anyone have experience with using powerquest drive image on xp?

"I'm Dan" wrote:

"JMB" wrote:
Dell tells me my hard drive is going bad. They are sending
a replacement. Powerquest Drive Image 7 says it can take
an image of the entire hard drive, and you can just copy it
to the new drive, with no need to reinstall anything.
Sounds almost too good to be true.

Anyone had success doing so in XP?

The simplest way usually is to use a simple disk copy utility from the
drive manufacturer. Many manufacturers have free software specifically
for your intended purpose -- such as Seagate's "Disk Wizard", Maxtor's
"MaxBlast", and WD's "Data Lifeguard Tools"....


MaxBlast only copies files (record by record), and not byte-for-byte.
That makes a non-bootable copy. Two Maxtor tech reps have explicitly
commented to me that their copying software is not good, and have
mentioned Drive Image and Ghost for image copying.

-\Stan/-

This is completely untrue !!
DI-6 = DI-2002 is working perfectly with Windows XP.
I am using it all the time.

I even like it much more than DI-7 which makes images very fast without
leaving Windows.
But :
1. Restoring an image is a pain (complicated and time consuming).
2. Once DI-7 installed the computer takes 10 times longer to shut down.

"john" wrote in message
...
DI 2002 is intended for all older OS's, but not for XP & will definitely
cause major (irreversible) problems under some circumstances.
DI 7.0 is specifically for XP.

--
John

No, DI 2002 is a great program and works fine on XP Pro.

Good Luck.


JMB wrote:
Dell tells me my hard drive is going bad. They are sending a
replacement. Powerquest Drive Image 7 says it can take an image of
the entire hard drive, and you can just copy it to the new drive, with
no need to reinstall anything. Sounds almost too good to be true.

Anyone had success doing so in XP?

ALSO: Since my hard drive is already going bad, maybe it's too late
to use the Drive Image 7?

What does everyone think?

Thanks!

I have tried both Norton Ghost & Powerquest Drive Image.
Drive Image 6 (=2002) became my choice because it is a lot easier to use.


"CWatters" wrote in message
...
I think Norton Ghost will also do what you want.


"JMB" wrote in message
news
Dell tells me my hard drive is going bad. They are sending a
replacement. Powerquest Drive Image 7 says it can take an image of
the entire hard drive, and you can just copy it to the new drive, with
no need to reinstall anything. Sounds almost too good to be true.

Anyone had success doing so in XP?

ALSO: Since my hard drive is already going bad, maybe it's too late
to use the Drive Image 7?

What does everyone think?

Thanks!

Far too complicated for me !!


Robert wrote in message ...
On 17/11/2003 JMB wrote:

Dell tells me my hard drive is going bad. They are sending a
replacement. Powerquest Drive Image 7 says it can take an image of
the entire hard drive, and you can just copy it to the new drive, with
no need to reinstall anything. Sounds almost too good to be true.

Anyone had success doing so in XP?

ALSO: Since my hard drive is already going bad, maybe it's too late
to use the Drive Image 7?

What does everyone think?

Thanks!
_______________

Hi!
Why not use True Image from http://www.acronis.co.uk/index.asp?
It is best value for money.
--
Cheers,
Robert

On 17/11/2003 Picsou wrote:

Far too complicated for me !!


Robert wrote in message
...
On 17/11/2003 JMB wrote:

Dell tells me my hard drive is going bad. They are sending a
replacement. Powerquest Drive Image 7 says it can take an image
of the entire hard drive, and you can just copy it to the new
drive, with no need to reinstall anything. Sounds almost too
good to be true.

Anyone had success doing so in XP?

ALSO: Since my hard drive is already going bad, maybe it's too
late to use the Drive Image 7?

What does everyone think?

