A Windows XP help forum. PCbanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PCbanter forum » Microsoft Windows XP » Windows XP Help and Support
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

How to use Acronis to backup o/s ?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #76  
Old January 23rd 09, 09:06 PM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics,microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support
Daave
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,568
Default How to use Acronis to backup o/s ?

"Anna" wrote in message
...

Please keep in mind that the drive letter assignments on the
*external* (destination) HDD are of *no* relevance should the time
come when the user would want to restore his/her system from the
contents of the destination drive. Obviously should the user desire to
restore their system to its previous state, they would simply clone
the contents of (in our example) the first three partitions on the
destination HDD back to their internal (source) HDD. (I mention this
because it seems there is some confusion over this point among some
users.)


We all know this is some kind of sticking point for Bill! So, out of
curiosity, if one clones the contents of the clone back to the PC's hard
drive, will the drive letter assignments be as they were (I'm talking
about how they were on the PC's hard drive originally before *any*
cloning took place)?


Ads
  #77  
Old January 23rd 09, 09:34 PM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics,microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support
Anna
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,039
Default How to use Acronis to backup o/s ?


"Daave" wrote in message
...
(SNIP)

I still think that the main appeal of cloning is that one can simply
physically place a perfectly cloned drive into the PC that contained the
original drive, which for whatever reason can't or won't work anymore. Or
if the cloned drive is *already* connected and "in the loop" (as another
internal PC hard drive or a connected eSATA drive, which also functions as
an internal drive), then it's just a matter of using the boot menu to
select it.

Cloning a clone back to the original drive (or a replacement drive) --
for instance, the clone resides on an external USB hard drive -- doesn't
seem to me to have much of an advantage over restoring an image. Is it
quicker, perhaps?



Daave:
As far as the restoration process goes, for the vast majority of users the
amount of time to restore one's system either using the disk-cloning process
or a disk-imaging process is really of little consequence. The important
thing - or so it seems to me - is *not* the amount of time of time it would
take for a user to restore his or her now-dysfunctional system to a
bootable, functional state, but only that the program involved (be it a
disk-cloning program or a disk-imaging program) is *effective* in restoring
the system. The times that a user would be involved in the restoration of
his or her system would presumably be a rather rare occasion (hopefully!).
One normally doesn't need to restore one's system on a daily, or twice a
week, or once a week, or every few weeks basis. Would you not agree?

The point I'm trying to make here is that there is probably relatively
little difference between a disk-cloning or disk-imaging program such as
Acronis True Image and the Casper 5 program when it comes to the
*restoration* of a system. If a user's primary or exclusive interest was in
the expenditure of time it takes to restore his or her system then there's
little difference, if any, to choose from among disk-imaging & disk-cloning
programs.

As I've tried to emphasize in past posts (which I believe you may be
familiar with) describing the Casper 5 program, aside from its simplicity of
operation and general effectiveness re the disk-cloning process, its *chief*
advantage over every other disk-cloning disk-imaging program I've ever
worked with (including the Acronis program) is its significant speed of
operation when a user uses the program to back up his/her system when the
program is used on a routine systematic basis.

As I've indicated a number of times when describing the Casper 5 program, it
has a capability unlike any other disk-cloning program I've ever worked with
in that it detects only the changes in the system since the previous
disk-cloning operation, Because of this capability it can carry out its
disk-cloning operations with extroardinary speed as compared with similar
disk-cloning or disk-imaging programs. Thus the user is encouraged to
*frequently* back up his entire system since he or she knows that it will
take only a few minutes to do so. This is not an insignificant capability
for the vast majority of PC users in my experience.

On the contrary. To my mind the important thing for that body of users is
to encourage them to comprehensively back up their system on a frequent
basis. And if they know that the expenditure of time in backing up their
system will be relatively slight they will be so encouraged. And at the end
of that backup operation via the disk-cloning process the user will have a
precise copy of his or her HDD with all the data on the cloned disk
immediately accessible and potentially bootable.

