> "Frog" wrote:
>
>> I have a new computer that has Windows XP software loaded on it.
>> The computer includes a floppy drive (A drive) and a read/write CD/DVD
>> player in it. I also have a copy of Acronis 7 backup software that I
>> previously used on my old Windows 98SE system. Now, for my questions:
>>
>> Is Acronis 7 compatible with a Windows XP machine? I think, based on my
>> research on the Web, that it is compatible. The newer version 11 seems
>> to have many new whistles and bells included in the software, but I
>> don't think I would ever use any of this expanded capability.
>>
>> Secondly, is it better to have my backups on my hard drive (E Drive) or
>> separate CDs? What are the pros and cons associated with both options?
>>
>> Is it better to make the backups using an Acronis startup floppy disk
>> for this purpose or use the software on the system once it is up and
>> running?
>>
>> I would really like to be able to have a backup that is not
>> dependent on having a working hard drive (say that the hard drive
>> stopped working and I had to start over with a new hard drive). That
>> tells me that I should either put my backup on CDs or an external hard
>> drive specifically for this purpose. Do any of you have thoughts on how
>> to best accomplish my goal?
>>
>> Lastly, will Windows XP recognize an Acronis 7 startup floppy
>> disk? I believe that it will, but I need some reassurance that that is
>> the case.
>>
>> I would like to hear any other thoughts and/or recommendations
>> that any of you might have on this subject.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks in advance for any help sent my way on this subject.
>> Frog
"usasma" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:F40CF432-EDC8-460D-8603-(E-Mail Removed)...
> I've been using Acronis True Image since v7 and it works quite well on all
> my
> XP systems. At times I prefer it to v11 because it seems (to me) to be
> faster (although some of the "tricks" in the later versions make restoring
> much faster).
>
> It's better to store your backups on and external hard drive - but backing
> up to DVD is also an option (although you'll end up using several DVD's
> each
> time). DO NOT save it to your hard drive. If the hard drive dies, so do
> your images!!! The only exception to this is if the computer will only
> run
> v7 in it's Safe Mode when booting from the disk (and then it won't access
> USB
> devices). This happened with my Toshiba M45 laptop.
>
> I prefer booting from the Acronis boot CD and making the images from
> there.
> That way there's nothing interfering with the process. I'm a bit leary of
> imaging my OS partition while the OS is running (although I have done
> it) - I
> worry about file access issues.
>
> Finally, the best advice I've heard is to test the image. Don't assume
> that
> it's good, even though it's been verified. Test it to be sure - that way
> you
> won't be surprised when you need it.
>
> - John
Frog:
First of all, let me say at the outset that by & large the recent versions
of Acronis True Image are basically fine programs as many of the responders
to your query have indicated.
As a computer technician/consultant we've worked with a wide variety of disk
cloning/disk imaging programs involving perhaps thousands of PC systems &
users. Up until a few years ago our favorite disk-cloning program in an XP
environment was Symantec's Norton Ghost 2003 version. We found the general
simplicity, straightforwardness, and most of all, effectiveness of this
program as a disk-cloning utility most appealing as long as the program was
being used through its bootable floppy disk containing the Ghost program
(and not through the Windows GUI). We found later versions of the Ghost
program - specifically versions 9 & 10 unacceptable for a variety of
reasons.
We began working with the Acronis program, like you, starting with version
7. While the program generally worked as it should we found too many
anomalies in both that version and the following version 8 to recommend it
wholeheartedly to our users. (I realize our experience with that program (at
least with respect to version 7), apparently differs from the experiences of
the other responders to your query who were, and are, apparently favorably
disposed toward that version. In any event, we did find the following
versions 9 & 10 sufficiently improved so that we did recommend the ATI
program to users. (We haven't worked with version 11 to any degree but from
the little experience we've had with that program I suspect it's not too
different from the previous 9 & 10 versions).
The disk-cloning program that we now strongly prefer is the Casper 4.0
program (
http://www.fssdev.com/products/casper/trial/). It's extremely
simple to use even for an inexperienced user, reasonably quick in operation,
and quite effective. There's virtually no learning curve in undertaking the
disk cloning process as one navigates through the few easy-to-understand
screens with a final mouse-click on the button on the screen which will
trigger the disk-cloning process. After undertaking one or two disk-cloning
operations it should take the user no more than 20 seconds or so to get to
that point.
The significant advantage of the Casper 4.0 disk cloning program compared
with other disk cloning programs that we're familiar with, e.g., Acronis
True Image or Symantec's Norton Ghost, is its ability to create
*incremental* disk clones following the creation of the original (first)
disk clone. Employing what Casper calls its "SmartClone" technology the
program can create subsequent disk clones of the source HDD usually at a
fraction of the time it takes to create a "full" disk clone. This results in
a decided incentive for the user to undertake frequent complete backups of
his or her system knowing that they can create "incremental" disk clones in
a relatively short period of time.
The Casper 4.0 program is also capable of scheduling the disk-cloning
process on a daily, weekly, or other time period selected by the user so
that you could arrange for automatic backups at pre-determined times.
There's a trial version available (see above link) although it's somewhat
crippled but it will give you a good idea as to how the program works. And I
can provide further details about using the program should you be
interested.
The downside to the Casper 4 program as compared with the Acronis and most
other disk-cloning programs is the cost of the program which comes to $49.95
for the program + $9.95 for the "Casper Startup Disk" (the program to create
the bootable CD containing the Casper program). So it's more expensive than
the others. But in our view, well worth the additional cost. AFAIK, the
program is available only through download from the developer.
All of the above is predicated on the basis that you're seeking a reliable
program to backup your *entire* day-to-day booting HDD, including the XP OS,
all your programs & applications, and your user-created data. And you want a
simple-to-use program to do this on a systematic routine basis reasonably
quickly & effectively. To that end we've found this Casper 4.0 program
really fills the bill.
As to your query about using CDs or even DVDs for comprehensive backup
purposes - I would really advise against your doing so. And, as "usasma" has
indicated, it's never a wise idea to store a "disk image" on the same
physical drive you're backing up. (I should point out at this time that the
Casper program is designed only for disk-cloning, not disk imaging). You
would be so much better to use an external USB or Firewire external HDD as
the recipient of the disk clone. You might even want to consider the
recipient HDD to be an internal secondary HDD installed in your machine (I
assume you're working with a desktop machine). Having an external HDD
containing the backup copy of your system obviously gives you a greater
sense of security since the device would ordinarily be disconnected from the
machine following the disk-cloning operation.
Anyway, if you're more comfortable with the Acronis program, so be it. But
at least take a look at the Casper program and compare the two from the
point-of-view of your objectives.
Anna
