image copying drive through USB?

[Yousuf Khan]

I usually transfer boot disk images using BootItNG. Those of you who
know BING, it is a utility that boots up with its own CD boot disk. This
is usually not a problem with my desktops, with plenty of drive bays and
multiple connector cables available. But now I want to transfer my
laptop boot disk to a new bigger disk and I'd like to transfer it to a
disk connected (temporarily) via USB. I have a small empty USB laptop
drive enclosure which is doing nothing right now.

The only problem is that I don't think BING can support USB hard drives,
I haven't really tested this assumption yet, so somebody might know
better and let me know. If BING can't do it, then what's an alternative
for transferring boot disks? Naturally, I'm thinking freeware/shareware,
rather than the commercial utils (such as Ghost or Drive Image). Maybe
even something that can do the boot disk image transfer while still
running under Windows, but anything that can do the transfer over USB
will do.

Yousuf Khan

 

[Ed Light]

The only problem is that I don't think BING can support USB hard drives,

Upgrade to the latest version.

To OP:

A BING boot disk can delete the partitions, then you can make one new
one. No charge unless you install it on the HD. When you boot it, skip
the installation -- it will fall back to the Maintenance work screen.
Activate USB 2 in settings. Click Partition Work, find the drive, click
on a partition and choose Delete. Then when it's all blank click on the
free space and choose Create, choos what kind of partition. Except for
FAT32, you'll have to format it in the OS. If Windows doesn't want to
format NTFS (had this happen for a thumb drive) then format it in BING
to FAT32 with align for NTFS checked. It should format to NTFS in Win,
but you can also use Convert at the command line.

--
Ed Light

Better World News TV Channel:
http://realnews.com

Bring the Troops Home:
http://bringthemhomenow.org
http://antiwar.com

Iraq Veterans Against the War:
http://ivaw.org
http://couragetoresist.org

Send spam to the FTC at
(e-mail address removed)
Thanks, robots.

 

[Rod Speed]

I usually transfer boot disk images using BootItNG. Those of you who
know BING, it is a utility that boots up with its own CD boot disk.
This is usually not a problem with my desktops, with plenty of drive
bays and multiple connector cables available. But now I want to
transfer my laptop boot disk to a new bigger disk and I'd like to
transfer it to a disk connected (temporarily) via USB. I have a small
empty USB laptop drive enclosure which is doing nothing right now.

The only problem is that I don't think BING can support USB hard
drives, I haven't really tested this assumption yet, so somebody
might know better and let me know. If BING can't do it, then what's
an alternative for transferring boot disks?

Acronis True Image.

Naturally, I'm thinking freeware/shareware, rather than the commercial utils (such as Ghost or Drive Image).

Drive Image is long gone now.

Maybe even something that can do the boot disk
image transfer while still running under Windows,

TI can do that.

but anything that can do the transfer over USB will do.

There isnt much that doesnt do that at the Win level now.
The main exception is TI which has a bootable CD which runs linux.

 

[Yousuf Khan]

TI can do that.


There isnt much that doesnt do that at the Win level now.
The main exception is TI which has a bootable CD which runs linux.

Another possibility is that in the old days of DOS, we were able to
transfer the boot disk by simply doing a system transfer to the new disk
to create the boot kernel, and then simply xcopying all of the rest of
the stuff over. That became nearly impossible with later standalone
Windows (e.g. I think it started with Win 95 and continued on). Is there
some simple analog to the old system transfer and xcopy process these
days that will produce an identical boot environment?

Yousuf Khan

 

[Rod Speed]

Yousuf Khan wrote

Rod Speed wrote

Another possibility is that in the old days of DOS, we were able to
transfer the boot disk by simply doing a system transfer to the new
disk to create the boot kernel, and then simply xcopying all of the rest of the stuff over. That became nearly
impossible with later standalone Windows (e.g. I think it started with Win 95 and continued on).

It isnt actually impossible, just rather more tricky.

Is there some simple analog to the old system transfer and xcopy
process these days that will produce an identical boot environment?

Yes, xxclone will do that. I much prefer TI tho.

Its not that expensive if you arent prepared to use torrents etc and
is the best backup software around quite apart from that cloning.

Seagate does have an older version available for download for free. I havent bothered
to check if it only works with a seagate drive in the system, likely it doesnt care.

 

[Jack]

Yousuf Khan wrote:
<snip>
:: The only problem is that I don't think BING can support USB hard
:: drives, I haven't really tested this assumption yet, so somebody
:: might know better and let me know.

Yousuf, I'm a little perplexed by your post. Of course BING can handle
external USB HD's (check that you have the latest version). Where BING gets
finicky (sp?) is with the various BIOS's from all the different
manufacturers.
One setting will work just fine but the same (or similar) setting with a
different manf. laptop won't. You just have to experiment and try.

You would be MUCH better off to post this question in the
terabyteunlimited.com Usenet NG. Could have sworn I've seen you there
before??

server: terabyteunlimited.com
server port number (NNTP): 1198

Later.

Jack

 

[bbbl67]

Yes, xxclone will do that. I much prefer TI tho.

Its not that expensive if you arent prepared to use torrents etc and
is the best backup software around quite apart from that cloning.

Seagate does have an older version available for download for free. I havent bothered
to check if it only works with a seagate drive in the system, likely it doesnt care.

Ooh, I like this XXClone, it seems to be exactly something I've been
looking for for a long long time. Even if BING does USB drives, I
think this one gives me a bit more flexibility. I especially like how
you can do clones to different sized partitions (even partitions that
are smaller than the original, if there is enough free space), and
even to partitions with different types of file systems (FAT <->
NTFS).

