Cloning to an eSATA drive


B

Bill in Co.

In addition to making image backups of my system, I've recently used ATI to
make a clone of my main drive to an external eSATA drive enclosure, and it
checks out fine. (I use the nice Vantec external HD enclosures, which have
their own power switch built-in). (and I have two types of these: SATA and
USB), and I use the SATA enclosure for the clone backup).

But what I don't understand is this:

Unless I reboot once, the eSATA external drive isn't apparently seen by
windows after just turning it on (either in Windows Explorer or in Disk
Management), however I know it is being "picked up" as I can see some disk
activity when I turn it on (on both my internal and external drives).

This behavior doesn't happen with the USB external enclosure drives; there,
if you turn on the external USB drive enclosure, it instantly is recognized.

Is this by design?

At any rate, it makes it a bit inconvenient to make a clone using eSATA,
since one always has to reboot first to get it recognized by windows, and
that process takes a bit of time before it settles down as it assigns drive
letters and all that. And I don't need that anyway since when the clone is
made, the first thing that happens is it deletes all the partitions on the
backup drive, as expected.

My solution to this mess has been as follows:
Before making a clone, boot up on BootITNG (outside of windows!) and delete
all partitions in the old clone drive (windows is NOT loaded at this time).
THEN boot up into windows with the clone drive connected, and proceed making
the clone.
 
Ad

Advertisements

S

sgopus

I have had this same issue occur with me, I also do the same as you, attach
the drive and boot, it's seen and I can use ATI to create my clone.
 
A

Anna

Bill in Co. said:
In addition to making image backups of my system, I've recently used ATI
to make a clone of my main drive to an external eSATA drive enclosure, and
it checks out fine. (I use the nice Vantec external HD enclosures, which
have their own power switch built-in). (and I have two types of these:
SATA and USB), and I use the SATA enclosure for the clone backup).

But what I don't understand is this:

Unless I reboot once, the eSATA external drive isn't apparently seen by
windows after just turning it on (either in Windows Explorer or in Disk
Management), however I know it is being "picked up" as I can see some disk
activity when I turn it on (on both my internal and external drives).

This behavior doesn't happen with the USB external enclosure drives;
there, if you turn on the external USB drive enclosure, it instantly is
recognized.

Is this by design?

At any rate, it makes it a bit inconvenient to make a clone using eSATA,
since one always has to reboot first to get it recognized by windows, and
that process takes a bit of time before it settles down as it assigns
drive letters and all that. And I don't need that anyway since when the
clone is made, the first thing that happens is it deletes all the
partitions on the backup drive, as expected.

My solution to this mess has been as follows:
Before making a clone, boot up on BootITNG (outside of windows!) and
delete all partitions in the old clone drive (windows is NOT loaded at
this time). THEN boot up into windows with the clone drive connected, and
proceed making the clone.


Bill:
I assume you're working with an Intel-based system. This "hot-plugging"
(lack of SATA device recognition) has been a problem with Intel chipsets
(even up to Intel's latest ICH10 SATA controller) at least with respect to
the XP OS environment. Theoretically this lack of SATA device recognition
(in terms of the device being "hot-pluggable") should be overcome by setting
the BIOS SATA controller mode to the AHCI setting, however it seems that
this mode while supported in Vista is not supported in XP. So the result (at
least based upon my experience) is a failure to boot the system when the
AHCI mode setting is selected.

We haven't run into the same problem with AMD-based systems (at least those
I've worked with, not including AMD's latest offerings). There the BIOS
default settings re the SATA HDD seem to work just fine and the external
SATA HDD (either SATA or eSATA) are "hot-pluggable" ("hot-swappable")
without further ado. (I would like to hear from anyone who has worked with
AMD's Phenom II X3 & X4 processors and hear their experience re this issue).

But if you are working with an Intel-based system there's a relatively
simple workaround to effect the "hot-pluggability" of an external SATA HDD
without the need to reboot the system. After the device is connected &
powered-on, access Device Manager (WinKey + Pause key, Hardware tab, Device
Manager or place a shortcut on your Desktop) and click Action, Scan for
hardware changes. The system will then detect the external SATA HDD.
Admittedly a bit of a pain but it beats rebooting, no?