Again, it seems to me that what's important (speed-wise) when comparing
these types of programs is *not* the speed of their restoration operations
but the speed of their routine backup operations so that the user is able &
willing to have a complete & reasonably up-to-date backup of their system.
In terms of the restoration process the Casper program is probably no better
nor worse then any other disk-cloning disk-imaging program.
Anna


  #78  
Old January 23rd 09, 10:06 PM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics,microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support
Richie Hardwick[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 159
Default How to use Acronis to backup o/s ?

On Fri, 23 Jan 2009 14:59:11 -0500, "Daave"
wrote:

"Richie Hardwick" wrote in message
news
when one chooses to clone an entire disk, Casper
REQUIRES AN ENTIRE DISK to accomplish that cloning, whether it uses
the full disk or not (one can choose to reduce the size of the clone
to any size down to one that fits the data on the source disk).

Any/all existing partitions on the destination disk are destroyed -
there is even a warning message to that effect before one can choose
to proceed with the cloning.

My testing with my own system last night - at the cost of about 3
hours of sleep - proved that.


Interesting. Your experience definitely contradicts what Anna stated!
She said that Casper *can* clone an entire disk to a partition on an
external hard drive without any effect on the other partitions (if I
understood her lengthy explanation).


That's what I read as well. My personal experience earlier today
show's that it just plain can NOT do what she claims.

Richie Hardwick
  #79  
Old January 23rd 09, 10:10 PM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics,microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support
Richie Hardwick[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 159
Default How to use Acronis to backup o/s ?

On Fri, 23 Jan 2009 15:25:08 -0500, WaIIy wrote:

I just finished partitioning my system disk into 3 partitions and I
copied some data into each of the extra partitions. I then
partitioned one of my other internal disks into 2 partitions.

I tried to clone the 3-partition disk to one of the partitions on the
other disk - ain't gonna happen. Casper wants the entire drive as I
originally thought it would a month or two ago.

To keep Casper from using the entire drive, I had to use Casper to
reduce the size of each partition on the source disk prior to
performing the clone.

RESULT? The recipient drive has 3 partitions AND a lot of unallocated
space which would be totally useless for holding another Casper clone.

WHICH APPEARS TO MEAN (as I've claimed in the past) that one can NOT
have multiple complete backups using Casper without having multiple
disks to hold them.


From what I read (and I read them over and over) of Anna's posts, she
said you can clone a multiple partition C drive onto ONE partition
of a multiple partition destination drive. Using this method, the
other partition(s) on the destination drive would be unaffected.

This makes no sense to me, but that seems to be what she said.


It makes no sense to me either, given my test earlier today.

Casper even WARNS that all partitions/data on the destination drive
will be destroyed before it lets you proceed with the cloning.

It's interesting that she's not replied to any of this.

Richie Hardwick.
  #80  
Old January 23rd 09, 11:20 PM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics,microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support
Twayne[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,276
Default How to use Acronis to backup o/s ?

"Anna" wrote in message
...

Please keep in mind that the drive letter
assignments on
the *external* (destination) HDD are of *no*
relevance
should the time come when the user would want
to restore
his/her system from the contents of the
destination
drive. Obviously should the user desire to
restore their
system to its previous state, they would simply
clone
the contents of (in our example) the first
three
partitions on the destination HDD back to their
internal
(source) HDD. (I mention this because it seems
there is
some confusion over this point among some
users.)


We all know this is some kind of sticking point
for Bill!
So, out of curiosity, if one clones the contents
of the
clone back to the PC's hard drive, will the
drive letter
assignments be as they were (I'm talking about
how they
were on the PC's hard drive originally before
*any*
cloning took place)?


