Images versus disk Clones

[Curt Christianson]

Thank you all for taking the time to read my question, although after all
the time I've spent in this and other NG's I feel I should know the answer.

I understand *some* of the basis differences between a disk image, and a
disk clone. Apparantly a clone may be bootable, an ready to run provided in
it installed in the proper BIOs channel along with it's coresponding
settings.

My understanding of any ISO image,it is not bootable and it is also a
bit-for-bit reproduction,--albeith in only ONE file?? Apparantly raw ISO
image is *not* bootiful. I don't understand this is that I thought an image
is a bit-by-bit exact copoy of the original.

I realize we don't usually use AUTOEXEC.BAT and more, or even ConFig.sys,
but there still must be bootable files on an ISO image, that left by
themselves just can boot. I know I'm missing something in the boot or file
structure anywhere, and would be so appreciative if one could explain it to
me, or know of a good site that, in this case, assumes I know
nothing.(That's getting closer all the time ;-(

Why for example can't i make a duplicate XP install disk as a back-up, using
the native "copy" command, and get it to boot?? AArrrrrgggggghhhhh! My
quess this all has to do with different file structures between medium.

Some kind of boot files do not allowed themselves to be copied in this
matter, and I want to know why.

If I take a simple DOS 6.22 disc, do a copy *.* to a destination drive, (CD)
it works flawlessly. Xp sure doesn't/won't do this As i've said, I'm open
to all ideas, lectures, or re-directs to other web-sites.

I' asking all this now becuse I've never been with the abiilty to back up,
and had a CD-rom burner before. It's high time **I**finally started usuing
backups. Yes Rock and others...you finally got through to me)!

Thank you for all you time and effort this rather lenght post, (nobody) has
every accussed my of not enough detail <VBG>

--
HTH,
Curt

Windows Support Center
www.aumha.org
Practically Nerded,...
http://dundats.mvps.org/Index.htm

 

[Pegasus \(MVP\)]

See below.

Thank you all for taking the time to read my question, although after all
the time I've spent in this and other NG's I feel I should know the
answer.

I understand *some* of the basis differences between a disk image, and a
disk clone. Apparantly a clone may be bootable, an ready to run provided
in
it installed in the proper BIOs channel along with it's coresponding
settings.

When people speak about disk images they usually mean an
image file that can be stored on a disk or on a CD/DVD.

My understanding of any ISO image,it is not bootable and it is also a
bit-for-bit reproduction,--albeith in only ONE file?? Apparantly raw ISO
image is *not* bootiful. I don't understand this is that I thought an
image
is a bit-by-bit exact copoy of the original.

Image files are not normally ISO images. They are written in a proprietary
format known to the supplier (e.g. Acronis, Ghost).

I realize we don't usually use AUTOEXEC.BAT and more, or even ConFig.sys,
but there still must be bootable files on an ISO image, that left by
themselves just can boot.

Here are the prerequisites for a WinXP boot:
- A Windows Master Boot Record (MBR)
- ntldr
- ntdetect.com
- boot.ini
All of these are stored in an image file and are put back into
place on a restore.

I know I'm missing something in the boot or file
structure anywhere, and would be so appreciative if one could explain it
to
me, or know of a good site that, in this case, assumes I know
nothing.(That's getting closer all the time ;-(

Why for example can't i make a duplicate XP install disk as a back-up,
using
the native "copy" command, and get it to boot??

If you mean "WinXP CD" when you write "duplicate XP install disk"
then the answer is: You can make a copy. Simply use the "copy"
function of your CD burner.

AArrrrrgggggghhhhh! My
quess this all has to do with different file structures between medium.

Some kind of boot files do not allowed themselves to be copied in this
matter, and I want to know why.

If I take a simple DOS 6.22 disc, do a copy *.* to a destination drive,
(CD)
it works flawlessly. Xp sure doesn't/won't do this As i've said, I'm
open
to all ideas, lectures, or re-directs to other web-sites.

You appear to mix up "installation disk" and "operating disk".

I' asking all this now becuse I've never been with the abiilty to back up,
and had a CD-rom burner before. It's high time **I**finally started
usuing
backups. Yes Rock and others...you finally got through to me)!

Buy a copy of an imaging program (e.g. Ghost, Acronis), then do this:
1. Create an image file.
2. Store it on a removeable disk.
3. Do a full restoration so that you know that it really works.

 

[Plato]

I understand *some* of the basis differences between a disk image, and a
disk clone. Apparantly a clone may be bootable, an ready to run provided in

http://www.xxclone.com/

 

[Gary S. Terhune]

Thank you all for taking the time to read my question, although after all
the time I've spent in this and other NG's I feel I should know the
answer.

