Backup program needed

[Henry]

Running WinXP Pro SP2 on Dell with 3G CPU and 2G RAM.

I bought a Seagate external hard drive for backup purposes and now I'm
looking for a good backup program. The one that came with the Seagate
isn't very good because it makes you backup on a schedule rather than
when you want and Microsoft's SyncToy is worthless because I don't
have all of my folders under My Documents so I have to make folder
pairs for each folder.

If there is something free out there that would be great. I'd like to
be able to have the program run and only change the folders/files that
have changed since the last time I backed up.

Thanks

Henry

 

[Bob CP]

Running WinXP Pro SP2 on Dell with 3G CPU and 2G RAM.

I bought a Seagate external hard drive for backup purposes and now I'm
looking for a good backup program. The one that came with the Seagate
isn't very good because it makes you backup on a schedule rather than
when you want and Microsoft's SyncToy is worthless because I don't have
all of my folders under My Documents so I have to make folder pairs for
each folder.

If there is something free out there that would be great. I'd like to be
able to have the program run and only change the folders/files that have
changed since the last time I backed up.

Thanks

Henry

Among others...

http://xxclone.com/

 

[Pooky]

I have good experiences with this program

http://www.educ.umu.se/~cobian/cobianbackup.htm

 

[choro]

Duh! Meant Acronis.

But Acronis makes images, doesn't it? How about a program that makes
individual copies of files and folders that are instantly accessible on any
computer? In other words an exact replica of My Documents and other such
folders including sub-folders?

 

[choro]

When you make an Acronis image backup, you're
welcome to access, use, or restore any file or folder.
You want to restore My Documents, and no other
folder? Go right ahead.

No, I wouldn't want to restore My Documents or any of its sub-folders. But I
might want just to have a look at My Personal Phone List for example by
connecting an external 2.5" SATA disk to my friend's computer. I can't help
but wonder why things cannot be made as simple as possible.

 

[wilby]

Running WinXP Pro SP2 on Dell with 3G CPU and 2G RAM.

I bought a Seagate external hard drive for backup purposes and now I'm
looking for a good backup program. The one that came with the Seagate
isn't very good because it makes you backup on a schedule rather than
when you want and Microsoft's SyncToy is worthless because I don't have
all of my folders under My Documents so I have to make folder pairs for
each folder.

If there is something free out there that would be great. I'd like to be
able to have the program run and only change the folders/files that have
changed since the last time I backed up.

Thanks

Henry

For making disc or partition images, use Macrium Reflect Freeware
version. I like it better than my paid for Acronis.

For making simple copies of files use Karen's Replicator freeware. It is
able to deal with errors and can be set to only copy files that have
changed. I love it.

Wilby

 

[Shenan Stanley]

Running WinXP Pro SP2 on Dell with 3G CPU and 2G RAM.

I bought a Seagate external hard drive for backup purposes and now
I'm looking for a good backup program. The one that came with the
Seagate isn't very good because it makes you backup on a schedule
rather than when you want and Microsoft's SyncToy is worthless
because I don't have all of my folders under My Documents so I have
to make folder pairs for each folder.

If there is something free out there that would be great. I'd like
to be able to have the program run and only change the
folders/files that have changed since the last time I backed up.

Perfect Disk works for me.

Duh! Meant Acronis.

But Acronis makes images, doesn't it? How about a program that makes
individual copies of files and folders that are instantly
accessible on any computer? In other words an exact replica of My
Documents and other such folders including sub-folders?

When you make an Acronis image backup, you're
welcome to access, use, or restore any file or folder.
You want to restore My Documents, and no other
folder? Go right ahead.

No, I wouldn't want to restore My Documents or any of its
sub-folders. But I might want just to have a look at My Personal
Phone List for example by connecting an external 2.5" SATA disk to
my friend's computer. I can't help but wonder why things cannot be
made as simple as possible.

Who is making anything complicated?

If you want your backups to be a scheduled task you make that uses the
built-in copy or xcopy command to make a copy of whatever you desire to
keep/think is important - go for it. Microsoft even has a synching program
frelly available that can do that for you (SyncToy.)

If you want something more sophisticated (like a full image of a partition
or disk) - go for it.

Or combine the two - have the backup that is easily portable (just copies of
your important stuff) and full image backups of your system. It's all up to
you...

You could even choose an online backup (if you are willing to trust a 3rd
party with your stuff) where you can even access individual files from any
place with Internet connectivity.