IFF it's a true "clone", then yes. I've seen the
definition of the word being rather *******ized,
apparently for convenience or hype by the program
makers. Or possibly language translations. The
word "clone" has suffered some serious dilution in
the past decade; in some instances it's turning
out to be nothing but a copy which is not the
intent of cloning a physical drive.
Cloning is to make the cloned disk data be
exactly like the original, with NO differences
whatsoever other than possible some extra space
left over if it's a larger physical drive.
The data that was in sector 1 of the original
gets put to sector 1 of the clone, 2 to 2, 3 to 3,
and so on to the end of the operation and the
physical drive. Anything that was NOT on the
original can not, by definition, be on the clone,
or it would not have made a clone. ALL existying
data on the device being cloned TO is gone,
period, never to be seen again.
Should pre-existing data on the drive being
cloned TO still be there after the "clone", then a
true "clone" was not accomplished; it was instead
an image of the original drive, and entirely
different animal. AFAIK anyway; I don't see why a
clone couldn't leave data in unneeded areas in
tack, if its location didn't ovelap with any
locations the cloned data needs, but ... I havent'
seen such an animal. Mainly because the actual
physical locations of partitions on a drive aren't
reliable, I suppose.
I don't know whether Acronis does a true clone
or not. I know Ghost does, because the MFT, MBR,
etc. are all part of the data transfered and of
course, must reside in the proper places on the
disk drive to be usable. Also AFAIK clones can
not be compressed while images of course can be,
and there is no such thing as an incremental clone
as there is for imaging or other types of backups.
Cloning operations go right down to the
head/platter/track/sector level where imaging
leaves that to the operating system which is why
images require VSS in order to image a system
drive while the system is running.

HTH

Twayne



  #81  
Old January 23rd 09, 11:35 PM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics,microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support
Twayne[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,276
Default How to use Acronis to backup o/s ?

"Daave"
wrote in
message
...
(SNIP)

I still think that the main appeal of cloning
is that
one can simply physically place a perfectly
cloned drive
into the PC that contained the original drive,
which for
whatever reason can't or won't work anymore. Or
if the
cloned drive is *already* connected and "in the
loop"
(as another internal PC hard drive or a
connected eSATA
drive, which also functions as an internal
drive), then
it's just a matter of using the boot menu to
select it. Cloning a clone back to the original
drive (or a
replacement drive) -- for instance, the clone
resides on
an external USB hard drive -- doesn't seem to
me to have
much of an advantage over restoring an image.
Is it
quicker, perhaps?



Daave:
As far as the restoration process goes, for the
vast
majority of users the amount of time to restore
one's
system either using the disk-cloning process or
a
disk-imaging process is really of little
consequence. The


Actually, the differences are large. A cloned
disk is one you can pick up and install in place
of the other disk; it's ready to go. Nothing to
restore; it IS a fully functional mirror of the
drive used to clone it.
You don't save clones as a rule. You clone a
drive to have a ready-to-use drive to replace the
drive that was cloned as in adding a newer larger
drive to a system, or an emergency backup drive in
place of a RAID system, etc..
..
Images on the other hand are backup
methodologies and their value is in their speed of
backups using full/incremental etc. types of
backup. While a clone isn't intended to be used
for "restore", an image is. You can further clone
cloned drives if one wishes, but it's al all or
nothign situation where images allow you to mess
with a single drive, directory, file, whatever in
any manner you wish. You can retrieve a lost file
from an image in a few minutes but it's quite a
task with a clone and can't really be very cleanly
accomplished without hoops.


important thing - or so it seems to me - is
*not* the
amount of time of time it would take for a user
to
restore his or her now-dysfunctional system to a
bootable, functional state, but only that the
program
involved (be it a disk-cloning program or a
disk-imaging
program) is *effective* in restoring the system.
The
times that a user would be involved in the
restoration of
his or her system would presumably be a rather
rare
occasion (hopefully!). One normally doesn't need
to
restore one's system on a daily, or twice a
week, or once
a week, or every few weeks basis. Would you not
agree?
The point I'm trying to make here is that there
is
probably relatively little difference between a
disk-cloning or disk-imaging program such as
Acronis True
Image and the Casper 5 program when it comes to
the
*restoration* of a system. If a user's primary
or
exclusive interest was in the expenditure of
time it
takes to restore his or her system then there's
little
difference, if any, to choose from among
disk-imaging &
disk-cloning programs.
As I've tried to emphasize in past posts (which
I believe
you may be familiar with) describing the Casper
5
program, aside from its simplicity of operation
and
general effectiveness re the disk-cloning
process, its
*chief* advantage over every other disk-cloning
disk-imaging program I've ever worked with
(including the
Acronis program) is its significant speed of
operation
when a user uses the program to back up his/her
system
when the program is used on a routine systematic
basis.
As I've indicated a number of times when
describing the
Casper 5 program, it has a capability unlike any
other
disk-cloning program I've ever worked with in
that it
detects only the changes in the system since the
previous
disk-cloning operation, Because of this
capability it can
carry out its disk-cloning operations with
extroardinary
speed as compared with similar disk-cloning or
disk-imaging programs. Thus the user is
encouraged to
*frequently* back up his entire system since he
or she
knows that it will take only a few minutes to do
so. This
is not an insignificant capability for the vast
majority
of PC users in my experience.
On the contrary. To my mind the important thing
for that
body of users is to encourage them to
comprehensively
back up their system on a frequent basis. And if
they
know that the expenditure of time in backing up
their
system will be relatively slight they will be so
encouraged. And at the end of that backup
operation via
the disk-cloning process the user will have a
precise
copy of his or her HDD with all the data on the
cloned
disk immediately accessible and potentially
bootable.