Thanks!
_______________

Hi!
Why not use True Image from http://www.acronis.co.uk/index.asp?
It is best value for money.
--
Cheers,
Robert
_______________

Hi, Picsou!
True Image could not be simpler!
Would you be a Drive Image rep by any chance?
--
Cheers,
Robert

Then take it up with Powerquest not me!
I'm only speaking from experience. It 2002 worked perfectly for me - until
one day---- .

Powerquest says - quote -

"Drive Image 7 runs on Windows XP Home and Professional, as well as Windows
2000 Professional Desktop Version.
Drive Image 2002 is included for users of Windows 95c, 98, ME and NT 4.0
Workstation."


--
John

This is completely untrue !!
DI-6 = DI-2002 is working perfectly with Windows XP.
I am using it all the time.

I even like it much more than DI-7 which makes images very fast without
leaving Windows.
But :
1. Restoring an image is a pain (complicated and time consuming).
2. Once DI-7 installed the computer takes 10 times longer to shut down.

"john" wrote in message
...
DI 2002 is intended for all older OS's, but not for XP & will
definitely cause major (irreversible) problems under some
circumstances.
DI 7.0 is specifically for XP.

--
John

No, DI 2002 is a great program and works fine on XP Pro.

Good Luck.


JMB wrote:
Dell tells me my hard drive is going bad. They are sending a
replacement. Powerquest Drive Image 7 says it can take an image of
the entire hard drive, and you can just copy it to the new drive,
with no need to reinstall anything. Sounds almost too good to be
true.

Anyone had success doing so in XP?

ALSO: Since my hard drive is already going bad, maybe it's too late
to use the Drive Image 7?

What does everyone think?

Thanks!

Then It's time they got their act together, so everyone knows what to use.
How can they EXPLICITLY say "it MAY work better" and "a POSSIBLE fix"?

--
John

"john" wrote:
DI 2002 is intended for all older OS's, but not for XP & will
definitely cause major (irreversible) problems under some
circumstances.
DI 7.0 is specifically for XP.


PowerQuest's telephone tech reps (two of them so far) have
explicitly said that Drive Image 2002 works with Windows XP
and that it may work better (more consistently and reliably)
than versions 7.0 and 7.01 . At least that is what they recommend
as a possible fix for problems I've had with 7.0 and 7.01 .

-\Stan/-

Hi Robert,

No I am not a Powerquest rep !

Why do I say that True Image is too complicated?
For the same reason I consider Drive Image 7 too complicated.

Both of them can create an image without leaving Windows: great.
For a restore I need however to boot my system with a floppy or a CD (for
both True & Drive Image).
This is exactly what I hate so much.

With Drive Image 6 (=2002) I can start the creation and the restore of an
image from within Windows.
My system is re-started into Dos for both of the actions, but frankly I
couldn't care less because there is not any intervention needed from my
side.
That is why I like this (older) version of Drive Image best, it's the
easiest one to use.




Robert wrote in message ...
On 17/11/2003 Picsou wrote:

Far too complicated for me !!


Robert wrote in message
...
On 17/11/2003 JMB wrote:

Dell tells me my hard drive is going bad. They are sending a
replacement. Powerquest Drive Image 7 says it can take an image
of the entire hard drive, and you can just copy it to the new
drive, with no need to reinstall anything. Sounds almost too
good to be true.

Anyone had success doing so in XP?

ALSO: Since my hard drive is already going bad, maybe it's too
late to use the Drive Image 7?

What does everyone think?

Thanks!
_______________

Hi!
Why not use True Image from http://www.acronis.co.uk/index.asp?
It is best value for money.
--
Cheers,
Robert
_______________

Hi, Picsou!
True Image could not be simpler!
Would you be a Drive Image rep by any chance?
--
Cheers,
Robert

t@k wrote:
I reboot from from restored system drive images quite frequently
using di6.0. If that's the rigmarole I can expect using 7.0/7.01
then I certainly won't be upgrading.


As far as I can determine, the best reason to upgrade from 2002 to DI7 is for
the USB/Firewire support. After my last meltdown, I was determined to avoid it
happening again. I bought an USB external hard drive and then purchased Drive
Image 7 to make the images.

