How to use Acronis to backup o/s ?

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.

How does that change anything??

If the resulting partition is the same size as it was created to be
before the cloning operation and contains the clone of the source
drive afterwards, I don't care if it changes the partition into a
pretzel before making the clone.

All I care about is that it contains the clone and that the clone is
usable for restoration purposes.

It can be a partition that is either smaller, the same size, or larger
than the size of the source drive, as long as it's large enough to
contain all the data on the source drive.

Which will be the case.

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, like BING) 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.

How does that change anything??

It certainly does help to be precise. (Maybe not for you, but certainly so
for me).

If the resulting partition is the same size as it was created to be
before the cloning operation and contains the clone of the source
drive afterwards, I don't care if it changes the partition into a
pretzel before making the clone.

Well, I certainly do. But then agian, I'm an engineer by education,
training, and vocation, and being analytical and precise is important, at
least to me.

All I care about is that it contains the clone and that the clone is
usable for restoration purposes.

"All you care about..." I care about more, from a technical viewpoint,
to understand it better.

On Thu, 22 Jan 2009 19:55:19 -0700, "Bill in Co."
wrote:

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, like BING) 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.

How does that change anything??

It certainly does help to be precise. (Maybe not for you, but certainly so
for me).

This, coming from someone who was using copy/clone interchangeably.
Heh.

If the resulting partition is the same size as it was created to be
before the cloning operation and contains the clone of the source
drive afterwards, I don't care if it changes the partition into a
pretzel before making the clone.

Well, I certainly do. But then agian, I'm an engineer by education,
training, and vocation, and being analytical and precise is important, at
least to me.

Based on how long it's taken you to figure out Casper, I'd guess that
it must've taken you 12 years to get a 4-year degree ;-)

All I care about is that it contains the clone and that the clone is
usable for restoration purposes.

"All you care about..." I care about more, from a technical viewpoint,
to understand it better.

DO you F I N A L L Y understand how Casper works, now?
Disk-to-disk, disk-to-partition or partition-to-partition?

"Richie Hardwick" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 22 Jan 2009 19:55:19 -0700, "Bill in Co."
wrote:

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, like BING) 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.

How does that change anything??

It certainly does help to be precise. (Maybe not for you, but
certainly so
for me).

This, coming from someone who was using copy/clone interchangeably.
Heh.

If the resulting partition is the same size as it was created to be
before the cloning operation and contains the clone of the source
drive afterwards, I don't care if it changes the partition into a
pretzel before making the clone.

Well, I certainly do. But then agian, I'm an engineer by education,
training, and vocation, and being analytical and precise is important,
at
least to me.

Based on how long it's taken you to figure out Casper, I'd guess that
it must've taken you 12 years to get a 4-year degree ;-)

All I care about is that it contains the clone and that the clone is
usable for restoration purposes.

"All you care about..." I care about more, from a technical
viewpoint,
to understand it better.

DO you F I N A L L Y understand how Casper works, now?
Disk-to-disk, disk-to-partition or partition-to-partition?

Quick question, Richie. I've never used this program, but I feel I have
after having read this thread!

Let's say I have an external hard drive that has two partitions. I
decide to clone my PC's only hard drive, which has three partitions. I
use Casper, instructing it to clone the PC's hard drive to one of the
partitions of the external hard drive. When all is said and done, does
the external hard drive now have four partitions? That is, one
partition, which is unchanged, and three new partitions where the other
one of two once was? Or is it still two partitions just like before, but
where the second partition contains three sub-partitions?

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.

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

On Thu, 22 Jan 2009 23:29:39 -0500, "Daave"
wrote:

Quick question, Richie. I've never used this program, but I feel I have
after having read this thread!

Let's say I have an external hard drive that has two partitions. I
decide to clone my PC's only hard drive, which has three partitions. I
use Casper, instructing it to clone the PC's hard drive to one of the
partitions of the external hard drive. When all is said and done, does
the external hard drive now have four partitions? That is, one
partition, which is unchanged, and three new partitions where the other
one of two once was? Or is it still two partitions just like before, but
where the second partition contains three sub-partitions?