If anyone coming upon this thread has had different experiences than I've
recounted re this issue with Intel-based systems, i.e., they've been able to
manipulate BIOS settings to effect this "hot-plugging", "hot-swappable"
capability re externally-connected SATA HDDs in a non-RAID configuration
without the "workaround" I mentioned above, then I would certainly like to
hear about it.
Anna
 
B

Bill in Co.

Anna said:
Bill:
I assume you're working with an Intel-based system. This "hot-plugging"
(lack of SATA device recognition) has been a problem with Intel chipsets
(even up to Intel's latest ICH10 SATA controller) at least with respect to
the XP OS environment. Theoretically this lack of SATA device recognition
(in terms of the device being "hot-pluggable") should be overcome by
setting
the BIOS SATA controller mode to the AHCI setting, however it seems that
this mode while supported in Vista is not supported in XP. So the result
(at
least based upon my experience) is a failure to boot the system when the
AHCI mode setting is selected.

Amazing that hot swappable SATA isn't the default, especially considering
that SATA is so much newer than USB. I can't understand why Intel didn't
get with the program on this. But I haven't checked the BIOS setting on
that yet.
We haven't run into the same problem with AMD-based systems (at least
those
I've worked with, not including AMD's latest offerings). There the BIOS
default settings re the SATA HDD seem to work just fine and the external
SATA HDD (either SATA or eSATA) are "hot-pluggable" ("hot-swappable")
without further ado. (I would like to hear from anyone who has worked with
AMD's Phenom II X3 & X4 processors and hear their experience re this
issue).

But if you are working with an Intel-based system there's a relatively
simple workaround to effect the "hot-pluggability" of an external SATA HDD
without the need to reboot the system. After the device is connected &
powered-on, access Device Manager (WinKey + Pause key, Hardware tab,
Device
Manager or place a shortcut on your Desktop) and click Action, Scan for
hardware changes. The system will then detect the external SATA HDD.
Admittedly a bit of a pain but it beats rebooting, no?

Sounds like it, thanks! However, I assume that when I do this, it's still
going to take a fair amount of time (just like it did after rebooting) for
the disk to be fully recognized in windows again? (When I did it my way
after rebooting, it took a few minutes for that backup drive to get fully
recognized by windows).

I guess one advantage of doing it outside of Windows (using BootItNG on a
floppy or Flash drive) is that after that is done (in its DOS-like bootdisk
environment, which is very quick), and then we boot up into Windows, it's
very fast (since all the partitions were already removed). (All this in
preparation for the new cloning operation)

A second comment:

Of course, the other thing that is a pain is always having to remember to at
least initialize the clone once *without* the normal internal system HD
connected (so I have to pull the case off, and disconnect it, temporarily -
a bit of a nuisance). It would nice if I could avoid that step by simply
changing the BIOS boot disk priority settings, but I don't think that alone
will work (so long as the other drive is connected, I mean). But maybe??

However, I think you said this disconnect step wasn't necessary with Casper
though, but I'm not sure. However if that is indeed the case, then Casper
must somehow get the system to write a new disk signature to the backup
drive even though the other drive is still connected? If that's the case,
I don't understand why ATI can't do that too.
 
A

Anna

Bill in Co. said:
Amazing that hot swappable SATA isn't the default, especially considering
that SATA is so much newer than USB. I can't understand why Intel
didn't get with the program on this. But I haven't checked the BIOS
setting on that yet.
Sounds like it, thanks! However, I assume that when I do this, it's
still going to take a fair amount of time (just like it did after
rebooting) for the disk to be fully recognized in windows again? (When
I did it my way after rebooting, it took a few minutes for that backup
drive to get fully recognized by windows).


Bill:
While the SATA device recognition will not be instantaneous, the system will
detect the SATA HDD fairly quickly. Surely a lot quicker than having to
reboot the system to effect device recognition.
Anna



Bill in Co. said:
A second comment:

Of course, the other thing that is a pain is always having to remember to
at least initialize the clone once *without* the normal internal system HD
connected (so I have to pull the case off, and disconnect it,
temporarily - a bit of a nuisance). It would nice if I could avoid that
step by simply changing the BIOS boot disk priority settings, but I don't
think that alone will work (so long as the other drive is connected, I
mean). But maybe??

However, I think you said this disconnect step wasn't necessary with
Casper though, but I'm not sure. However if that is indeed the case,
then Casper must somehow get the system to write a new disk signature to
the backup drive even though the other drive is still connected? If
that's the case, I don't understand why ATI can't do that too.