Yousuf Khan

 

[Rod Speed]

bbbl67 wrote

Ooh, I like this XXClone, it seems to be exactly
something I've been looking for for a long long time.

One downside with it is that its a hell of a lot slower to clone a drive than TI.

Even if BING does USB drives, I think this one gives me a bit more flexibility.

Yes, particularly the intelligent updating, works well for backup of a bootable clone.

I especially like how you can do clones to different sized partitions (even
partitions that are smaller than the original, if there is enough free space),

Most modern cloners will do that now.

and even to partitions with different types of file systems (FAT <-> NTFS).

Yeah, but one real downside of that capability is that since its done at the file level, its much slower to clone a
drive.

 

[bbbl67]

One downside with it is that its a hell of a lot slower to clone a drive than TI.

Yeah, but one real downside of that capability is that since its done at the file level, its much slower to clone a
drive.

Interestingly, it's not. I've just received the new hard drive, and I
have begun the experiments both with BING and XXClone. As Jack said,
BING does see the USB drive. But XXClone is blowing away BING, hands
down, in speed. So far I'm cloning the laptop's restore partition,
which is pretty small, only 4GB or so. It's taking XXClone only about
15-20 minutes to copy that over USB, but it was barely budging under
BING. I'd hate to try to clone the main 90GB Windows system partition
with BING.

I don't know why it's so much slower. Maybe because BING copies it at
the very low level, sector-by-sector, it may be running into USB
protocol overhead, whereas XXClone might avoid the low-level overhead?
Maybe because the restore partition is FAT32 rather than NTFS, BING is
slower? Maybe because USB boots up at the slower USB 1.1 speeds while
in BIOS, and only kicks into full USB 2.0 speeds after Windows has
loaded? It could be any combination of those things, I imagine.

Yousuf Khan

 

[Ed Light]

BING does see the USB drive. But XXClone is blowing away BING

I think for BING you have to turn on USB 2.0 support in settings.

--
Ed Light

Better World News TV Channel:
http://realnews.com

Bring the Troops Home:
http://bringthemhomenow.org
http://antiwar.com

Iraq Veterans Against the War:
http://ivaw.org
http://couragetoresist.org

Send spam to the FTC at
(e-mail address removed)
Thanks, robots.

 

[Rod Speed]

bbbl67 wrote

Interestingly, it's not.

Fraid it is.

I've just received the new hard drive, and I have
begun the experiments both with BING and XXClone.

I was talking about TI, not BING.

As Jack said, BING does see the USB drive. But
XXClone is blowing away BING, hands down, in speed.

I've never liked BING, for that reason.

So far I'm cloning the laptop's restore partition, which is pretty small, only
4GB or so. It's taking XXClone only about 15-20 minutes to copy that over USB,

Thats a hell of a long time for 4GB.

but it was barely budging under BING. I'd hate to try to
clone the main 90GB Windows system partition with BING.

Yeah, thats the reason I dont use it, its a steaming turd in a number of areas.

I don't know why it's so much slower. Maybe because BING copies
it at the very low level, sector-by-sector, it may be running into USB
protocol overhead, whereas XXClone might avoid the low-level overhead?

Maybe, but if it is doing it sector by sector, its a steaming turd by definition.

Maybe because the restore partition is FAT32 rather than NTFS, BING is slower?

You'd have to test that possibility.

Maybe because USB boots up at the slower USB 1.1 speeds while
in BIOS, and only kicks into full USB 2.0 speeds after Windows has
loaded? It could be any combination of those things, I imagine.

And TI leaves XXCOPY for dead speed wise, which is why I use it.

 

[Jones]

bbbl67 wrote:

I think for BING you have to turn on USB 2.0 support in settings.

Like I said, its a steaming turd in a number of areas.

 

[Ed Light]

Like I said, its a steaming turd in a number of areas.

Was the USB 2.0 setting in BING turned on?

Have you got an older motherboard (such as K7?).

It's pretty quick for me.

You might try their newsgroup as it gets fast answers.

--
Ed Light

Better World News TV Channel:
http://realnews.com

Bring the Troops Home:
http://bringthemhomenow.org
http://antiwar.com

Iraq Veterans Against the War:
http://ivaw.org
http://couragetoresist.org

Send spam to the FTC at
(e-mail address removed)
Thanks, robots.

 

[bbbl67]

bbbl67wrote


I was talking about TI, not BING.

Oh yes, you're right, sorry, I reread the quote: I just had BING in my
head, but you were actually talking TI.

But anyways, XXClone still seems to be blowing BING away.

I've never liked BING, for that reason.


Thats a hell of a long time for 4GB.

Could be, but it's a laptop, using 5400RPM drives here.

Maybe, but if it is doing it sector by sector, its a steaming turd by definition.

Well, what else does "low-level" mean other than sector-by-sector? You
said that TI uses low-level procedures too.

Yousuf Khan

 

[bbbl67]

bbbl67wrote:

I think for BING you have to turn on USB 2.0 support in settings.

The version I have doesn't seem to have a setting for that. I have
version 1.44a.

Yousuf Khan

 

[Ed Light]

The version I have doesn't seem to have a setting for that. I have
version 1.44a.

Yousuf Khan

1.86 here. Better grab the new one, with the enable usb 2.0 setting.

--
Ed Light

Better World News TV Channel:
http://realnews.com

Bring the Troops Home:
http://bringthemhomenow.org
http://antiwar.com

Iraq Veterans Against the War:
http://ivaw.org
http://couragetoresist.org

Send spam to the FTC at
(e-mail address removed)
Thanks, robots.