I just posted a LONG second reply to Bill that I think clears things
up.

Short version: Casper wants to use the entire drive, or at least
enough of it to hold all the partitions and all their data... meaning
that the partitions can be shrunk - if desired - but not smaller than
the data each holds.

When cloning is complete, the drive will either be fully used, or -
if the partitions were shrunk prior to cloning - there will be
unallocated space.

"Daave" wrote in message
...
Quick question, Richie. I've never used this program, but I feel I have
after having read this thread!

Let's say I have an external hard drive that has two partitions. I decide
to clone my PC's only hard drive, which has three partitions. I use
Casper, instructing it to clone the PC's hard drive to one of the
partitions of the external hard drive. When all is said and done, does the
external hard drive now have four partitions? That is, one partition,
which is unchanged, and three new partitions where the other one of two
once was? Or is it still two partitions just like before, but where the
second partition contains three sub-partitions?


Daave:
Let me answer your question with a concrete example...
Using your example with a source HDD of say, 250 GB, containing three
partitions -let's say a C: partition of 50 GB, a second D: partition of 125
GB and the third E: partition of 75 GB.

Now let's say the user has a 500 GB external HDD which will serve as the
"destination" drive, and (for whatever reason) he or she has created two
partitions on that external HDD - one of 300 GB, and the second as 200 GB.

Using Casper it is a simple straightforward procedure to clone the source
HDD containing the three partitions to the *first* partition (300 GB) of the
external HDD, in effect a disk-to-partition clone. As I've previously
indicated, the only proviso is that the destination partition be sufficient
in size to contain the cloned contents of the source disk. Since the user
would be cloning a 250 GB disk to a 300 GB partition on the destination
drive there is obviously no problem here.

Following the cloning operation, the destination partition (the 300 GB one)
will now be split up into the *three* partitions of the source HDD. Since
the user would be cloning 250 GB of data into a 300 GB "space", (in effect a
disk-to-partition clone), the program will automatically *proportion* the
three partitions that will make up that formerly single partition. So that
in this specific example three partitions will be set up in that former
single partition as follows:
1st partition (the former C: partition of the source HDD) = 60 GB
2nd partition (" " D: " " " " "
= 150 GB
3rd partition (" " E: " " " " "
= 90 GB

The upshot of all this is that now the external (destination) HDD will,
contain four partitions - the three partitions from the source disk (above)
and the 300 GB partition (untouched) previously created by the user.

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.)

But also understand (for restoration purposes) that there would be nothing
to prevent the user from making a *disk-to-disk* clone from the external HDD
to the internal HDD as long as the internal HDD (acting as destination drive
in this situation) was sufficient in disk space to accommodate the contents
of the external HDD. And, of course, nothing to prevent the user from making
a simple partition-to-partition clone should he or she wish to do so.

The process, is as I've stated, simple & straightforward for the user to
achieve. Little more than a few mouse clicks with the Casper 5 program.

Hope this helps.
Anna

"Anna" wrote in message
...

"Daave" wrote in message
...
Quick question, Richie. I've never used this program, but I feel I
have after having read this thread!

Let's say I have an external hard drive that has two partitions. I
decide to clone my PC's only hard drive, which has three partitions.
I use Casper, instructing it to clone the PC's hard drive to one of
the partitions of the external hard drive. When all is said and done,
does the external hard drive now have four partitions? That is, one
partition, which is unchanged, and three new partitions where the
other one of two once was? Or is it still two partitions just like
before, but where the second partition contains three sub-partitions?


Daave:
Let me answer your question with a concrete example...
Using your example with a source HDD of say, 250 GB, containing three
partitions -let's say a C: partition of 50 GB, a second D: partition
of 125 GB and the third E: partition of 75 GB.

Now let's say the user has a 500 GB external HDD which will serve as
the "destination" drive, and (for whatever reason) he or she has
created two partitions on that external HDD - one of 300 GB, and the
second as 200 GB.