Just don't choose one and then say that it is too complicated (not as simple
as possible) because it doesn't make it 'as simple as possible' as the other
choice you could have made. Also - a little effort will be necessary on
your part to figure out what you need, what you want and what you can/cannot
do for whatever reason.

GhostWalker was a feature of the Norton/Symantec product imaging I liked,
Acronis required the application to be installed on the system to mount the
images ad drives - GhostWalker was a stand-alone application. Maybe Acronis
has come up with such a tool which would make what you said combined with
what Anthony Buckland said work with a tiny extra step and a small
application saved on that same external drive.

Good backups (based around individual needs) will take effort. Although I
like the Seagate Replica drive myself - a little of all worlds (backs up
everything, bare metal restore possible, individual file browsing possible,
can be manual or whenever I plug the drive in, etc and so on) - sometimes
drag-n-drop just makes sure I have what I want to backup done/what I might
want elsewhere. Although - to be honest - if a situation like the one you
mentioned came up - I would just securely remote into my machine. ;-)

BTW - Henry (the OP) - please upgrade to a current service pack. Your
system is no longer supported at all - July 13, 2010 ended support for your
OS as it stands. SP3 installation will extend it to April 2014.

 

[Bob CP]

No, I wouldn't want to restore My Documents or any of its sub-folders. But I
might want just to have a look at My Personal Phone List for example by
connecting an external 2.5" SATA disk to my friend's computer. I can't help
but wonder why things cannot be made as simple as possible.

As I said in the first reply, xxclone will do exactly what you want.
If you want to back up only certain folders, use xxcopy in a batch file.

 

[choro]

As I said in the first reply, xxclone will do exactly what you want.
If you want to back up only certain folders, use xxcopy in a batch
file.

Thanks. I will try to give xxclone a try. I am already using xcopy by going
to the DOS command center after copying and pasting one of the appropriate
xcopy commands with the required parameters from a word .doc file for which
I have put a shortcut on my desktop. This enables me to copy folders and
subfolders from the appropriate partitions on any of the hard disks which I
have installed on my computer.

But I feel it is now time to switch over to the new computer I have built
for myself as the motherboard on my old faithful won't support SATA drives.
The new motherboard is equipped with a fast four-core AMD CPU as well as a
very fast DDR3 graphics card plus a generous 4 GB DDR3 RAM. My old faithful
will only take PATA HDs, AGP graphics cards and much slower memory modules.
But it still is my old faithful and I am finding it hard to switch over to
my newer computer. I guess I am put off by having to reinstall all the
programs I have already installed on my old faithful and all the tweaks I
have made on my old faithful which incidentally is now a full 10 years old.
It was and remains my first true love!

I also have to admit that I am so happy with my Windows XP/SP3 that I
hesitate to move over to Windows 7.

 

[Daave]

For making disc or partition images, use Macrium Reflect Freeware
version. I like it better than my paid for Acronis.

What specifically about Macrium do you prefer?

 

[Bob CP]

On 8/1/2010 9:55 AM, choro wrote:
....

Thanks. I will try to give xxclone a try. I am already using xcopy by going
to the DOS command center after copying and pasting one of the appropriate
xcopy commands with the required parameters from a word .doc file for which
I have put a shortcut on my desktop. This enables me to copy folders and
subfolders from the appropriate partitions on any of the hard disks which I
have installed on my computer.

Note that I mentioned xxcopy (http://www.xxcopy.com/xcpymain.htm), not
xcopy. xxcopy has a /clone switch that will duplicate the source
exactly, including deleting any files on the destination disk that
aren't on the source. Since my computers are all networked, I back up
critical data between them on a daily basis (not to mention the usual
external stuff...).

...I guess I am put off by having to reinstall all the
programs I have already installed on my old faithful and all the tweaks I
have made on my old faithful which incidentally is now a full 10 years old.
It was and remains my first true love!

It's not perfect, but I've used PC Mover
(http://www.laplink.com/pcmover) to transfer many programs to a new box.

 

[choro]

On 8/1/2010 9:55 AM, choro wrote:
...

Note that I mentioned xxcopy (http://www.xxcopy.com/xcpymain.htm), not
xcopy. xxcopy has a /clone switch that will duplicate the source
exactly, including deleting any files on the destination disk that
aren't on the source. Since my computers are all networked, I back up
critical data between them on a daily basis (not to mention the usual
external stuff...).

It's not perfect, but I've used PC Mover
(http://www.laplink.com/pcmover) to transfer many programs to a new
box.

