How to use Acronis to backup o/s ?

PA20Pilot wrote:
Hi again,

Twain wrote ".......Sorry about the mis speak,"

No problem, I was pretty sure you let it slip by accidentally.

".......I do disagree that it's worth the lost time and
machine cycles it takes to make clones"

I just go watch TV ant let the box play with itself for a while.

"......To me that's not a backup literally; it's a catastrophic recovery
method"

It's working well as my backup, everything is right here for the grabbing.

".......requiring a disk drive for each clone."

I have ample disks so that's not a problem.

".......MBR and tables, etc., are in wrong places, so cloning that back
to another hard disk would not result in a usable bootable drive."

There's really no reason to clone back to anything, just run/boot the
clone disk and when you get a chance reclone it to another spare drive.

That's one of the reasons I like to clone instead of image, ease of
recovery. If a master drive went to hell and all I had was an image I'd
need to find another drive to put the image on while hoping I could find
a non scratched CD to boot from.

Since I've never played with image files, am I wrong in my assumption
that an image file can't be restored to the disk it's on?

It *can* be done, but it's generally a BAD idea to use it on the same drive.
In Acronis True Image, that backup image would need to be put in the
so-called Secure Zone (if on the same drive), and this adds a bit of
complication (for one thing, the bootup process is somewhat modified).

Another question of mine would be how much compression could I expect
from an image? Let's say I have 10GB of data and image it. About what
size would that image file be?

With Acronis True Image, I have about 20 GB of data, and the corresponding
image files are about 15 GB, so that's 75% of the original size.

"Twayne" wrote:

...

However, I have to add that there is no bar to
using the
Casper 5 disk-cloning program for that purpose
as well.
The only limitation(s) is the total amount of
the user's
data to be cloned and the disk-space available
on the
destination HDD, i.e., the recipient of the
cloned
contents. So, for example, if the user's data
contents
totaled 50 GB and the user's destination drive
had a
capacity of 500 GB, nearly ten (10)
"generational" copies
of the user's source drive could be maintained
on the
destination HDD. Anna

I'm curious; I checked out Casper's site and I
don't see references to things like that.

There's probably good reason for that: they don't exist because the
capability doesn't exist. From the past couple of days there seems to
be strong evidence that "Anna" hasn't used Casper for anything other
than cloning disk-to-disk.

Have you actually ever created multiple
"clones" to a single hard drive, and then used any
of the interim clones to totally rebuild a new or
formatted boot drive? And it worked?

I have a suspicion it didn't/doesn't work; in
fact, I'm reasonably sure, but ... would be
interested in learning more about it if it's true.
Here's some information I dug up:

Each clone requires a hard drive.
They do create a clone, and maintain the clone
via copy/data management methods"
Read about it he
http://www.fssdev.com/products/casper/smartclone.aspx

and here for Normal hype:
http://www.fssdev.com/products/casper/
http://www.fssdev.com/
http://www.fssdev.com/products/casper/features.aspx

It's classed as:
Utilities : Backup/Copy Tools
http://www.filebuzz.com/fileinfo/42540/Casper.html
Some How tos:
http://www.eggheadcafe.com/software/...ckup-of-a.aspx

Backing up a complete system with either
“Image” or “Cloning” software.
What’s the difference?

http://www.sctxca.org/export/sites/d...sperbackup.pdf
Page 3 of the above has probably the clearest,
concise definition of clone/image I've seen yet.

Cloning vs IMaging:
The two procedures are similar, but yet so
different in how they are formed
and how they can be used. To clone a hard drive
the clone should be
copied directly to another hard drive. That hard
drive can either be external
or internal. They need not be of the same size. To
image a hard drive the
image is much smaller that the original and can be
place on many different
storage devises such as CD, DVD and other hard
drives. They can be
internal or external.
To recover with a clone it is only necessary to
boot up the clone. Nothing
else needs to be done. To recover an image a boot
up disc (often the disk
that made the clone) is placed in the CD drawer
and the computer is booted
from that. It then needs the image disc to restore
the computer to its original
state. Different programs handle this recover in
different ways
Recovery with a clone is faster and in my opinion
more reliable, but it does
necessitate having a second hard drive, preferable
internal.
Another point in favor of a clone is that is
simple to check the clone to see if
it works. Just reboot the computer and in the BIOS
change the boot order of
the drives. To check an image it is destructive
and if is not good you have
ruined your day. You can check the validity of a
backup image by running a
backup validate which completely rebuilds the disk
image in memory and
validates that the whole backup could be restored
without error. Still?