Like someone else mentioned, you have to have the original DI7 CD to boot, then
you can restore. You can make the backup image without the CD, but you have to
have the CD to restore.

Truly, it's been an easy solution for me and does what I need.



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN


http://www.mortimerschnerd.com

On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 00:18:11 -0800, "Stanly A. Warner"
wrote:


"Rock" non-sequetered:
No, DI 2002 is a great program and works fine on XP Pro.


He asked about DI 7.0, but moving right along...
Did you ever get an error message at the first bootup
of the resulting image:

"Windows could not start because the following file
is missing or corrupt:
Windows root\System32\hal.dll
Please re-install a copy of the above file."?

I just did, and it's driving me batty. The hal.dll file is
there, but WinXP doesn't like it for some reason.


-\Stan/-
See this:
http://support.microsoft.com/default...&Product=winxp

apparently this is the message you get when boot.ini is bad....
Dave

You can also receive this message if you "Restore" an image to a
PC and the BIOS settings related to ACPI are changed from what
was set when the image was created.

"davetest" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 00:18:11 -0800, "Stanly A. Warner"
wrote:


"Rock" non-sequetered:
No, DI 2002 is a great program and works fine on XP Pro.


He asked about DI 7.0, but moving right along...
Did you ever get an error message at the first bootup
of the resulting image:

"Windows could not start because the following file
is missing or corrupt:
Windows root\System32\hal.dll
Please re-install a copy of the above file."?

I just did, and it's driving me batty. The hal.dll file is
there, but WinXP doesn't like it for some reason.


-\Stan/-
See this:

http://support.microsoft.com/default...&Product=winxp

apparently this is the message you get when boot.ini is bad....
Dave

I seem to have become involved in several different discussions regarding
D.I., it was becoming a matter of one side opting for V7.0, the other for
2002, so I just rang PQ to find out exactly what was what.

Here are the results.

Powerquest web-site recommends V7.0 for XP - not 2002 (V6.0).

Drive Image 2002 is only for users of Windows 95c, 98, ME and NT 4.0
Workstation.

2002 works on a "boot-to-DOS" system, whereas V7.0 functions without having
to reboot.

2002 was tested on the FIRST release of XP and PRIOR to SP1, also it DOES
NOT support USB, USB2, DVD drives and some later drivers, so, if you use
2002 to image an OS with SP1 and the Critical Updates, you are asking for
trouble.

V7.0 was designed to support all these updates and does not go through the
"boot-to-DOS" process.
Additionally, it will get on with its imaging task in the background
allowing you in the meantime to continue with your normal work.

--
John

t@k wrote:
I reboot from from restored system drive images quite frequently
using di6.0. If that's the rigmarole I can expect using 7.0/7.01
then I certainly won't be upgrading.


As far as I can determine, the best reason to upgrade from 2002 to DI7
is for the USB/Firewire support. After my last meltdown, I was
determined to avoid it happening again. I bought an USB external hard
drive and then purchased Drive Image 7 to make the images.

Like someone else mentioned, you have to have the original DI7 CD to
boot, then you can restore. You can make the backup image without the
CD, but you have to have the CD to restore.

Truly, it's been an easy solution for me and does what I need.



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN


http://www.mortimerschnerd.com

Addendum

A bit more I found about 7.0 which is not available on 2002 -

1. Backs up everything without leaving Windows

2. Creates drive letters for your backups

3. Saves to DVD

4. Saves to network and FireWire devices

5. Saves to network drives

--
John

I seem to have become involved in several different discussions
regarding D.I., it was becoming a matter of one side opting for V7.0,
the other for 2002, so I just rang PQ to find out exactly what was what.

Here are the results.

Powerquest web-site recommends V7.0 for XP - not 2002 (V6.0).

