Michael, please take no umbrage. Realize that it is frustrating,
and the whole system of narrow-band Q & A and waiting only
adds to the frustration. You may be right, and "they" may be
right, but your definitions of "image" and "copy" are the
reverse of what some other knowledgeable people prefer. As
you say, I've tried both and they lead me ultimately to the
same place, which is almost a dead end. Even the Microsoft
Article 307654 doesn't accurately lead me to folders and
files that should be there. Maybe if they were there, my
system would work the way it should.

I acknowledge with appreciation that you spent considerable
time and effort trying to educate me, and to work through
to a solution to the problem. That you didn't succeed doesn't
mean that you failed....the problem may not be solvable. It
may be an after-effect or interactive effect, caused by
Microsoft's passion or obsession with security. Note,
however, that others have succeeded, maybe by starting
with a cleaner system.

As for Norton, their practice is to give you a document which
includes links to five other documents, each of which has links
to five other documents, and you have to print them all out
because you can't possibly remember what steps to take or
what registry items to find and delete, and the end result
is even more unsatisfying than what we've been going through.
Even more so than 307654 to which I was recently directed.

Again, please don't misinterpret my frustration and impatience
as dissatisfaction with your spirit of cooperation, only with
the end result.


Michael Solomon (MS-MVP Windows Shell/User) wrote:
Well, I'm not sure, should I be insulted?

William, I did the best I could for you under the circumstances and I did
initially try to direct you to the hardware forum where I thought there
might be users who had done what you were trying to do.

Second, when pressed, I tried to help but cautioned I had not done precisely
what you were attempting.

Third, my understanding of a "drive copy" versus an "image" is exactly the
opposite of what has been presented in that the copy is simply a copy of
what is on the drive while an image is an exact sector by sector duplicate.

You've now had problems attempting to do what you are trying to do with
either method, using the same product. Perhaps you are using the wrong
product, (That's rhetorical, I don't want to be accused of encouraging you
to use a different product only to have it fail as well and get blamed for
that tooG) perhaps it's the nature of your setup or perhaps it's the
manner in which you are using the product; I don't know.

I've had some pretty vile things said to me and about me on these boards,
usually from people that I wasn't even trying to help and often from people
who contributed nothing else to a particular thread. That was easy to
ignore. But, when I've gone out of my way to help someone who from the very
outset I specifically told I had not done this procedure in the manner it
was being done yet gave whatever benefit of my experience I could when
pressed by that someone and he has the temerity seemingly to offer up an
implied dig in my direction, I can't help but find that a bit insulting.

I wasn't arguing with you last night with regard to my interpretation of the
issue. I cannot be sure XP's anti-piracy scheme is the source of the
problem but I said and reiterate the error message is consistent with that
being the issue. Kirk to Spock, "Nonsense, no ship that size could generate
energy enough to hold a ship the size of the Enterprise." Spock to Kirk,
"We are being held, Captain," and all the logic in the world and
pronouncements about imaging software doesn't change the fact, you did
indeed receive such a message and it is consistent with that type of issue
and I had this concern and expressed it from the very beginning. I don't
expect to be complimented, especially when I haven't resolved the issue but
I don't appreciate left handed comments when I've gone out of my way to help
someone and have spent as much time on the issue as I have with you.

Symantec has a bulletin board on USENET, it's simply listed as
symantec.support. If you can't find it in your newsreader on a USENET
server to which you might have access, you might find at Google under
groups. Perhaps, you will be able to find someone there who has tried
precisely what you are attempting and will know what is wrong. The issue I
sited, may only be a symptom, perhaps someone who is doing this can diagnose
the cause and give you the help you need.


--
William B. Lurie