There's a lot more but that should assist anyone
wanting to do some reading. I've purposely not
bothered with anything negative because IMO it's
not called for. What Casper has created is a new
methodology for backup systems that can logically
even take an existing clone and modify it
(incremental, if you will) to create a new clone
from the old one by moving data and inserting it
where it needs to be in order to keep it as a
"clone". So, the end result, even after running
an incremental or differential clone, I forget
what they called it, does actually create a new
clone from the old one, rather than by creating a
completly new clone copy. The first link above I
think it was, shows that process rather well.

They have managed to take one of the best
concepts of imaging, incremental backups, and
added it to the cloning feature but without
creating new files and instead revising data
locations in the current clone to place the
new/changed data into the same data slots on the
clone as they are onthe hard disk, thus
maintaining the same addresses of data inthe clone
as are used on the hard disk. AFAIK other
low-priced Clone software programs don't do that,
or even many of the pay-fors in the same price
range as Casper.
That's a good step forward. Imaging software
doesn't do that until you go to Restore it. But,
imaging software still carries the advantage of
being to restore only an incremental as opposed to
the entire backup, which the cloning operation
can't to. So that part comes down to whether the
user cares or not. I do, but many may not. There
are a few other things like that too, but they all
come down to user preference.

As for time to make a clone and increment it,
there is nothing special there. It works in the
background like many do to create the first clone,
a time consuing operation for any software, and
depending on the amount of data in the incremental
to the clone is a little slower than imaging
because instead of simply creating another file,
it has to move data around so it can be inserted
into the right places inside the clone and that
can take anything from a pretty short time to a
long time, depending on how many changes there are
and how much data has to be moved around inside
the clone. If something is added at the end of
the clone, it's quicker than if something were
added at the beginning, requiring possibly many
gigabytes of information to be slid over xx bytes
to make room for the new data write. Again, see
http://www.fssdev.com/products/casper/smartclone.aspx
for an example of how that works.
OTOH, time is of little consequence unless it
occurs while the opearator is sitting at the
keyboard. Any program worth its existance will do
the monkey work in the background and works by
schedule and unattended.

So Casper isn't too shoddy at all. At $60-$70 I
think it's priced a bit steeply for what it does,
but ... if it's reliable and support is available,
it could work well for a lot of people if they
haven't built in auto-obsoletion a la Microsoft's
practicesg. One will still get more features
and better control over everything with most
imaging applications than with Casper or one of
its competitors.

I'll be sticking with imaging because I use a
lot of the features Casper can't offer plus I can
also clone anytime I need to. This thread was
good for getting me to thinking about my backup
situation and to consider whether it was enough or
not, and I think it is; I have the best of both
worlds this way. Should anyone wonder, I use
Ghost14 for backups; a tad more expensive than
Acronis was, but the extra bells & whistles are
handy too.

And of course all recommend the all-important
external disk drives, which are now very
reasonably priced all the way up to a Terabyte.

Of no consequence, but should anyone wonder:
Machine 1: XP Pro SP3, Pentium 4, 2.7 GHz, 1 Gig
RAM, 5 physical drives, two of the externals for
swapping on alternate days for backups, 7 USB
peripherals, no firewire.

Machine 2: Dell dual Xeon, 1 Gig RAM, 2 SCSI
drives, 1 IDE, Windows 2000 Server Edition SP4,
used as a sandbox. Only the OS is backed up;
carries little keepable data.

Machine 3: Laptop, P4, 1.7 GHz, 512 RAM, 80 Gig
drive. Carried off premises for whatever; kept
synced with this machine, backed up to the 1 TB
drive as required. .