Bill:
Yes, you've got it right insofar as the Casper 5 disk-cloning program. There
is *no* need to disconnect the source HDD following the disk-cloning
operation and boot only with the cloned (internal or external eSATA) HDD
connected. It simply doesn't matter whether the cloned HDD is connected
during the initial boot to the source HDD immediately following the
disk-cloning operation.

Nor is it necessary to directly boot to the cloned HDD with the source HDD
disconnected immediately following the disk-cloning operation. (Naturally
many users may want to do this if only for the sake of determining that the
clone "took" and the cloned HDD is indeed a bootable device. But it's
unnecessary to prevent the possible problem to which you're referring). It's
another reason why we prefer the Casper 5 program as a comprehensive backup
program for a wide range of PC users.
Anna
 
B

Bill in Co.

UPDATE: I checked the BIOS settings, and that option is not present on
mine.

UPDATE: As I mentioned, I checked the BIOS settings, and that ACHI option
is not present on my system. More below.
Bill:
While the SATA device recognition will not be instantaneous, the system
will
detect the SATA HDD fairly quickly. Surely a lot quicker than having to
reboot the system to effect device recognition.
Anna

Right. Let me ask you this, Anna: does it end up doing exactly the same
thing, or does it just do a quick scan and leave it at that (and not go
through all the dvice recognition and setup stuff it does when it reboots)?

I'm guessing it does exactly the same thing, though, but at least saves the
reboot time - but only that. IOW, there will still be a device
recognition time of a few minutes where it sets up all the drive letters and
all that. More below.

Bill:
Yes, you've got it right insofar as the Casper 5 disk-cloning program.
There
is *no* need to disconnect the source HDD following the disk-cloning
operation and boot only with the cloned (internal or external eSATA) HDD
connected. It simply doesn't matter whether the cloned HDD is connected
during the initial boot to the source HDD immediately following the
disk-cloning operation.

Nor is it necessary to directly boot to the cloned HDD with the source HDD
disconnected immediately following the disk-cloning operation. (Naturally
many users may want to do this if only for the sake of determining that
the
clone "took" and the cloned HDD is indeed a bootable device. But it's
unnecessary to prevent the possible problem to which you're referring).
It's
another reason why we prefer the Casper 5 program as a comprehensive
backup program for a wide range of PC users.
Anna

OK, I'm going to look into this a bit more, and try to "get to the bottom of
it" (as to why it can do that, but ATI can't, or whatever). Evidently
Casper must then rewrite the clone HD signature to the clone drive's MBR
*right after making it* (and it has to be rewritten, because it still
contains the identical cloned MBR values from the source drive, and that
signature must be unique for each HD). At least as I understand it.

Not having to open up the case and disconnect the main drive, and then
having to boot up one time on the clone to make sure its properly
initialized, and then having to shut down and disconnectting the clone and
reconnecting the main drive once again (AND resetting the BIOS boot device
priority along the way) would be a nice thing.
 
Ad

Advertisements

T

Timothy Daniels

"Andy" <wrote:
I recently checked out True Image Home 2009 and Casper 5
by cloning a triple boot disk containing Windows XP, Windows
Vista, and Windows 7 RC. Both programs cloned the disk
correctly, meaning that the clone had a unique disk signature,
and the MountedDevices entries in the registries of the three
operating systems were properly modified to reflect the disk
signature and partition offsets.

This is major news for users of those utilities! But now we'll
have to add at the end of every rendition of proper cloning
procedure, "But if you use TI 2009 or Casper 5, you don't
have to do this." What a pain! :)

*TimDaniels*
 
A

Anna

Timothy Daniels said:
This is major news for users of those utilities! But now we'll
have to add at the end of every rendition of proper cloning
procedure, "But if you use TI 2009 or Casper 5, you don't
have to do this." What a pain! :)

*TimDaniels*


Tim:
While it would be "major news" insofar as the ATI program is concerned,
based on my experience over a nearly three-year period with the Casper 4 and
(current) Casper 5 programs, this capability has *always* been present in
the Casper programs as I described in my previous post to "Bill in Co.".
Anna
 
B

Bill in Co.

Anna said:
Tim:
While it would be "major news" insofar as the ATI program is concerned,
based on my experience over a nearly three-year period with the Casper 4
and
(current) Casper 5 programs, this capability has *always* been present in
the Casper programs as I described in my previous post to "Bill in Co.".
Anna

What is interesting is that when I went to both of their websites, and
looked at the support sections and the FAQs there, I couldn't find this
specific issue being addressed explicitly (nor in their documentation files
which I also have).

Also, if one is using the previous version of ATI Home (11.0), I thought I
had read of some reader comments of possible incompatibilities between the
newer and older versions, but I can't recall now. Maybe it was just that
if you make an image with the newer version, the older one can't use it,
which would make sense.

Anna, did you see my last post where I asked you a couple of more questions?
 
B

Bill in Co.

Timothy said:
"Andy" <wrote:

This is major news for users of those utilities! But now we'll
have to add at the end of every rendition of proper cloning
procedure, "But if you use TI 2009 or Casper 5, you don't
have to do this." What a pain! :)

*TimDaniels*

It would be nice if that change was documented somewhere (either at their
web site or in their documentation).

But also, as I said to Anna, there may have been some potential
incompatabilities between using the older and newer versions of ATI? Or
maybe it was just that you can't use the older version with the newer
version images. I can't recall now what some of the reader comments on the
new version of ATI were, bugt I do remember reading of some possible issues.
 
A

Anna

Bill in Co. said:
What is interesting is that when I went to both of their websites, and
looked at the support sections and the FAQs there, I couldn't find this
specific issue being addressed explicitly (nor in their documentation
files which I also have).

Also, if one is using the previous version of ATI Home (11.0), I thought I
had read of some reader comments of possible incompatibilities between the
newer and older versions, but I can't recall now. Maybe it was just that
if you make an image with the newer version, the older one can't use it,
which would make sense.

Anna, did you see my last post where I asked you a couple of more
questions?


Bill,
AFAIK, the developer of Casper has never "ballyhooed" that capability
although based on our extensive experience with both the versions 4 & 5 it
has been present. At least based upon our experience undertaking or being
involved with hundreds of disk-cloning operations with those versions we
have never once run into the problem that made it necessary to disconnect
one or the other of the source-destination drives following a disk-cloning
operation.

Note that Andy was referring to the latest version of Acronis True Image so
perhaps that "fix" insofar as the Acronis program is concerned had its
genesis beginning with the 2009 version. I know the (potential) problem
existed re the ATI Home programs through version 10, but I don't know (from
personal experience) whether it existed in their version 11 (since I had
limited experience with that version) although I do recall reading reports
that the problem could still arise with that version.

As to the other questions you raised in a prior post (different thread)...

As best as I could find, are these what you're referring to?...

Bill in Co. said:
However, I assume that when I do this, it's still going to take a fair
amount of time (just like it did after rebooting) for the disk to be fully
recognized in windows again? (When I did it my way after rebooting, it
took a few minutes for that backup drive to get fully recognized by
windows).

(Where you were referring to the "Scan for hardware changes" item in Device
Manager that I had suggested to invoke in order for the system to detect an
eSATA-connected HDD).

My response was...
While the SATA device recognition will not be instantaneous, the system will
detect the SATA HDD fairly quickly. Surely a lot quicker than having to
reboot the system to effect device recognition.


You also asked...
Of course, the other thing that is a pain is always having to remember to
at least initialize the clone once *without* the normal internal system HD
connected (so I have to pull the case off, and disconnect it,
temporarily - a bit of a nuisance). It would nice if I could avoid that
step by simply changing the BIOS boot disk priority settings, but I don't
think that alone will work (so long as the other drive is connected, I
mean). But maybe??

However, I think you said this disconnect step wasn't necessary with
Casper though, but I'm not sure. However if that is indeed the case,
then Casper must somehow get the system to write a new disk signature to
the backup drive even though the other drive is still connected? If
that's the case, I don't understand why ATI can't do that too.

My response was...
Yes, you've got it right insofar as the Casper 5 disk-cloning program. There
is *no* need to disconnect the source HDD following the disk-cloning
operation and boot only with the cloned (internal or external eSATA) HDD
connected. It simply doesn't matter whether the cloned HDD is connected
during the initial boot to the source HDD immediately following the
disk-cloning operation.

Nor is it necessary to directly boot to the cloned HDD with the source HDD
disconnected immediately following the disk-cloning operation. (Naturally
many users may want to do this if only for the sake of determining that the
clone "took" and the cloned HDD is indeed a bootable device. But it's
unnecessary to prevent the possible problem to which you're referring). It's
another reason why we prefer the Casper 5 program as a comprehensive backup
program for a wide range of PC users.


I don't recall if your raised other questions.
Anna
 
Ad

Advertisements

T

Timothy Daniels

Anna said:
While it would be "major news" insofar as the ATI program is concerned, based on my experience over a nearly
three-year period with the Casper 4
and (current) Casper 5 programs, this capability has *always* been
present in the Casper programs as I described in my previous post to
"Bill in Co.".
Anna

I am reminded of the one of the reasons why light aircraft airframe and
engine design haven't progressed much since the 1950s, and even 1940s
in some cases - because a major change in design implies an inadequacy
in the previous design, and armies of widows, orphans, and their lawyers
would destroy the light aircraft industry. If a cloning utilitiy publisher
fixed an unannounced flaw in its previous version (and announced the fix),
businesses which lost data due to that flaw would swamp it with lawsuits,
or at least with bad publicity. Better in that case to just fix it quietly.

I do remember losing documents after a cloning operation, and I
discovered it accidentally while checking out the new clone which I had
booted up without disconnecting the "parent" OS's hard drive. I think I
was using Drive Image then, which Symantec subsequently bought and
renamed "Ghost" to replace its own "Ghost". But in my switch to using
Casper (then called "CasperXP"), I never bothered to undertake the
investigation to see whether the clone could be booted for its 1st run
in the presence of its "parent" OS - I just continued my cautious
procedure. So, as far as I've heard, no one has determined whether
CasperXP had "fixed" the problem by then, or whether a later version
of Casper did it. Since I still use CasperXP on my desktop system,
and since I have DPST toggle switches to put one or the other HD
off-line without opening the case, I'll just continue the procedure
until I get a new desktop and new Casper.

*TimDaniels*
 
B

Bill in Co.

But maybe the slightly older Acronis True Image ver 11.0 didn't have this
problem either?

I haven't tried that out yet (I mean with both drives connected right after
cloning, instead of temporarily disconnecting the main drive at first boot
up, as is generally procedurally recommended).

More below...
Bill,
AFAIK, the developer of Casper has never "ballyhooed" that capability
although based on our extensive experience with both the versions 4 & 5 it
has been present. At least based upon our experience undertaking or being
involved with hundreds of disk-cloning operations with those versions we
have never once run into the problem that made it necessary to disconnect
one or the other of the source-destination drives following a disk-cloning
operation.

Note that Andy was referring to the latest version of Acronis True Image
so
perhaps that "fix" insofar as the Acronis program is concerned had its
genesis beginning with the 2009 version. I know the (potential) problem
existed re the ATI Home programs through version 10, but I don't know
(from
personal experience) whether it existed in their version 11 (since I had
limited experience with that version) although I do recall reading reports
that the problem could still arise with that version.

I don't know for sure if it exists with ATI Home ver 11.0. I just assumed
from all the dire warnings posted in here that one needs to at least once
boot up on the clone with the other (source) drive disconnected, but that
may have been just a generality, and not necessary needed for Acronis True
Image Home ver 11.0.
As to the other questions you raised in a prior post (different thread)...

As best as I could find, are these what you're referring to?...



(Where you were referring to the "Scan for hardware changes" item in
Device
Manager that I had suggested to invoke in order for the system to detect
an
eSATA-connected HDD).

My response was...
While the SATA device recognition will not be instantaneous, the system
will
detect the SATA HDD fairly quickly. Surely a lot quicker than having to
reboot the system to effect device recognition.

I was asking if it still goes through the same process of assigning drive
letters and setting it up exactly as it would do by rebooting, or if it
simply "initializes" recognizing the drive, and that's it (which would be
much quicker). (I'm guessing just doing that alone is not possible though;
i.e., when it recognizes the drive, it also starts setting up all the drive
letters, and going through the whole shebang process).
You also asked...

Interestingly I could never find any documentation on either product's site
(ATI or Casper), or in their manuals, explicitly documenting this rewriting
a new HD signature thing. Too technical, I guess. It would help clarify
it though.
My response was...
Yes, you've got it right insofar as the Casper 5 disk-cloning program.
There
is *no* need to disconnect the source HDD following the disk-cloning
operation and boot only with the cloned (internal or external eSATA) HDD
connected. It simply doesn't matter whether the cloned HDD is connected
during the initial boot to the source HDD immediately following the
disk-cloning operation.

