to trolls like Andy Mabbett, Bear Bottoms, Hummingbird or proteanthread. Due to all the spam coming from that service, I use NFilter to block all Google Groups posts from being displayed in my news reader. No ad, cd, commercial, cripple, demo, NAGWARE, share, spy, time-limited, trial or web wares or warez for me, please.
From: badgolferman on 16 Aug 2007 09:04 John Corliss, 8/15/2007,9:55:20 AM, wrote: > No preaching to me about how to back up my $#!%?%! data, PLEASE! As you have realized by now Karen's Replicator is not a cloning program, just a file backup program. It does that job well and is easy to use. Cloning programs work nicely for what they are designed for but I am starting to use them less and less. I use Karen's to backup the data files I want to keep, ERUNT for emergency registry restores, and resign myself to reinstallation of OS and applications. I do have a cloned backup of the original installation just in case I decide to use that. My reasoning is based on several factors that make sense to me only, I suppose. My OS gets bloated over time and their are programs in there I don't use anymore. Whatever corrupted the OS in the first place to force a reinstallation is probably still residing in the latest clone, especially if all I do is incremental backups. My OS is much speedier and leaner when starting from scratch. Now when I was a system administrator I would keep several cloned copies of the W2K3 Servers in addition to the RAID systems also within them that were supposed to prevent data loss, in addition to file backups to remote servers. That was a different situation where I had to ensure no loss of data and had to have insurance to restore stuff quickly.
From: John Corliss on 16 Aug 2007 09:16 dadiOH wrote: > John Corliss wrote: >> I downloaded and installed this program, hoping it would be >> something that could clone my main hard drive's main partition to >> my backup hard drive's backup partition and do it incrementally. >> >> Good news is that it's incremental, bad news is that it doesn't do a >> genuine clone on my XP Home SP2 computer. This is because the >> following files couldn't be copied because of Error 32 - "The >> process cannot access the file because it is being used by another >> process": >> (snip) >> >> This failure to copy the registry, AFAIK, would mean that the backup >> partition would be unable to start Windows, at least without more >> than the default registry settings. > > I'm confused by the your reference to the registry as I see no > registry files in your list. At least, not as I know them in Win98. > Does the XP registry contain something else? It does and they're stored in a different location. See bluerhinoceros' reply. >> I guess it's a keeper, but I still would like to be able to >> incrementally clone my main partition (non-compressed) to my backup >> hard drive so that if my main drive fails, all I have to do is to >> yank it and hook up the backup (slave) drive as the master drive to >> be back in business until the replacement hard drive arrives. > > I use Karen's Replicator v 1.08.0010 (aka v1.8.10). I once updated it > but went back to that version because it *does* copy everything. > Except the swap file which is un-needed. I *can* unplug my primary > drive, plug in a backup drive (made "active" when formatting) to that > channel and boot from it. That's with Win98, YMMV with XP. XXCopy used to create a functional backup for me when I was using ME. It doesn't with XP though. The reason it doesn't is the same as the reason that Replicator doesn't - neither can copy system files that are in use. > I see nothing that would preclude passing on my old copy of the > program; assuming that is the case, I would be pleased to send you a > copy if you wish...just let me know via email (see address in "reply > to sender"). Thanks for the offer, but I'm almost positive that an older version of the program wouldn't be able to temporarily unlock XP's system files for copying. > BTW, it doesn't "clone" (a sector to sector copy) My bad, but what I meant was (as you go on to say) the ability to retain the folder and file structure. I couldn't think of another term to describe that. The simple term "backup" doesn't necessarily imply it either. > but copies > files/directories...where those files/directories physically reside on > the backup drive is unimportant, only the structure is. The only > thing that need be in a specific location is the boot sector and that > was written when the drive was made active. That needs to be in a > specific place because the BIOS has to find it where expected so that > it can be loaded by BIOS; the boot then continues using the code/data > in that sector. Whenever I fdisk a new drive, I first install it as the master drive and with no other hard drives hooked up. Then I create at least on bootable partition on it. -- John Corliss BS206. I try not to reply to trolls like Andy Mabbett, Bear Bottoms, Hummingbird or proteanthread. Due to all the spam coming from that service, I use NFilter to block all Google Groups posts from being displayed in my news reader. No ad, cd, commercial, cripple, demo, NAGWARE, share, spy, time-limited, trial or web wares or warez for me, please.
From: dadiOH on 16 Aug 2007 09:37 John Corliss wrote: > XXCopy used to create a functional backup for me when I was using > ME. It doesn't with XP though. The reason it doesn't is the same as > the reason that Replicator doesn't - neither can copy system files > that are in use. Gotta love the way MS protects us from ourselves...:( ____________ >> I see nothing that would preclude passing on my old copy of the >> program; assuming that is the case, I would be pleased to send you >> a copy if you wish...just let me know via email (see address in >> "reply to sender"). > > Thanks for the offer, but I'm almost positive that an older version > of > the program wouldn't be able to temporarily unlock XP's system > files for copying. Well, if it doesn't, someone will/should write one. If necessary, all they need do is access the drives without the presence of an OS. Which means they'd have to write their own disk and monitor i/o routines. A "mini-DOS". A nuisance but not an impossibility. -- dadiOH ____________________________ dadiOH's dandies v3.06... ....a help file of info about MP3s, recording from LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that. Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico
From: dadiOH on 16 Aug 2007 09:45
dadiOH wrote: > John Corliss wrote: > >> XXCopy used to create a functional backup for me when I was using >> ME. It doesn't with XP though. The reason it doesn't is the same as >> the reason that Replicator doesn't - neither can copy system files >> that are in use. > > Gotta love the way MS protects us from ourselves...:( > ____________ > >>> I see nothing that would preclude passing on my old copy of the >>> program; assuming that is the case, I would be pleased to send you >>> a copy if you wish...just let me know via email (see address in >>> "reply to sender"). >> >> Thanks for the offer, but I'm almost positive that an older version >> of >> the program wouldn't be able to temporarily unlock XP's system >> files for copying. > > Well, if it doesn't, someone will/should write one. If necessary, > all they need do is access the drives without the presence of an OS. > Which means they'd have to write their own disk and monitor i/o > routines. A "mini-DOS". A nuisance but not an impossibility. After writing the above, a thought struck me: I wonder if a hot (CD bootable) distro of Linux could be used. Just mulling.... -- dadiOH ____________________________ dadiOH's dandies v3.06... ....a help file of info about MP3s, recording from LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that. Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico |