CS said:
Perhaps that's your experience, but many users including myself find
it reliable both for FAT-32 and NTFS. No problems whatsoever. Same
with Drive Image and Acronis True Image. All work well.
Yes, but reliability is not measured by whether you have been burned "so far".
My experience was three different images created a few months apart that all
created without error, verified without error, yet would not restore. Tech
Support at Symantec basically admitted that this was possible with NTFS
partitions (though should be rare).
I don't know about you, but I need a backup that I can trust absolutely.
Finding out that all my images were crap at the exact moment that I needed them
is not acceptable for any kind of backup software.
My biggest beef wasn't that an image might not be any good, but that these
images passed the Ghost verification process. This means that with a Ghost
image of an NTFS partition you can never know 100% that it's any good until you
actually try to restore from it. That might be practical if you have a second
identical system to try it on, but if you don't you're screwed because the
nature of the problem is that you don't find out the image is no good until
after it has already wiped your disk.
In my case I was simply trying to restore to a point before some system changes
had taken place. So I had a working system before attempting to restore from
the images. Afterwards I had nothing but a disk that had to be reformatted and
loaded from scratch. Luckily with Ghost explorer I was able to retrieve a few
individual data files from the images that otherwise would have been lost.