All are backed up to the 1 TB external drive
monthly or as required, depending on use/activity.
This machine does a full backup once per month,
nightly incrementals in between. Other machines
as required.

Cheers,
Twayne

Mike Torello wrote:
"Twayne" wrote:

...

However, I have to add that there is no bar to
using the
Casper 5 disk-cloning program for that purpose
as well.
The only limitation(s) is the total amount of
the user's
data to be cloned and the disk-space available
on the
destination HDD, i.e., the recipient of the
cloned
contents. So, for example, if the user's data
contents
totaled 50 GB and the user's destination drive
had a
capacity of 500 GB, nearly ten (10)
"generational" copies
of the user's source drive could be maintained
on the
destination HDD. Anna

I'm curious; I checked out Casper's site and I
don't see references to things like that.

There's probably good reason for that: they don't exist because the
capability doesn't exist. From the past couple of days there seems to
be strong evidence that "Anna" hasn't used Casper for anything other
than cloning disk-to-disk.

Wait a minute. Are you stating that Casper CANNOT do just partition
copying?
That is, simply backup a partition to unallocated space on the other drive?

And that Casper can ONLY clone the entire source disk over to a destination
disk, and NOT do multiple, generational, partition backups to the
destination drive, like Partition Magic and Boot IT NG can? (Casper is the
only program of the four we've discussed that I have no real experience
with).

Hi Bill,

.......... that's 75% of the original size.

That's about what I would have guessed.

.......... an image file can't be restored to the disk it's on?
It *can* be done, but it's generally a BAD idea to use it on the same drive.

That also would have been my guess. So, if the master hard drive goes
bad, throws a rod through the case and the oil starts running down the
front of the desk, you better go out and buy another if you want to get
up and running again anytime soon.

I think I'll stick with my clones.

Thanks!

---==X={}=X==---

Jim Self

AVIATION ANIMATION, the internet's largest depository.
http://avanimation.avsupport.com

Your only internet source for spiral staircase plans.
http://jself.com/stair/Stair.htm

Experimental Aircraft Association #140897
EAA Technical Counselor #4562

PA20Pilot wrote:
Hi Bill,

......... that's 75% of the original size.

That's about what I would have guessed.

......... an image file can't be restored to the disk it's on?
It *can* be done, but it's generally a BAD idea to use it on the same
drive.

That also would have been my guess. So, if the master hard drive goes
bad, throws a rod through the case and the oil starts running down the
front of the desk, you better go out and buy another if you want to get
up and running again anytime soon.

Plus some other disadvantages of using the Secure Zone, as I mentioned.

I think I'll stick with my clones.

Thanks!

OR one can use images stored on a secondary drive (if using an imagining
program).

"Bill in Co." wrote:

Mike Torello wrote:
"Twayne" wrote:

...

However, I have to add that there is no bar to
using the
Casper 5 disk-cloning program for that purpose
as well.
The only limitation(s) is the total amount of
the user's
data to be cloned and the disk-space available
on the
destination HDD, i.e., the recipient of the
cloned
contents. So, for example, if the user's data
contents
totaled 50 GB and the user's destination drive
had a
capacity of 500 GB, nearly ten (10)
"generational" copies
of the user's source drive could be maintained
on the
destination HDD. Anna

I'm curious; I checked out Casper's site and I
don't see references to things like that.

There's probably good reason for that: they don't exist because the
capability doesn't exist. From the past couple of days there seems to
be strong evidence that "Anna" hasn't used Casper for anything other
than cloning disk-to-disk.

Wait a minute. Are you stating that Casper CANNOT do just partition
copying?
That is, simply backup a partition to unallocated space on the other drive?

And that Casper can ONLY clone the entire source disk over to a destination
disk, and NOT do multiple, generational, partition backups to the
destination drive, like Partition Magic and Boot IT NG can? (Casper is the
only program of the four we've discussed that I have no real experience
with).

