few questions: Ghost 9 vs Ghost 2003

[JLS]

Hi newsgroup,

I used Norton Ghost 2003 for 2 years and was completely satisfied with
it. Now I installed Norton Systemworks 2005 (and therefore I had to
uninstall Gost 2003) and I now have Ghost 9 installed. My questions
are:
Is a Ghost 9 image as reliable as a Ghost 2003 image was? Ghot 2003
images were 100% reliable because they were created in DOS.
Can I continue working with windows while Gost 9 is creating a drive
image (in windows)?
What happens to the files I modify during the creation of the image
file? I guess these files will not be added to the image file?

Thanks for trying to help me
Jack

 

[Bob Harris]

GHOST 9 is based on PowerQuest's Drive Image, not on previous versions of
GHOST. (Symantec, the maker of GHOST, bought PowerQuest.)

I have used Drive Image at work, and it appears to be reliable. Thus, I
assume that GHOST 9 is also reliable. However, the version I use at work,
boots into DOS, does the image, then returns to windows, so it sounds like
an older version that you have. In my case, there is never a question of
"continuing working" while the image is being made. That is not possible
with the version I have experienced.

In general, I would recommend NOT touching the PC while a backup is being
made. The program probably makes a list of files to save, then marches down
the list, missing any newer ones. If necessary, let it run overnight.
Also, if the backup program has a feature to "verify" the image, run that
after the image is made. Aternatively, "mount" the image and see whether
you can extract a single file from it. GHOST 2003 and earlier had this
ability via a program called "GHOST Explorer".

 

[Leythos]

GHOST 9 is based on PowerQuest's Drive Image, not on previous versions of
GHOST. (Symantec, the maker of GHOST, bought PowerQuest.)

Symante didn't make Ghost 2003 either, in fact, BinaryResearch made the
Ghost products and a non-corporate version was licensed from BR for
Symnatec to distribute. BR use to sell a corp version at the same time
that Symantec did.

I still use Ghost 2003 for my Windows 2003/XP SP2 systems without any
issues.

Ghost 2003 and Symantec AV Corporate are the only Symantec products I
would install on any computer, never one of their suites.

 

[Plato]

I used Norton Ghost 2003 for 2 years and was completely satisfied with
it. Now I installed Norton Systemworks 2005 (and therefore I had to

Try xxclone. Free.
http://www.xxclone.com/