For each clone, you need a disk drive. You cannot
have more than one clone on a drive because each
bootable drive can have only one MBR, one NTFS
table, etc., etc., etc.. Doing so will simply
result in one clone with a bunch of very large
files added to it.

Again, it seems to me that what's important
(speed-wise)
when comparing these types of programs is *not*
the speed
of their restoration operations but the speed of
their
routine backup operations so that the user is
able &
willing to have a complete & reasonably
up-to-date backup
of their system. In terms of the restoration
process the
Casper program is probably no better nor worse
then any
other disk-cloning disk-imaging program. Anna


Imaging and incremental backups takes a LOT less
space on a drive and can be compressed to boot.
You can squeeze several weeks worth of backups
into the space of one cloned drive.
I think the syntax and meanings of the terms
has been sort of lost in this thread. They are
two entirely different animals with entirely
different mechanisms and purposes for uses. As I
already mentioned, you need a drive per clone but
you can fit several instances of backups into
images. In a nutshell.

HTH
\
Twayne





  #82  
Old January 24th 09, 12:26 AM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics,microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support
Richie Hardwick[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 159
Default How to use Acronis to backup o/s ?

On Fri, 23 Jan 2009 18:21:34 -0500, WaIIy wrote:

Casper does what it calls a "differential" clone.


The correct term is "incremental" clone.
  #83  
Old January 24th 09, 12:58 AM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics,microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support
Bill in Co.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,106
Default How to use Acronis to backup o/s ?

WaIIy wrote:
On Fri, 23 Jan 2009 01:41:34 -0600, Richie Hardwick
wrote:

On Thu, 22 Jan 2009 12:49:52 -0700, "Bill in Co."
wrote:

OK, I think this is the point of confusion. If one uses Casper to clone
a
source drive with say 3 partitions over to a destination drive, it is a
bit
inaccurate to say "you can clone those three INTO an existing partition
on
the destination drive".

Because what is really happening must be this: when Casper (or any such
program) starts cloning TO the currently existing partition on the
destination drive, that existing partition is destroyed (marked as
unallocated, behind the scenes), in preparation for the cloning of the 3
partitions.


I apologize. You are 100% correct. I am SO embarrassed!

Let me backup...

As I've said in previous posts, I use Casper on a daily basis to clone
disk-to-disk so that I have a bootable backup for my system disk. I
have ONLY used it that way. I've relied on what Anna has said - or
what I *thought* she said - to talk about other uses. I shouldn't
have talked about something I wasn't completely sure about.

Either I read wrong (she is so damned verbose that she's hard to
follow) or she posted bad info. Whatever. I ended up propagating bad
info: that the 3-partition disk could be cloned INTO a preset
partition on another disk. IT CAN'T BE.

I just finished partitioning my system disk into 3 partitions and I
copied some data into each of the extra partitions. I then
partitioned one of my other internal disks into 2 partitions.

I tried to clone the 3-partition disk to one of the partitions on the
other disk - ain't gonna happen. Casper wants the entire drive as I
originally thought it would a month or two ago.