Someone here did testing trying to clone a multi-partitioned drive
every-which-way-possible and said that Casper destroys everything on
the destination disk when cloning and that there is even a warning
message to that effect. Right after that "Anna" backtracked and said
that person was correct.

From that I gathered that yes, it WILL clone a partition to
unallocated space - by making the entire drive unallocated space
before performing the clone.

I would download the trial version but it's crippled.

Mike Torello wrote:
"Bill in Co." wrote:

Mike Torello wrote:
"Twayne" wrote:

...

However, I have to add that there is no bar to
using the
Casper 5 disk-cloning program for that purpose
as well.
The only limitation(s) is the total amount of
the user's
data to be cloned and the disk-space available
on the
destination HDD, i.e., the recipient of the
cloned
contents. So, for example, if the user's data
contents
totaled 50 GB and the user's destination drive
had a
capacity of 500 GB, nearly ten (10)
"generational" copies
of the user's source drive could be maintained
on the
destination HDD. Anna

I'm curious; I checked out Casper's site and I
don't see references to things like that.

There's probably good reason for that: they don't exist because the
capability doesn't exist. From the past couple of days there seems to
be strong evidence that "Anna" hasn't used Casper for anything other
than cloning disk-to-disk.

Wait a minute. Are you stating that Casper CANNOT do just partition
copying?
That is, simply backup a partition to unallocated space on the other
drive?

And that Casper can ONLY clone the entire source disk over to a
destination
disk, and NOT do multiple, generational, partition backups to the
destination drive, like Partition Magic and Boot IT NG can? (Casper is
the
only program of the four we've discussed that I have no real experience
with).

Someone here did testing trying to clone a multi-partitioned drive
every-which-way-possible and said that Casper destroys everything on
the destination disk when cloning and that there is even a warning
message to that effect. Right after that "Anna" backtracked and said
that person was correct.

From that I gathered that yes, it WILL clone a partition to
unallocated space - by making the entire drive unallocated space
before performing the clone.

Ahhhh. Now THAT is a key and important distinction!! So Casper will ONLY
allow the source drive to be transferred to the destination drive and
nothing else can remain on the destination drive? Not nice. But ok, IF
you SOLELY want a clone of the source drive.

With Partition Magic and BootIT NG you CAN do selective, individual
partition copies, but I don't think you can simply make a clone of the
source drive, per se, or at least not in one easy operation. (But I
haven't ever investigated that possibility, however)

Hi again,

Twain wrote ".......Sorry about the mis speak,"

No problem, I was pretty sure you let it slip by
accidentally.
".......I do disagree that it's worth the lost
time and
machine cycles it takes to make clones"

I just go watch TV ant let the box play with
itself for a
while.
"......To me that's not a backup literally; it's
a
catastrophic recovery method"

It's working well as my backup, everything is
right here
for the grabbing.
".......requiring a disk drive for each clone."

I have ample disks so that's not a problem.

lol, Well, that would sure help the multi-version
historical kind of thing! I can see where it
would be workable though.


".......MBR and tables, etc., are in wrong
places, so
cloning that back to another hard disk would not
result
in a usable bootable drive."
There's really no reason to clone back to
anything, just
run/boot the clone disk and when you get a
chance reclone
it to another spare drive.

Right; I was referring to multiple cloes on one
disk; only one would be able to occupy the boot
sectors at a time, etc.. MInor detail in the
overall scheme of things I guess.

That's one of the reasons I like to clone
instead of
image, ease of recovery. If a master drive went
to hell
and all I had was an image I'd need to find
another drive
to put the image on while hoping I could find a
non
scratched CD to boot from.

Umm, no. The imaging programs come with a .iso
that you burn a bootable Emergency Recovery Disk
CD from. That CD has, in my case, Ghost on it, is
bootable, and when it comes up, lets me tell it
where the images reside, which is normally on an
external drive but could be any functioning drive
connected to the machine. So you toss the CD in,
boot on it, and browse to your images to tell it
where they are, then pick which image you want to
use to reset the drive to the time of the image.
You only need the CD in the case of a belly-up
system drive; otherwise just run the program; in
my case Ghost.


