Unfortunately, I was had to get offline rather quickly last night or I would
have tried to give you a better explanation.
To cut right through this and put it at its most basic level, a copy of a
drive, copies the "contents" of the drive. An image is a sector by sector
duplicate of the drive and, as such as in exact duplicate of the drive.
The reason I made the distinction is you had previously tried a copy and it
wasn't working. It appeared to me that perhaps XP's activation scheme might
be playing a role in your problem as a copy is not an exact physical
duplicate of the original. I'm glad it's working for you now but if you
should have boot issues with that drive, it's possible that cause may be
that the drive is not an exact duplicate. Further, when you posted last
night, you stated you wanted an exact duplicate of everything on the drive
and that's precisely what an image does right down to the sectors. It is
not a difference without a distinction, there is a distinction.
So, to try to bottom line it for you and the rest of the thread, a copy
copies the contents of a drive but an image makes an exact sector by sector
duplicate and that was what you had originally said you wanted. The
implication of your OP in this thread was that a copy was closer to that
than an image. However, it is the reverse.
--
Michael Solomon MS-MVP
Windows Shell/User
Backup is a PC User's Best Friend
DTS-L.Org:
http://www.dts-l.org/
"William B. Lurie" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> Michael Solomon (MS-MVP Windows Shell/User) wrote:
>
>> Bill, if you want an exact copy, that's an image. Ironically, a copy is
>> not an exact copy, an image creates an exact copy.
>>
> Michael, I have a lengthy commentary in response to your helpful
> but paradoxical explanation above. Rather than force everybody to read it,
> unless they really want to, I am putting it on my website:
>
> http://bellsouthpwp.net/b/i/billurie/image1.txt
>
> William B. Lurie