Using Casper it is a simple straightforward procedure to clone the
source HDD containing the three partitions to the *first* partition
(300 GB) of the external HDD, in effect a disk-to-partition clone. As
I've previously indicated, the only proviso is that the destination
partition be sufficient in size to contain the cloned contents of the
source disk. Since the user would be cloning a 250 GB disk to a 300 GB
partition on the destination drive there is obviously no problem here.

Following the cloning operation, the destination partition (the 300 GB
one) will now be split up into the *three* partitions of the source
HDD. Since the user would be cloning 250 GB of data into a 300 GB
"space", (in effect a disk-to-partition clone), the program will
automatically *proportion* the three partitions that will make up that
formerly single partition. So that in this specific example three
partitions will be set up in that former single partition as follows:
1st partition (the former C: partition of the source HDD) = 60 GB
2nd partition (" " D: " " " "
" = 150 GB
3rd partition (" " E: " " " "
" = 90 GB

The upshot of all this is that now the external (destination) HDD
will, contain four partitions - the three partitions from the source
disk (above) and the 300 GB partition (untouched) previously created
by the user.

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.)

But also understand (for restoration purposes) that there would be
nothing to prevent the user from making a *disk-to-disk* clone from
the external HDD to the internal HDD as long as the internal HDD
(acting as destination drive in this situation) was sufficient in disk
space to accommodate the contents of the external HDD. And, of course,
nothing to prevent the user from making a simple
partition-to-partition clone should he or she wish to do so.

The process, is as I've stated, simple & straightforward for the user
to achieve. Little more than a few mouse clicks with the Casper 5
program.

Hope this helps.

Yes, thanks. So, the answer is:

The detination drive will have one partition, which is unchanged, and
three new partitions where the other one of two once was.

Got it.

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?

On Fri, 23 Jan 2009 12:00:06 -0500, "Daave"
wrote:

Yes, thanks. So, the answer is:

The detination drive will have one partition, which is unchanged, and
three new partitions where the other one of two once was.

Got it.

We have a problem he Anna's info does not jibe with what I found
last night (actually early this morning) when I put it to the test.

Casper ONLY SAW THE ENTIRE DESTINATION DISK, not the partitions.
However... the destination disk was smaller than the source drive, not
larger as in her example. Maybe that made a difference, but I can't
see how. Casper readily sees entire disk that are smaller than the
source disk and will shrink everything proportionally to fit the
destination disk.

Casper DID NOT SEE the two partitions I created on that destination
disk (each large enough to hold the partitions/data that needed to be
saved), it only saw the entire disk.


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?

You have rightly identified the largest drawback of using Casper: it
can only clone. Restoring from the clone is no faster than restoring
from an image.

PLUS... if you need to boot to a CD to perform the restore - a very
likely possibility - you better have bought and downloaded the
burnable ISO image to do that because it isn't included in the main
program purchase.

On Fri, 23 Jan 2009 11:54:45 -0600, Richie Hardwick
wrote:

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?

You have rightly identified the largest drawback of using Casper: it
can only clone. Restoring from the clone is no faster than restoring
from an image.

P.S.: Acronis also will clone your disk if that's what you decide to
do some day. SO... one gets both cloning AND imaging utilities with
Acronis - and MORE.

It will backup - manually or on a schedule - entire disks or just
selected data, even a single file.

And you can browse any image to find selected data to restore if you
don't need to do a full restore.

Try doing that with Casper.

I'm not totally trashing Casper as a program because as I've
repeatedly stated: I use it daily. But ONLY to maintain a clone that
is second in the boot order in case my system disk totally dies.

I also use Acronis on a daily basis to image that drive for use in the
case I need/want to do a full/partial restore.

Richie Hardwick

Anna wrote:
"Daave" wrote in message
...
Quick question, Richie. I've never used this program, but I feel I have
after having read this thread!

Let's say I have an external hard drive that has two partitions. I decide
to clone my PC's only hard drive, which has three partitions. I use
Casper, instructing it to clone the PC's hard drive to one of the
partitions of the external hard drive. When all is said and done, does
the
external hard drive now have four partitions? That is, one partition,
which is unchanged, and three new partitions where the other one of two
once was? Or is it still two partitions just like before, but where the
second partition contains three sub-partitions?


