complete pc backup produces inconsistance results

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guest
  • Start date Start date
G

Guest

Hi,

I installed a clean XP Pro and the Vista Business upgrade along with a few
of my production apps.

I tried the new complete pc backup feature to create an image of the clean
installation just in case I had problems later.

When creating the image on the hard drive, it used about 10Gb. I did the
exact same backup straight after and it fit onto a single 4.7G dvd.

That didn't give me much confidence in the actual backup so I bought a third
party solution.

Any one else had this? It complained that it needed 20G to do the backup in
the first place.


regards

Justin.
 
Justin Time said:
Hi,

I installed a clean XP Pro and the Vista Business upgrade along with a few
of my production apps.

I tried the new complete pc backup feature to create an image of the clean
installation just in case I had problems later.

When creating the image on the hard drive, it used about 10Gb. I did the
exact same backup straight after and it fit onto a single 4.7G dvd.

That didn't give me much confidence in the actual backup so I bought a
third
party solution.

Any one else had this? It complained that it needed 20G to do the backup
in
the first place.
Click to expand...

PC Backup does not compress the image when it's created on a hard drive, but
it does compress it when created on a DVD. That's about a 2:1 compression
ratio which is good. The real test though comes in by checking that it will
restore. If you don't test it, then you can't rely on it.
 
Right. You have to willing to possibly sacrifice your system and test your
backup. If you don't you will always be uncertain as whether, or not, it
works.

--


Regards,

Richard Urban MVP
Microsoft Windows Shell/User
 
Right. You have to willing to possibly sacrifice your system and test your
backup. If you don't you will always be uncertain as whether, or not, it
works.
Click to expand...

I actually found the complete pc backup feature in ultimate to be very fast
& reliable.
I did many restores using it & it worked fine.
 
I also. But, until that first time you try it your really don't know. There
is always a doubt in the back of your mind that it may not work.

Better to try it on "your terms" rather than wait for a failure - 4 hours
before that critical paper is due for submission to the boss.

--


Regards,

Richard Urban MVP
Microsoft Windows Shell/User
 
Yes, true, it is worrying that 1st time you do a recovery.
I bought Ghost 10 & it backed up but *never* restored once for me, at all.
Won't be going there again.
Acronis all the way for me on XP.
Still say it's a shame Drive Image was assimilated into the Symantec
collective, that was a great, reliable product which never failed me once.

But if I had stayed with Vista, i'd have just used the built in utility.
I wasn't bothered about it not compressing the backup to a HDD as it made
backups faster...also restores were faster than Acronis.
 
Back
Top