I understand *some* of the basis differences between a disk image, and a
disk clone. Apparantly a clone may be bootable, an ready to run provided
in
it installed in the proper BIOs channel along with it's coresponding
settings.

My understanding of any ISO image,it is not bootable and it is also a
bit-for-bit reproduction,--albeith in only ONE file?? Apparantly raw ISO
image is *not* bootiful. I don't understand this is that I thought an
image
is a bit-by-bit exact copoy of the original.

ISO and other image files are usually compressed but in any they aren't an
exact copy (which is what a clone is.) They need to be "extracted" or
"restored" to be usable.

I realize we don't usually use AUTOEXEC.BAT and more, or even ConFig.sys,
but there still must be bootable files on an ISO image, that left by
themselves just can boot. I know I'm missing something in the boot or
file
structure anywhere, and would be so appreciative if one could explain it
to
me, or know of a good site that, in this case, assumes I know
nothing.(That's getting closer all the time ;-(

Why for example can't i make a duplicate XP install disk as a back-up,
using
the native "copy" command, and get it to boot?? AArrrrrgggggghhhhh!
My
quess this all has to do with different file structures between medium.

Some kind of boot files do not allowed themselves to be copied in this
matter, and I want to know why.

If I take a simple DOS 6.22 disc, do a copy *.* to a destination drive,
(CD)
it works flawlessly. Xp sure doesn't/won't do this As i've said, I'm
open
to all ideas, lectures, or re-directs to other web-sites.

I' asking all this now becuse I've never been with the abiilty to back up,
and had a CD-rom burner before. It's high time **I**finally started
usuing
backups. Yes Rock and others...you finally got through to me)!

Thank you for all you time and effort this rather lenght post, (nobody)
has
every accussed my of not enough detail <VBG>

COPY is a limited function utility. Other utilities do a better job, but
only a "clone" will be immediately bootable, since the MBR itself is
involved and no COPY or similar utility goes near the MBR.

 

[Rock]

Thank you all for taking the time to read my question, although after all
the time I've spent in this and other NG's I feel I should know the
answer.

I understand *some* of the basis differences between a disk image, and a
disk clone. Apparantly a clone may be bootable, an ready to run provided
in
it installed in the proper BIOs channel along with it's coresponding
settings.

A disk clone is a simple concept. It's an exact reproduction of the drive
(though some programs like Casper allow for cloning an individual partition
on a drive). Just substitute it for the original drive and use it.

My understanding of any ISO image,it is not bootable and it is also a
bit-for-bit reproduction,--albeith in only ONE file?? Apparantly raw ISO
image is *not* bootiful. I don't understand this is that I thought an
image
is a bit-by-bit exact copoy of the original.

Images created by disk imaging programs such as Acronis or Ghost are not an
..iso image. .iso is one format, often used to contain a bootable image that
can be burned to a CD by a suitable program. Acronis and Ghost use their
own proprietary formats. But basically it is a single file, normally
compressed, which contains all the data on that partition or drive. To use
that image it has to be restored to the drive using the program that created
it.

I realize we don't usually use AUTOEXEC.BAT and more, or even ConFig.sys,
but there still must be bootable files on an ISO image, that left by
themselves just can boot. I know I'm missing something in the boot or
file
structure anywhere, and would be so appreciative if one could explain it
to
me, or know of a good site that, in this case, assumes I know
nothing.(That's getting closer all the time ;-(

Why for example can't i make a duplicate XP install disk as a back-up,
using
the native "copy" command, and get it to boot?? AArrrrrgggggghhhhh!
My
quess this all has to do with different file structures between medium.

Some kind of boot files do not allowed themselves to be copied in this
matter, and I want to know why.

If I take a simple DOS 6.22 disc, do a copy *.* to a destination drive,
(CD)
it works flawlessly. Xp sure doesn't/won't do this As i've said, I'm
open
to all ideas, lectures, or re-directs to other web-sites.

I' asking all this now becuse I've never been with the abiilty to back up,
and had a CD-rom burner before. It's high time **I**finally started
usuing
backups. Yes Rock and others...you finally got through to me)!

Go all the way. Get an external hard drive and Acronis True Image Home
version 10. Update it to the latest build from the Acronis site if needed.
Image the sytem regularly to the external drive. You can also use ATI to do
file backup. Use that for redundancy to backup individual important files
to a different medium such as CD or DVD.