To keep Casper from using the entire drive, I had to use Casper to
reduce the size of each partition on the source disk prior to
performing the clone.

RESULT? The recipient drive has 3 partitions AND a lot of unallocated
space which would be totally useless for holding another Casper clone.

WHICH APPEARS TO MEAN (as I've claimed in the past) that one can NOT
have multiple complete backups using Casper without having multiple
disks to hold them.


From what I read (and I read them over and over) of Anna's posts, she
said you can clone a multiple partition C drive onto ONE partition
of a multiple partition destination drive. Using this method, the
other partition(s) on the destination drive would be unaffected.

This makes no sense to me, but that seems to be what she said.


Let's be clear here, and Anna can correct me if I mistated what she said:

Anna said (using Casper) that you CAN clone a source drive partition into a
destination drive partition *without destroying the other pre-existing
partitions on the destination drive*. OK, that is ONE issue.

The OTHER issue, which is a different one, is this:

If you could "clone" a source drive partition to a destination drive
partition, then the previously existing partition on the destination drive
will be removed and replaced with the clone partition(s). Thus it would be
impossible to literally clone, say, 3 source drive partitions INTO one
destination drive partition such that you would still have that one
partition ENCLOSING the 3 cloned partitions from the source drive.
Instead, there would now be 3 partitions in the place of the previously
existing ONE (which was removed)
At least as I see it, based on my experiences with BING (which is somewhat
similar)



If one wants multiple backups - and most everyone here except Anna
seems to feel that's desirable - an imaging program such as Acronis
True Image would be required.

If one is merely cloning a partition, then that limitation doesn't
apply.

I hope I didn't miss anything, because I'm gonna crash for the night.

Again... Bill, I apologize.

Richie



  #84  
Old January 24th 09, 01:16 AM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics,microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support
Richie Hardwick[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 159
Default How to use Acronis to backup o/s ?

On Fri, 23 Jan 2009 16:58:11 -0700, "Bill in Co."
wrote:

Let's be clear here, and Anna can correct me if I mistated what she said:

Anna said (using Casper) that you CAN clone a source drive partition into a
destination drive partition *without destroying the other pre-existing
partitions on the destination drive*. OK, that is ONE issue.

The OTHER issue, which is a different one, is this:

If you could "clone" a source drive partition to a destination drive
partition, then the previously existing partition on the destination drive
will be removed and replaced with the clone partition(s). Thus it would be
impossible to literally clone, say, 3 source drive partitions INTO one
destination drive partition such that you would still have that one
partition ENCLOSING the 3 cloned partitions from the source drive.
Instead, there would now be 3 partitions in the place of the previously
existing ONE (which was removed)
At least as I see it, based on my experiences with BING (which is somewhat
similar)


BING doesn't even belong in this discussion.

I know from what I did last night that Casper can NOT clone a
multi-partition disk to a single partition on another disk. It either
fills the destination disk, or it takes whatever space you specify
(limited on the low end only by the data that the source partitions
contain) and leaves the remaining space unallocated.

That is no different from how it handles a source disk with only one
partition.

I'm satisfied at this point that I know what Casper can and cannot do
and that the info from Anna on this subject is flawed at best,
completely wrong at worst.

You guys have fun with Bill (and Anna). The two of them have been
back and forth on this since last Spring.

I'm outta here.

Richie Hardwick
  #85  
Old January 24th 09, 01:40 AM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics,microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support
Daave
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,568
Default How to use Acronis to backup o/s ?

"Richie Hardwick" wrote in message
news
On Fri, 23 Jan 2009 15:25:08 -0500, WaIIy wrote:

I just finished partitioning my system disk into 3 partitions and I
copied some data into each of the extra partitions. I then
partitioned one of my other internal disks into 2 partitions.

I tried to clone the 3-partition disk to one of the partitions on the
other disk - ain't gonna happen. Casper wants the entire drive as I
originally thought it would a month or two ago.

To keep Casper from using the entire drive, I had to use Casper to
reduce the size of each partition on the source disk prior to
performing the clone.

RESULT? The recipient drive has 3 partitions AND a lot of
unallocated
space which would be totally useless for holding another Casper
clone.

