Macrium Reflect FREE Edition v4.2.2733
in [Freeware]
|
From: Jim S. Witherspoon on 24 Jul 2010 10:36 On Sat, 24 Jul 2010 08:21:43 -0500, M.L. wrote: > The dottech link doesn't indicate which imagers allow one to explore > or copy files from an image archive, which is a very important feature > if one accidentally deletes a file that's in the archive. ML - the table does show that all of the compared programs have "mount/browse backup images and perform selective restore" - do you mean something beyond that? jim
From: Jim S. Witherspoon on 24 Jul 2010 10:37 > > Darn, forgot to add the URL to the table showing comparison of imaging > products. Here's the URL to the comparison table and another that I > found: > > http://dottech.org/featured/11628 > http://www.raymond.cc/images/disk-imaging-features-compared.png very nice and thorough comparison. Thanks very much for links. jim
From: REM on 24 Jul 2010 12:55 > VanguardLH <V(a)nguard.LH> wrote: >From the web page listing the differences between the free and paid >versions, it doesn't look like I'll be using it. Since it doesn't >support incremental or differential image backups, you can only do full >image backups. Check Best Buy (first link that came up): WD 2TB, 64MB cache, $139. And maybe delete old image files if space is still an issue? >Since you can use Windows Explorer to access the "images", guess they >can't be compressed or in any proprietary or special file format. Makes >me wonder how the size of its image backups compares to other imaging >products. http://www.macrium.com/features.asp Look under File Backup for both incremental and compression. Look under Disk Image for compression. >Before I'd spend time on Macrium's freeware, I'd go check to see how >well it does restores. Backups are nice and the faster the better (but >full-only images would just consume way too much disk space) but unless >it is reliable for restores than it is bogus software. That would be under File Backup... incremental file backup with compression? That's what you are wanting to do? A system partition image and then specific incremental file backups? >Rather than >claim to have "used" this product to save backups, has anyone actually >had to do restores from it and do so several times to gauge its >reliability to actually make use of the backups? Do you lose the entire >image if a portion of it is corrupted (like the n-th CD out of several >used to store the image)? CD? Seriously? I'm going to try it out. I hope to do a reinstall this weekend. That will be a good opportunity to test the image ability using my current setup versus the new install. It might be towards next weekend before I have time to do both images, the install, and try both images. No CDs will be harmed during this trial. :)
From: REM on 24 Jul 2010 13:03 > Caesar Romano <Spam(a)uce.gov> wrote: >> FredW <fredw(a)blackholespam.net> >>>> VanguardLH <V(a)nguard.LH> wrote: >>>> I found a comparison table of several free imaging programs (with >>>> Acronis TrueImage thrown in for comparison). >>>Darn, forgot to add the URL to the table showing comparison of imaging >>>products. Here's the URL to the comparison table and another that I >>>found: >>> >>>http://dottech.org/featured/11628 >>Thank you for the links. >+1 on that. x3. The only problem that I see with Macrium from the link above is that you can only restore an image to the same hard drive. That might be a deal breaker. Partition? The same hard drive (brand, size?) if the hard drive fails? I'll see soon enough. It does clone one hard drive to another, though. That's an interesting ability.
From: VanguardLH on 24 Jul 2010 19:11
REM wrote: >> VanguardLH wrote: > > >> From the web page listing the differences between the free and paid >> versions, it doesn't look like I'll be using it. Since it doesn't >> support incremental or differential image backups, you can only do >> full image backups. > > Check Best Buy (first link that came up): WD 2TB, 64MB cache, $139. > And maybe delete old image files if space is still an issue? Thanks for illustrating my point that a series of *full* images to provide a history of backups means you reduce how deep is that history from which you can extract restores. >> Since you can use Windows Explorer to access the "images", guess they >> can't be compressed or in any proprietary or special file format. >> Makes me wonder how the size of its image backups compares to other >> imaging products. > > http://www.macrium.com/features.asp Look under File Backup for both > incremental and compression. Look under Disk Image for compression. Someone else mentioned that Macrium, like others, will "mount" a drive containing the backup so you can browse through it. That makes it possible to use Windows Explorer. I saw mention regarding their quick restore that all backup media must be available in the same folder (i.e., you cannot use their quick restore across multiple storage media, like for an N-disc backup to CD/DVDs, and they require you to copy the backups to one folder). So my guess is that you also must have all of the backup in one location in order to mount it and browse through it. >> Before I'd spend time on Macrium's freeware, I'd go check to see how >> well it does restores. Backups are nice and the faster the better >> (but full-only images would just consume way too much disk space) >> but unless it is reliable for restores than it is bogus software. > > That would be under File Backup... incremental file backup with > compression? That's what you are wanting to do? A system partition > image and then specific incremental file backups? Um, no, not the point here. Doing backups every day for weeks on end may make you feel warm and comfy but unless you actually restore (and NOT just run a verify operation) then you don't know how reliable are those backups. I've seen many times in the past where users have faithfully performed backups only to find out that there were failures on restores so they lost their files. All that time to do backups was wasted. Even picking just a few files at random spots in the backup from which to restore might indicate if those backups are truly usable. Other users have responded that they have performed restores many times over a span of time so it looks like Macrium is good for restores since without which the backups would be a waste of time. >> Rather than claim to have "used" this product to save backups, has >> anyone actually had to do restores from it and do so several times >> to gauge its reliability to actually make use of the backups? Do >> you lose the entire image if a portion of it is corrupted (like the >> n-th CD out of several used to store the image)? > > CD? Seriously? I wasn't really interested in listed all backup media types (floppy, tape, CD, DVD, Blu-ray, 2nd internal, removable, or external hard disks, online storage, USB sticks, etc). The respondents have not indicated if they could still recover some or most files from a corrupted backups that spanned multiple backup media - WHATEVER that backup media type happens to be. If 1 out of N backup media is unusable, can you still recover files from the other N-1 backup media, whatever type it is? If mounting a virtual drive is how Macrium grants access to files within a backup: one, does the entire backup have to be available in one location (i.e., under one folder on one backup source); and, two, how do you recover what files you can if the backup spans multiple storage media but one of them fails (no backup media type is absolutely perfect with no failures even if only placed in storage after use). > I'm going to try it out. I hope to do a reinstall this weekend. That > will be a good opportunity to test the image ability using my current > setup versus the new install. I'll probably play around with it later in a VM. I've saved a shortcut to it on my desktop. I do daily image backups (Tue-Sun) and full image backups (Mon). Not have reduced image size because incrementals (or even differentials) weren't available for backup modes probably means that I'll investigate what else this product does but buying another even more huge hard disk (internal or external) obviously doesn't make this a free solution to providing consistent and regular backups. One respondent mentioned that perhaps most image software users only do a backup once per month. I feel pain if I lose a days worth of output. A month's loss would be intolerable. |