Since I've never played with image files, am I
wrong in
my assumption that an image file can't be
restored to the
disk it's on?

Sure. The default is to return the files to the
same folders/drive they were originally on, which
is logical. You can choose an alternate location
if you wish, or even to a flat folder if you want.
So if you want to recover say a specific file, you
use Explorer to locate it, mark it for recovery,
tick the box if you don't want it to go back to
where it came from, and click OK.


Another question of mine would be how much
compression
could I expect from an image? Let's say I have
10GB of
data and image it. About what size would that
image file
be?

That would depend on what you're backing up and
the compression provided by the imaging program,
really. My version of Ghost claims a 40% average
with a couple more intense settings of 45 & 50%
IIRC. Other versions had different numbers. It's
pretty much equivalent to zipping: Some files will
shrink almost none, some a lot. My System Drive,
mostly executables, DLLs and the like and a
boatload of logs, compresses to about 80 - 85%.
My E drive, which contains a lot of text or
text-like programs and no executables or DLLs or
the like, compresses to about 30-35% it original
size in some of the incrementals. In the full
backup, it's closer to 50% shrinkage overall.
Just like a zip program, it depends on what's
being zipped. I do have some images on that drive
that don't compress (jpeg & png) so they tend to
skew the numbers.
I have experimented a but and neither XP's zip
feature nor WinZip, unless you use the most
aggressive zip setting, doesn't make the files any
smaller, so ... I'd assume they're pretty much
similar in the overall. I've no idea what Ghost
uses for a compression algo, probably the public
legacy zip algo, but it doesn't slow things down
a lot. Since I only run backups at night 98% of
the time and in real time they become low affinity
tasks, I don't really care, but when I first got
the program I was pretty curious.
One of the things I like about Ghost (Acronis
is probably the same) is whenever anything is
installed or uninstalled, it makes a new backup
right there in real time, immediately. If any
other drive sees a space change of over 500 Meg
(Programmable), added or deted, it'll also trigger
an immediate real time backup for that drive.
They're incrementals, of course. I don't use
differentials but they're available, as are
cloning features.

Quite honeslty, I'm not sure which is better; a
cloner or an imager, except that the imagers all
seem to also clone, but cloners don't image.
Newbies and those who don't want to see what goes
on would probably benefit the most from cloning as
Casper has set it up, but other clone programs
don't do what Casper does, so it's caveat emptor
there. Casper is closer to a one button solution
where imaging provides more choices, features and
controls, which are ony "good" if they're useful
to the user and he wants to use them.
If Casper weren't so expensive compared to its
competitors & imagers I might get behind seeing if
it's, to me, actually as recommendable as the
users here think it is. But for a couple dollars
more you can go to branded imaging software and
actually have the best of both worlds, IMO. I
have to admit it's an interesting program and I
kind of wonder what it's going to be in the
future - as in, adding imaging capabilities or ...
?


Thanks!

Happy to provide what I can.

Cheers,

Twayne


---==X={}=X==---

Jim Self

AVIATION ANIMATION, the internet's largest
depository.
http://avanimation.avsupport.com

Your only internet source for spiral staircase
plans.
http://jself.com/stair/Stair.htm

Experimental Aircraft Association #140897
EAA Technical Counselor #4562

PA20Pilot wrote:
Hi again,

Twain wrote ".......Sorry about the mis speak,"

No problem, I was pretty sure you let it slip
by
accidentally. ".......I do disagree that it's
worth the lost time and
machine cycles it takes to make clones"

I just go watch TV ant let the box play with
itself for
a while. "......To me that's not a backup
literally; it's a
catastrophic recovery method"

It's working well as my backup, everything is
right here
for the grabbing. ".......requiring a disk
drive for each clone."

I have ample disks so that's not a problem.