Drive Image 2002 is only for users of Windows 95c, 98, ME and NT 4.0
Workstation.

2002 works on a "boot-to-DOS" system, whereas V7.0 functions without
having to reboot.

2002 was tested on the FIRST release of XP and PRIOR to SP1, also it
DOES NOT support USB, USB2, DVD drives and some later drivers, so, if
you use 2002 to image an OS with SP1 and the Critical Updates, you are
asking for trouble.

V7.0 was designed to support all these updates and does not go through
the "boot-to-DOS" process.
Additionally, it will get on with its imaging task in the background
allowing you in the meantime to continue with your normal work.

--
John

t@k wrote:
I reboot from from restored system drive images quite frequently
using di6.0. If that's the rigmarole I can expect using 7.0/7.01
then I certainly won't be upgrading.


As far as I can determine, the best reason to upgrade from 2002 to DI7
is for the USB/Firewire support. After my last meltdown, I was
determined to avoid it happening again. I bought an USB external hard
drive and then purchased Drive Image 7 to make the images.

Like someone else mentioned, you have to have the original DI7 CD to
boot, then you can restore. You can make the backup image without the
CD, but you have to have the CD to restore.

Truly, it's been an easy solution for me and does what I need.



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN


http://www.mortimerschnerd.com

"JMB" wrote:
Dell tells me my hard drive is going bad. They are sending
a replacement. Powerquest Drive Image 7 says it can take
an image of the entire hard drive, and you can just copy it
to the new drive, with no need to reinstall anything.
Sounds almost too good to be true.

Anyone had success doing so in XP?

"I'm Dan" wrote:
The simplest way usually is to use a simple disk copy utility from
the drive manufacturer. Many manufacturers have free software
specifically for your intended purpose -- such as Seagate's
"Disk Wizard", Maxtor's "MaxBlast", and WD's "Data
Lifeguard Tools"....

"Stanley A. Warner" wrote:
MaxBlast only copies files (record by record), and not
byte-for-byte. That makes a non-bootable copy. Two Maxtor
tech reps have explicitly commented to me that their copying
software is not good, and have mentioned Drive Image and
Ghost for image copying.

In and of itself, file-copying doesn't mean a copy won't be bootable --
create a valid partition, make it active, install a valid partition boot
sector, copy all the files, and you'll have a bootable copy. Since
MaxBlast operates completely outside of Windows, there are no open files
or things actively being shielded by the operating system.

Nevertheless, I do prefer DI and won't argue whether or not MaxBlast (or
the similar offerings from other manufacturers) is very good. If OP has
DI or Ghost, he should use that, but if not, then it's still worth
giving MaxBlast a shot -- the software is free and there is nothing
installed in Windows to go awry. If it works, great, but if not then no
harm done, and move to Plan B.

DI 2002 is intended for all older OS's, but not for XP & will
definitely cause major (irreversible) problems under some
circumstances. DI 7.0 is specifically for XP.

This is completely untrue !!
DI-6 = DI-2002 is working perfectly with Windows XP.
I am using it all the time.

Powerquest says - quote -

"Drive Image 7 runs on Windows XP Home and Professional,
as well as Windows 2000 Professional Desktop Version.
Drive Image 2002 is included for users of Windows 95c, 98,
ME and NT 4.0 Workstation."

That doesn't mean DI 2002 doesn't work with XP, it means DI7 *doesn't*
work with 9x/NT. (I'm another of the many people who have no trouble
with DI 2002 on XP.)

It may sound slick that DI7 can operate totally within Windows, but
that's not necessarily a desirable thing. For best results, operations
involving the OS partition itself are best done *outside* of the OS.
Then, it's simply a matter of copying sectors at the hardware level.
That's what makes DI 2002 better. Utilities that work from a boot
floppy can do their work in the most straightforward manner possible,
rather than a Rube Goldberg approach to work around the hardware access
constraints imposed by Windows. It amazes me how this simple concept
often eludes many people.