Daave:
Let me answer your question with a concrete example...
Using your example with a source HDD of say, 250 GB, containing three
partitions -let's say a C: partition of 50 GB, a second D: partition of
125
GB and the third E: partition of 75 GB.

Now let's say the user has a 500 GB external HDD which will serve as the
"destination" drive, and (for whatever reason) he or she has created two
partitions on the external HDD: one of 300 GB, and the second as 200 GB

Using Casper it is a simple straightforward procedure to clone the source
HDD containing the three partitions to the *first* partition (300 GB) of
the
external HDD, in effect a disk-to-partition clone.

But Anna, that partition is removed in the process, and is replaced with the
3 partitions. That partition that used to exist on the destination drive
is no longer there. What IS happening is is that the space that was
reserved for that partition is presumably being marked as unallocated when
Casper does its partition copy. So at the end, you have those 3 new
partitions. They are NOT lying within (inside of) the previously existing
partition, as though it were an extended partition encompassing those 3
partitions. Doesn't that clarify it?

As I've previously
indicated, the only proviso is that the destination partition be
sufficient
in size to contain the cloned contents of the source disk. Since the user
would be cloning a 250 GB disk to a 300 GB partition on the destination
drive there is obviously no problem here.

Following the cloning operation, the destination partition (the 300 GB
one)
will now be split up into the *three* partitions of the source HDD. Since
the user would be cloning 250 GB of data into a 300 GB "space", (in effect
a disk-to-partition clone), the program will automatically *proportion*
the
three partitions that will make up that formerly single partition.

AND that single partition is no longer there. It was removed in the
process.

So that
in this specific example three partitions will be set up in that former
single partition as follows:
1st partition (the former C: partition of the source HDD) = 60 GB
2nd partition (" " D: " " " " "
= 150 GB
3rd partition (" " E: " " " "
"
= 90 GB

The upshot of all this is that now the external (destination) HDD will,
contain four partitions - the three partitions from the source disk
(above)
and the 300 GB partition (untouched) previously created by the user.

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.

But they certainly MAY be of relevance for some other considerations, as
I've mentioned before.

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.)

But also understand (for restoration purposes) that there would be nothing
to prevent the user from making a *disk-to-disk* clone from the external
HDD
to the internal HDD as long as the internal HDD (acting as destination
drive
in this situation) was sufficient in disk space to accommodate the
contents
of the external HDD. And, of course, nothing to prevent the user from
making a simple partition-to-partition clone should he or she wish to do
so.

The process, is as I've stated, simple & straightforward for the user to
achieve. Little more than a few mouse clicks with the Casper 5 program.

Hope this helps.
Anna

On Fri, 23 Jan 2009 11:49:37 -0700, "Bill in Co."
wrote:

Now let's say the user has a 500 GB external HDD which will serve as the
"destination" drive, and (for whatever reason) he or she has created two
partitions on the external HDD: one of 300 GB, and the second as 200 GB

Using Casper it is a simple straightforward procedure to clone the source
HDD containing the three partitions to the *first* partition (300 GB) of
the
external HDD, in effect a disk-to-partition clone.

But Anna, that partition is removed in the process, and is replaced with the
3 partitions. That partition that used to exist on the destination drive
is no longer there. What IS happening is is that the space that was
reserved for that partition is presumably being marked as unallocated when
Casper does its partition copy. So at the end, you have those 3 new
partitions. They are NOT lying within (inside of) the previously existing
partition, as though it were an extended partition encompassing those 3
partitions.

You are 100% correct.

That's because 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.

Richie Hardwick

"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).

"Bill in Co." wrote in message
...
Anna wrote:

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.

But they certainly MAY be of relevance for some other considerations,
as I've mentioned before.

I'm with Anna on this one. How would there be relevance? Everything goes
back. If the drive letter assignments change, just change them again!
It's not like you have dozens of partitions!

"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)?