".......MBR and tables, etc., are in wrong
places, so
cloning that back to another hard disk would
not result
in a usable bootable drive." There's really no
reason to clone back to anything, just
run/boot the clone disk and when you get a
chance
reclone it to another spare drive. That's one
of the reasons I like to clone instead of
image, ease of recovery. If a master drive went
to hell
and all I had was an image I'd need to find
another
drive to put the image on while hoping I could
find a
non scratched CD to boot from. Since I've never
played with image files, am I wrong in
my assumption that an image file can't be
restored to
the disk it's on?

It *can* be done, but it's generally a BAD idea
to use it
on the same drive. In Acronis True Image, that
backup
image would need to be put in the so-called
Secure Zone
(if on the same drive), and this adds a bit of
complication (for one thing, the bootup process
is
somewhat modified).

Maybe a misunderstanding here? He asked about
restoring to the same disk it's on. It would
work fine but as you indicate isn't advisable if
the image is being stored on the same drive it's
backing up. Some programs would even go into a
cyclic copy mode and never be able to get out of
it. In other words, trying to back itself up,
getting done, veryfying, finding the original
changed, backing it up again, finding yet more new
files and backing up again, and ... I think you
get the pictureG.

But w/r to Restoring, you can either let the
default put the file back where it came from or
choose an alternate location which could be
anywhere, including the drive the image resides
on. Assuming the disk were healty, it would work
fine.


Another question of mine would be how much
compression
could I expect from an image? Let's say I have
10GB of
data and image it. About what size would that
image file
be?

With Acronis True Image, I have about 20 GB of
data, and
the corresponding image files are about 15 GB,
so that's
75% of the original size.

Yup; the amount of compression depends on what's
being compressed. Some things compress a lot,
others not so much. I see values all over the map
in my Ghost backup ratios, from 0 to around 50%,
even more in some cases.

Cheers,

Twayne

"Bill in Co." wrote:

Mike Torello wrote:
"Bill in Co." wrote:

Mike Torello wrote:
"Twayne" wrote:

...

However, I have to add that there is no bar to
using the
Casper 5 disk-cloning program for that purpose
as well.
The only limitation(s) is the total amount of
the user's
data to be cloned and the disk-space available
on the
destination HDD, i.e., the recipient of the
cloned
contents. So, for example, if the user's data
contents
totaled 50 GB and the user's destination drive
had a
capacity of 500 GB, nearly ten (10)
"generational" copies
of the user's source drive could be maintained
on the
destination HDD. Anna

I'm curious; I checked out Casper's site and I
don't see references to things like that.

There's probably good reason for that: they don't exist because the
capability doesn't exist. From the past couple of days there seems to
be strong evidence that "Anna" hasn't used Casper for anything other
than cloning disk-to-disk.

Wait a minute. Are you stating that Casper CANNOT do just partition
copying?
That is, simply backup a partition to unallocated space on the other
drive?

And that Casper can ONLY clone the entire source disk over to a
destination
disk, and NOT do multiple, generational, partition backups to the
destination drive, like Partition Magic and Boot IT NG can? (Casper is
the
only program of the four we've discussed that I have no real experience
with).

Someone here did testing trying to clone a multi-partitioned drive
every-which-way-possible and said that Casper destroys everything on
the destination disk when cloning and that there is even a warning
message to that effect. Right after that "Anna" backtracked and said
that person was correct.

From that I gathered that yes, it WILL clone a partition to
unallocated space - by making the entire drive unallocated space
before performing the clone.

Ahhhh. Now THAT is a key and important distinction!! So Casper will ONLY
allow the source drive to be transferred to the destination drive and
nothing else can remain on the destination drive? Not nice. But ok, IF
you SOLELY want a clone of the source drive.

With Partition Magic and BootIT NG you CAN do selective, individual
partition copies, but I don't think you can simply make a clone of the
source drive, per se, or at least not in one easy operation. (But I
haven't ever investigated that possibility, however)

Go for it.

WaIIy wrote:

On Tue, 27 Jan 2009 11:13:43 -0600, Mike Torello
wrote:

"Anna" wrote:

However, I have to add that there is no bar to using the Casper 5
disk-cloning program for that purpose as well. The only limitation(s) is the
total amount of the user's data to be cloned and the disk-space available on
the destination HDD, i.e., the recipient of the cloned contents. So, for
example, if the user's data contents totaled 50 GB and the user's
destination drive had a capacity of 500 GB, nearly ten (10) "generational"
copies of the user's source drive could be maintained on the destination
HDD.