I haven'ty tried any such software but I must admit they scare me. All those
DLLs on the old hard disk to go with the old motherboard, graphics card,
printer etc etc. Surely they will clash with the new drivers. And I am
eventually moving from WinXP to Win7 (which is installed on my new homebuilt
PC anyway) and which will require new drivers etc anyway. It scares the
shits out of me. I might be a chicken but I prefer a clean install. At least
I won't have old drivers incompatible with Win 7. It can't be all that much
more hassle to clean install everything and thus avoid any possible
pitfalls.

But thanks all the same. But I'll keep it in mind and may be try
http://www.laplink.com/pcmover with another Hard Disk. I am a glutton for
punishment, as a friend once told me.

 

[wilby]

What specifically about Macrium do you prefer?

Daave:

1. It is free.
2. The backup and restore wizards are easy to use.
3. My first test of imaging a Win 7/64 pro machine, and restoring it to
a new empty hard drive, worked 100% resulting in a bootable and exact
copy of my system.
4. While it expects me to install it on my C: drive for doing image
backups (which I do), I can (and did) also make a bootable BART CD that
also does the image backups.
5. Image restores are easily done when booted to the "easy to make"
Macrium emergency CD disc (Linux). Restores are also able to be done
from the BART CD.
6. The free version of Macrium Reflect doesn't have many of the fancy
extras such as scheduling, etc. I like this better because there are
less complications to cause errors. I do an image whenever I feel like it.

Acronis Paid software does all these things just as well but not better.
When users start using some Acronis advanced features is when problems
often happen. Go to their forum and almost every reported problem
involves fancy extra features such as continuous backup, scheduling,
on-line backup, and their "try & decide" feature.

I've played with at least six freeware image software and, for me,
Macrium is #1.

Wilby

 

[Daave]

Daave:

1. It is free.
2. The backup and restore wizards are easy to use.
3. My first test of imaging a Win 7/64 pro machine, and restoring it
to a new empty hard drive, worked 100% resulting in a bootable and
exact
copy of my system.
4. While it expects me to install it on my C: drive for doing image
backups (which I do), I can (and did) also make a bootable BART CD
that also does the image backups.
5. Image restores are easily done when booted to the "easy to make"
Macrium emergency CD disc (Linux). Restores are also able to be done
from the BART CD.
6. The free version of Macrium Reflect doesn't have many of the fancy
extras such as scheduling, etc. I like this better because there are
less complications to cause errors. I do an image whenever I feel
like it.
Acronis Paid software does all these things just as well but not
better. When users start using some Acronis advanced features is when
problems often happen. Go to their forum and almost every reported
problem involves fancy extra features such as continuous backup,
scheduling, on-line backup, and their "try & decide" feature.

I've played with at least six freeware image software and, for me,
Macrium is #1.

Thanks for the info.

Personally, I think #6 is very important, so I would either prefer the
paid version of Macrium or Acronis. FWIW, I use Acronis (version 9) and
it works flawlessly. I don't use "continuous" backup (I'm pretty sure
version 9 doesn't have it!), but I do use the incremental imaging
feature. I also like I have the option to create a clone if necessary.
(Yes, I know there are free programs that can create clones.) So, to me,
the advantage in using Acronis is the ability to schedule incremental
images. Otherwise, I would use DriveImageXML (which sounds similar to
Macrium).

 

[VanguardLH]

For making disc or partition images, use Macrium Reflect Freeware
version. I like it better than my paid for Acronis.

The free version does NOT do the incremental images that the user
requested as a feature. Macrium Reflect (free) only saves full images.
For a list of features missing in the free version, see:

http://www.macrium.com/reflectfree.asp

While it doesn't do incremental image backups, Paragon's B&R Free does
do differential image backups which are much smaller than having to save
a full image for every backup. Incrementals are susceptible to
corruption and loss if one incremental becomes unusable in the chain
back to the last full backup. Differentials consume more space but are
less susceptible since you only need the one differential and the prior
full image backups. Full image backups, which is the only type that
Macrium Reflect Free can do, consume the most disk space to save.

 

[VanguardLH]

Running WinXP Pro SP2 on Dell with 3G CPU and 2G RAM.

I bought a Seagate external hard drive for backup purposes and now I'm
looking for a good backup program. The one that came with the Seagate
isn't very good because it makes you backup on a schedule rather than
when you want and Microsoft's SyncToy is worthless because I don't
have all of my folders under My Documents so I have to make folder
pairs for each folder.