 

[Lil' Dave]

Apples and oranges you mix in your runon.

The way a CD boots, and a hard disk partition boots are completely
different.

An ISO image of a bootable CD does contain the boot portion of that CD.

A CD or DVD media is a D I S C, not a D I S K.

If used in the proper selection within the appropriate CD burning software,
like Nero, one can make an identical CD that the iso image was created from.
If the software is very old or very limited, it probably has no contengency
for making such.

You can start by providing specifics such as the make and version of the Cd
burning software you are using.

Dave

 

[Daave]

A disk clone is a simple concept. It's an exact reproduction of the
drive (though some programs like Casper allow for cloning an
individual partition on a drive). Just substitute it for the
original drive and use it.

When I think of clone (which I've never done), I think of something that
is identical. Does the best way to make a clone involve using the same
make and model of the hard drive? What happens if the size of the drive
is different?

 

[Uncle Grumpy]

When I think of clone (which I've never done), I think of something that
is identical. Does the best way to make a clone involve using the same
make and model of the hard drive? What happens if the size of the drive
is different?

As long as it's large enough to hold the original drive's contents, no
problem.

"Identical" means that all of the CONTENTS of the cloned drive are
identical to those on the original drive.

This ain't brain surgery.

 

[Lil' Dave]

When I think of clone (which I've never done), I think of something that
is identical. Does the best way to make a clone involve using the same
make and model of the hard drive? What happens if the size of the drive
is different?

There is no such thing as an identical hard drive. All hard drives have
minute unusable areas on their platters. These are mapped out in low level
formatting at the factory. As a consequence, the actual usable area on a
hard drive will be different, byte for byte, than another of same make and
model. Cloning software makes allowances for that on a minute scale.

Generally, cloning software will clone a small hard drive to a large hard
drive. May have the option of making use of the larger storage area in a
target drive by making all the partitions larger before the cloning begins
the procedure. Can't clone the contents of a larger hard drive a smaller
one if the larger hard drive is used to capacity with partition(s). This is
one button operation.

Partition copying software can copy a partition or partitions from one hard
drive to the other. If enough empty space is within that partition, it can
be shrunk to allow for a smaller capacity hard drive. This takes more user
interaction, and may take more time as well.

Generally, cloning software is a one time operation for cloning the contents
of one hard drive to the other. Most people don't do that very often.

Partitioning software is similar. But, may be used more often as it has
assets of shrinking and expanding individual partitions as well. As well as
creating, deleting, and moving partitions. Some offer a hide capability
(hide the file system contents from the OS) of partitions. More flexible.

Dave

 

[Anna]

When I think of clone (which I've never done), I think of something that
is identical. Does the best way to make a clone involve using the same
make and model of the hard drive? What happens if the size of the drive
is different?

Daave:
For all practical purposes, a disk clone is a clone is a clone is a clone.
While it is true that the cloned contents of the source HDD residing on the
destination HDD will not be an *exact* bit-for-bit copy of the source drive,
it is a true copy in every practical sense of the word, i.e., it will be
bootable and function precisely the same way as the source from which it was
cloned.

So you (and Rock) are right to think of a disk clone that, again, for all
practical purposes, is "identical" or an "exact reproduction".

With modern disk cloning/disk imaging programs such as Symantec's Norton
Ghost, Acronis True Image, Casper, etc., there is no need for the
destination HDD to be the same make and/or model of the source disk. All
that is necessary is that the destination drive contain sufficient disk
space to hold the cloned contents of the source drive. So, for example, if
your source HDD was 250 GB but contained only 110 GB of data, there would be
no problem cloning the contents of source drive to a 160 GB HDD.

Many users, we among them, use the disk cloning capability of a disk imaging
program for routine backup purposes. While it is true that (generally)
creating a disk-to-disk clone takes longer than creating a disk image, there
are certain advantages to the disk clone - one of which is that all the data
is immediately available on the recipient (destination) HDD. No recovery
process is necessary as one needs to undertake re the restoration process
involving one or more disk images.

The disk cloning program we are currently using and which we've been very
impressed with it the Casper 4.0 program (http://www.fssdev.com) . Perhaps
you've come across my recent detailed account of this program that I believe
I posted to this newsgroup. It's one you should look into if you're
interested in a disk cloning program.
Anna

 

[Rock]

When I think of clone (which I've never done), I think of something that
is identical. Does the best way to make a clone involve using the same
make and model of the hard drive? What happens if the size of the drive
is different?

No it doesn't have to be the same make/model/size of drive, it just has to
be large enough to hold the clone.