HOW!?

If Casper's "Copy Drive" is used, it destroys ALL data/partitions on
the destination drive before making the clone.

I thought that was firmly established in the past couple of days!

me too

With Casper you have the option to" Copy an entire hard disk" that
option takes the whole destination drive and makes a clone.

The other option to "Copy a specific drive" will not wipe out the
destination disk and you can keep as many copies as you have room, but
I think on different partitions of the destination disk.

Have you tried that?

I might just buy Casper and see for myself. I need something new to
play with ;-D

WaIIy wrote:

On Tue, 27 Jan 2009 08:55:08 -0500, PA20Pilot wrote:

Hi,

Mike Torello wrote......"Have you ever restored from a clone on an
external drive?"

I use a removeable carraage so I can turn the key and place any hard
drive I want in the holder. It's a lot like an external, but I an slap
any drive I need to in there whenever it's needed.

This setup works very well for me, might not be your choice though. I
can handle that.

Wally wrote......Here ! Here ! Pick me Pick me

Sorry, I don't need any games right now.


Oh, I see you are above it all.

I've restored from an external drive in an enclosure and it works fine.

I never questioned that. What I was questioning when I asked "Have
you ever restored from a clone on an external drive?" was its speed
compared to restoring from an image. I'll bet there is little if any
difference.

Ps Learn what a delimiter is, when you have the time that is.

WaIIy wrote:

On Tue, 27 Jan 2009 18:44:02 -0600, Mike Torello
wrote:

WaIIy wrote:

On Tue, 27 Jan 2009 11:13:43 -0600, Mike Torello
wrote:

"Anna" wrote:

However, I have to add that there is no bar to using the Casper 5
disk-cloning program for that purpose as well. The only limitation(s) is the
total amount of the user's data to be cloned and the disk-space available on
the destination HDD, i.e., the recipient of the cloned contents. So, for
example, if the user's data contents totaled 50 GB and the user's
destination drive had a capacity of 500 GB, nearly ten (10) "generational"
copies of the user's source drive could be maintained on the destination
HDD.

HOW!?

If Casper's "Copy Drive" is used, it destroys ALL data/partitions on
the destination drive before making the clone.

I thought that was firmly established in the past couple of days!

me too

With Casper you have the option to" Copy an entire hard disk" that
option takes the whole destination drive and makes a clone.

The other option to "Copy a specific drive" will not wipe out the
destination disk and you can keep as many copies as you have room, but
I think on different partitions of the destination disk.

Have you tried that?

The short answer is no.

I clone my c drive to an external enclosure.

I have an internal drive with two partitions.

I copy my main drive to one of the partitions and have some
misc, stuff on the second partition.

Copying the drive (not cloning) doesn't touch my second partition.
Casper just asks me where I want to copy to.

OK. That answers it for me. You saved me fifty bucks (but it would
still be fun to play with Casper, even if I don't need it).


I "assume" it would not be a problem if I didn't have anything on the
second partition and made a copy of my drive there, too.

I might just buy Casper and see for myself. I need something new to
play with ;-D

Hi again,

Thanks!

---==X={}=X==---

Jim Self

AVIATION ANIMATION, the internet's largest depository.
http://avanimation.avsupport.com

Your only internet source for spiral staircase plans.
http://jself.com/stair/Stair.htm

Experimental Aircraft Association #140897
EAA Technical Counselor #4562

Wally wrote....."Oh, I see you are above it all."

I'm glad you caught that on the first try. Good boy!


---==X={}=X==---

Jim Self

AVIATION ANIMATION, the internet's largest depository.
http://avanimation.avsupport.com

Your only internet source for spiral staircase plans.
http://jself.com/stair/Stair.htm

Experimental Aircraft Association #140897
EAA Technical Counselor #4562