WHICH APPEARS TO MEAN (as I've claimed in the past) that one can NOT
have multiple complete backups using Casper without having multiple
disks to hold them.


From what I read (and I read them over and over) of Anna's posts, she
said you can clone a multiple partition C drive onto ONE partition
of a multiple partition destination drive. Using this method, the
other partition(s) on the destination drive would be unaffected.

This makes no sense to me, but that seems to be what she said.


It makes no sense to me either, given my test earlier today.

Casper even WARNS that all partitions/data on the destination drive
will be destroyed before it lets you proceed with the cloning.

It's interesting that she's not replied to any of this.


She will. :-)


  #86  
Old January 24th 09, 03:30 AM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics,microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support
Richie Hardwick[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 159
Default How to use Acronis to backup o/s ?

I wrote:

You guys have fun with Bill (and Anna). The two of them have been
back and forth on this since last Spring.


Actually, since last February 18th when it all began between the two
of them.

In one of his posts, Bill replied to "Kenneth"...

==============
Kenneth wrote:

SNIP


Hi Anna,
I am certainly part of that "vast, if not overwhelming
majority" who understands nothing about the difference
between "cloning" and "imaging."


Can you describe that to me?


Sincere thanks,
--
Kenneth


In a nutshell, how about this synopsis:

Cloning makes a good copy, but not an exact copy, of the original
source partition(s).

Imaging, OR "partition copying", makes an *exact* copy of the original
source partition(s).

==============

I think Bill has learned something about cloning since he posted that.

Richie Hardwick
  #87  
Old January 24th 09, 04:14 AM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics,microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support
Bill in Co.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,106
Default How to use Acronis to backup o/s ?

Richie Hardwick wrote:
I wrote:

You guys have fun with Bill (and Anna). The two of them have been
back and forth on this since last Spring.


Actually, since last February 18th when it all began between the two
of them.

In one of his posts, Bill replied to "Kenneth"...

==============
Kenneth wrote:

SNIP


Hi Anna,
I am certainly part of that "vast, if not overwhelming
majority" who understands nothing about the difference
between "cloning" and "imaging."


Can you describe that to me?


Sincere thanks,
--
Kenneth


In a nutshell, how about this synopsis:

Cloning makes a good copy, but not an exact copy, of the original
source partition(s).

Imaging, OR "partition copying", makes an *exact* copy of the original
source partition(s).

==============


Except that your "synopsis" is incorrect - and inadequate in detail.
And imaging is not the same thing as partition copying (if so implied).

I think Bill has learned something about cloning since he posted that.


It seems you haven't, if you believe your synopsis.

IF you really want to learn what's going on in some detail, use something
like Boot It NG (on it's bootup floppy/flash disk), because unless you know
exactly what you're doing, it won't do anything. It's not a "let me hold
your hand and guide you, and hide all the details behind the scenes" type of
thing.

UNLIKE Casper and ATI, which hide the real details of what's going on, you
will know (or have to learn) what explicitly is being done, down at the
partition level (underneath windows).


  #88  
Old January 24th 09, 04:59 AM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics,microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support
Anna
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,039
Default How to use Acronis to backup o/s ?


"Richie Hardwick" wrote in message
It's interesting that she's not replied to any of this.



"Daave" wrote in message
...
She will. :-)



Daave, Wally, Richie, et al...
And so I am...

And humbly too.

I was apparently mistaken re my last post to "Daave" re the cloning of a
source HDD containing multiple partitions - in Daave's example, three
partitions. I used as an example that the C: partition was 50 GB, a second
D: partition of 125 GB, and a third E: partition of 75 GB. The example
assumed a 500 GB external HDD was to be used as the destination drive and
had been set up with two partitions of 200 GB and 300 GB. The 200 GB
partition was destined to be the recipient of the contents of the source
HDD; presumably the 300 GB partition contained user data.