Nor is it necessary to directly boot to the cloned HDD with the source HDD
disconnected immediately following the disk-cloning operation. (Naturally
many users may want to do this if only for the sake of determining that
the
clone "took" and the cloned HDD is indeed a bootable device. But it's
unnecessary to prevent the possible problem to which you're referring).
It's
another reason why we prefer the Casper 5 program as a comprehensive
backup program for a wide range of PC users.


I don't recall if your raised other questions.
Anna

Well, I think you've mostly covered it, Anna, except for some comments I
made above, so thanks.
 
B

Bill in Co.

Timothy said:
I am reminded of the one of the reasons why light aircraft airframe and
engine design haven't progressed much since the 1950s, and even 1940s
in some cases - because a major change in design implies an inadequacy
in the previous design, and armies of widows, orphans, and their lawyers
would destroy the light aircraft industry. If a cloning utilitiy
publisher
fixed an unannounced flaw in its previous version (and announced the fix),
businesses which lost data due to that flaw would swamp it with lawsuits,
or at least with bad publicity. Better in that case to just fix it
quietly.

I do remember losing documents after a cloning operation, and I
discovered it accidentally while checking out the new clone which I had
booted up without disconnecting the "parent" OS's hard drive. I think I
was using Drive Image then, which Symantec subsequently bought and
renamed "Ghost" to replace its own "Ghost". But in my switch to using
Casper (then called "CasperXP"), I never bothered to undertake the
investigation to see whether the clone could be booted for its 1st run
in the presence of its "parent" OS - I just continued my cautious
procedure. So, as far as I've heard, no one has determined whether
CasperXP had "fixed" the problem by then, or whether a later version
of Casper did it. Since I still use CasperXP on my desktop system,
and since I have DPST toggle switches to put one or the other HD
off-line without opening the case, I'll just continue the procedure
until I get a new desktop and new Casper.

*TimDaniels*

Well, I was thinking I might want to upgrade to ATI 2009 (or get Casper)
because of this potential cloning problem, but possibly Acronis True Image
ver 11.0 (the immediate predecessor to ATI 2009) doesn't even have this
potential cloning problem, afterall!! It would be nice to know if someone
has actually tried it out with that version (11.0) (meaning making the
clone and leaving both drives (clone and the main drive) connected and
rebooting WITHOUT having to at least once disconnect the main source drive)
 
A

Anna

Timothy Daniels said:
I am reminded of the one of the reasons why light aircraft airframe and
engine design haven't progressed much since the 1950s, and even 1940s
in some cases - because a major change in design implies an inadequacy
in the previous design, and armies of widows, orphans, and their lawyers
would destroy the light aircraft industry. If a cloning utilitiy
publisher
fixed an unannounced flaw in its previous version (and announced the fix),
businesses which lost data due to that flaw would swamp it with lawsuits,
or at least with bad publicity. Better in that case to just fix it
quietly.

I do remember losing documents after a cloning operation, and I
discovered it accidentally while checking out the new clone which I had
booted up without disconnecting the "parent" OS's hard drive. I think I
was using Drive Image then, which Symantec subsequently bought and
renamed "Ghost" to replace its own "Ghost". But in my switch to using
Casper (then called "CasperXP"), I never bothered to undertake the
investigation to see whether the clone could be booted for its 1st run
in the presence of its "parent" OS - I just continued my cautious
procedure. So, as far as I've heard, no one has determined whether
CasperXP had "fixed" the problem by then, or whether a later version
of Casper did it. Since I still use CasperXP on my desktop system,
and since I have DPST toggle switches to put one or the other HD
off-line without opening the case, I'll just continue the procedure
until I get a new desktop and new Casper.

*TimDaniels*


Tim:
As long as it (Casper XP) works for you that's all that matters. I think
we've had this discussion before re Casper XP. We were never thrilled with
that program and gave it up soon after using it. We found the later-released
Casper 4 program far superior and subsequently the newer (present) Casper 5
version (quite similar to the 4 version in our experience).

Assuming you haven't already done so, why don't you give the trial version
of Casper 5 a workout?
Anna
 
Ad

Advertisements

Ad

Advertisements


Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Top