If there is something free out there that would be great. I'd like to
be able to have the program run and only change the folders/files that
have changed since the last time I backed up.

http://www.paragon-software.com/home/db-express/

Doesn't do incremental image backups but will do differential image
backups.

If you have 5 incremental backups since the prior full backup, all 6
backups must be available and usable to do the image restore; i.e., you
need full + incr1 + incr2 + incr3 + incr4 + incr5. Incrementals consume
the least disk space but only record the changes made since the prior
incremental backup. The longer the chain of backups the more vulnerable
you are to loss if one of the incrementals is not usable.

Differentials track changes made since the full backup, not from a prior
incremental or differential backup. Differentials consume more space
than incrementals but are smaller than full backups. Each differential
backup gets progressively larger since it records changes between now
and the last full backup. Restore only need 2 backups: full + diff.

Other free imaging programs usually only let you save full images.
Paragon is the only that I know of (so far) where its free version also
does something less than a full image, like a differential. I don't
know of a free one that does incremental image backups.

 

[VanguardLH]

But why bother with the incremental or differential backups, and their
limitations as mentioned, if a full and complete image backup only takes
about 10 minutes (at least over here, for 20 GB of data on C.

A full image consumes more disk space. If you are doing backups, it is
highly unlikely that you want only 1 backup. If all you want is 1
backup than use cloning. Typically you want a history of backups from
which to choose. For example, if you find that you are infected, it is
likely that several of your backups may be just as infected and you have
to walk back further to find a clean backup. Well, the more disk space
that gets consumed per backup means the less backups you can store on
your storage media for those backups. Incremental and differential
backups give you a greater depth in history of backups from which to
select a restore. Despite being cheap[er], disk space isn't free. If
getting more into the same size storage constrainment wasn't an issue,
utilities to compress multiple files into a .zip, .tar, .rar or other
archival filetype would never had showed up.

 

[choro]

Thanks. I will try to give xxclone a try. I am already using xcopy by
going to the DOS command center after copying and pasting one of the
appropriate xcopy commands with the required parameters from a word
.doc file for which I have put a shortcut on my desktop. This enables
me to copy folders and subfolders from the appropriate partitions on
any of the hard disks which I have installed on my computer.

But I feel it is now time to switch over to the new computer I have
built for myself as the motherboard on my old faithful won't support
SATA drives. The new motherboard is equipped with a fast four-core
AMD CPU as well as a very fast DDR3 graphics card plus a generous 4
GB DDR3 RAM. My old faithful will only take PATA HDs, AGP graphics
cards and much slower memory modules. But it still is my old
faithful and I am finding it hard to switch over to my newer
computer. I guess I am put off by having to reinstall all the
programs I have already installed on my old faithful and all the
tweaks I have made on my old faithful which incidentally is now a
full 10 years old. It was and remains my first true love!
I also have to admit that I am so happy with my Windows XP/SP3 that I
hesitate to move over to Windows 7.

One word of advice to those who might want to back up or actually to copy
their user files using the easy peasy xcopy command...

The xcopy command doesn't like blank spaces in folders on the second or
slave hard drive. While it will happily accept " My Documents" (with the
blank space) on the master C drive, it cannot cope with My Old Docs on say
the slave D drive.

So change the folder name on the second slave drive to " My_Old_Docs " (with
no blank spaces).

 

[Daave]

But why bother with the incremental or differential backups, and
their limitations as mentioned, if a full and complete image backup
only takes about 10 minutes (at least over here, for 20 GB of data
on C.

A full image consumes more disk space. If you are doing backups, it
is highly unlikely that you want only 1 backup. If all you want is 1
backup than use cloning. Typically you want a history of backups from
which to choose. For example, if you find that you are infected, it
is likely that several of your backups may be just as infected and
you have to walk back further to find a clean backup. Well, the more
disk space that gets consumed per backup means the less backups you
can store on your storage media for those backups. Incremental and
differential backups give you a greater depth in history of backups
from which to select a restore. Despite being cheap[er], disk space
isn't free. If getting more into the same size storage constrainment
wasn't an issue, utilities to compress multiple files into a .zip,
.tar, .rar or other archival filetype would never had showed up.

Excellent explanation.

 

[Daave]

I guess the tradeoff is: would you rather put up with the
limitations and potential liabilities of using incrementals and
differentials, or rather have a full and complete (and fresh
standalone) single image backup (admitedly with the disadvantage of
having some fewer backups to fall back on).

As long as the backup archives are validated, I would always opt for
more backups.