I stated (mistakenly) that one could clone the entire contents of the source
HDD to *one* of the two partitions on the destination drive (in the example,
the 200 GB partition) and the Casper 5 program would proportionally allocate
disk-space for each of those source drive's three partitions on that single
200 GB partition of the destination drive. So that the former 200 GB
partition on the destination HDD would, in effect, be split up
(proportionally) with three separate partitions mirroring the source HDD's
partitions. Mistakenly, and this is the important part, I indicated that the
second 300 GB partition presumably containing user data would remain
untouched.

The information I provided was wrong. While it is indeed possible for the
user to easily clone the contents of the source drive's three partitions (in
our example) to the destination HDD and, using the Casper program, set up
the size of each of those three partitions on the destination drive, any
remaining disk space would be considered "unallocated". That second
partition (in our example) that previously existed on the destination HDD
would disappear (along with its data, of course!) and become part of the
"unallocated" disk space. Richie correctly pointed out my mistake in this
regard.

My only excuse (as flimsy as it might be!) is that the scenario I described
*did* exist at one time in the Casper program. I can't recall whether it was
part of the predecessor Casper 4 program or, more likely, a beta version of
one of the Casper versions I worked with in the past. It might even have
existed in an earlier "build" of Casper 5. I just can't remember. But in any
event that capability I described does not exist in the Casper 5 program.
Obviously I hadn't used the current 5 version in the manner I had described.
I should have tested it out to make certain the info I was providing was
correct, but I didn't.

So my apologies to all of you for the misinformation.

In any event, here's (I hope & trust!) the *real* story...

In the example given above involving a source HDD with three partitions, the
user would have the following options re cloning the contents of that source
HDD (the three partitions) to the destination drive, a 500 GB HDD...

1. He or she could allow the Casper program to proportionally create the
three partitions on the 500 GB destination drive (466 GB binary). So that in
the example given the first partition on the destination HDD would be
(approx) 102 GB, the second partition 248 GB, and the third partition 116
GB. So that the entire disk space of the destination drive would be used to
hold the contents of the source disk.(Again, all figures approximate); or,

2. The user could perform a disk-to-disk clone in which case the three
partitions created on the destination drive would mirror the disk-space of
each of the three source drive's partitions (and of course, contain their
contents). The remaining disk space would be unallocated.

3. The user could specify how the disk space is to be allotted, in effect
resizing the three destination drive partitions to whatever size he or she
desires, naturally assuming the individual partition size would be
sufficient to contain the contents of the source drive's partition. Again,
the remaining disk space would be unallocated.

Again, my apologies to all for the misinformation I previously provided and
for any inconvenience it may have caused anyone.
Anna


  #89  
Old January 24th 09, 05:14 AM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics,microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support
Richie Hardwick[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 159
Default How to use Acronis to backup o/s ?

On Fri, 23 Jan 2009 20:14:40 -0700, "Bill in Co."
wrote:

Richie Hardwick wrote:
I wrote:

You guys have fun with Bill (and Anna). The two of them have been
back and forth on this since last Spring.


Actually, since last February 18th when it all began between the two
of them.

In one of his posts, Bill replied to "Kenneth"...

==============
Kenneth wrote:

SNIP


Hi Anna,
I am certainly part of that "vast, if not overwhelming
majority" who understands nothing about the difference
between "cloning" and "imaging."


Can you describe that to me?


Sincere thanks,
--
Kenneth


In a nutshell, how about this synopsis:

Cloning makes a good copy, but not an exact copy, of the original
source partition(s).

Imaging, OR "partition copying", makes an *exact* copy of the original
source partition(s).

==============


Except that your "synopsis" is incorrect - and inadequate in detail.
And imaging is not the same thing as partition copying (if so implied).

I think Bill has learned something about cloning since he posted that.


It seems you haven't, if you believe your synopsis.


The synopsis was YOURS Bill old boy. The material between the dashed
lines is a copy of a post you made on Feb. 18 of last year.

  #90  
Old January 24th 09, 05:16 AM posted to microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics,microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support
Richie Hardwick[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 159
Default How to use Acronis to backup o/s ?

On Fri, 23 Jan 2009 22:59:43 -0500, "Anna" wrote:

So my apologies to all of you for the misinformation.


Accepted... I stand vindicated.

Richie
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off






All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:56 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PCbanter.
The comments are property of their posters.