QUE: Ghost Image sizes vary

[Buckwheat]

I have a 4GB partition on which I have installed WinXP Professional, SP1a.
I created a Ghost Image for this configuration using High compression. The
image file is 1.1 GB. I then installed W2K by formatting the 4GB partition.
I created a Ghost Image for this partition and stored it on the local disk,
just like the XP image. The W2K image is only 698MB. Why is there such a
vast difference in size??? My goal was to create images that would fit onto
CD so that I could use a boot floppy with CD drivers and not be
disk-dependent.

 

[kurttrail]

I have a 4GB partition on which I have installed WinXP Professional,
SP1a. I created a Ghost Image for this configuration using High
compression. The image file is 1.1 GB. I then installed W2K by
formatting the 4GB partition. I created a Ghost Image for this
partition and stored it on the local disk, just like the XP image.
The W2K image is only 698MB. Why is there such a vast difference in
size??? My goal was to create images that would fit onto CD so that
I could use a boot floppy with CD drivers and not be disk-dependent.

XP is just 2K with a lot of useless bloatware.

2K = NT 5.0
XP = NT 5.1

..1 for mostly useless crap. That's why many major corporations have yet to
upgrade there systems to XP even though they have legitimate volume licenses
to move to XP, because the only thing XP really does better than 2K is crash
more often.

Look at it this way:

XP is to 2K, as ME is to 98SE.

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei!"

 

[Mike Kolitz]

I would check to make sure that there wasn't anything in the recycling bin
in your XP image. That could potentially bloat the image to a larger size,
though you'd have to have a lot of junk to get it that big...

What version of Ghost are you using to create the images?

--
Mike Kolitz MCSE 2000
MS-MVP - Windows Setup and Deployment

Remember to check Windows Update often,
and apply the patches marked as Critical!
http://windowsupdate.microsoft.com

Protect your PC!
http://www.microsoft.com/security/protect

 

[Guest]

WinXP will usually end up getting you a significantly larger image than Win2k.
Partially because there is more stuff in WinXP, but largely because of things
like the System Restore, driver backups, update patch backups, etc.
If you turn System Restore off & then back on just before doing your image, it
will remove the System Restore points, and save you some space. If you are
imaging a well-working system, you should not need the restore points, anyway.
You could probably remove a lot of the update patch backups, too (see
http://www.dougknox.com/ and look for the RemoveHotfixBackup utility -
unfortunately, the latest version only works for XP, not 2000)

You can ignore the pagefile - Ghost doesn't bother copying the contents of
this, anyway (as far as I can tell).

|I would check to make sure that there wasn't anything in the recycling bin
|in your XP image. That could potentially bloat the image to a larger size,
|though you'd have to have a lot of junk to get it that big...
|
|What version of Ghost are you using to create the images?

 

[CS]

I have a 4GB partition on which I have installed WinXP Professional, SP1a.
I created a Ghost Image for this configuration using High compression. The
image file is 1.1 GB. I then installed W2K by formatting the 4GB partition.
I created a Ghost Image for this partition and stored it on the local disk,
just like the XP image. The W2K image is only 698MB. Why is there such a
vast difference in size??? My goal was to create images that would fit onto
CD so that I could use a boot floppy with CD drivers and not be
disk-dependent.

The difference in image size relates to the difference in the size of
the installation. XP Home is at least 25% larger (takes up more disk
space) than Win2000 Pro. XP Pro takes up more disk space than the
Home edition. At least that has been my experience with them. I'm
using Drive Image and my XP image is around 1gb while my Win2000 image
is only around 600mb. Of course it also depends on what else you have
installed in addition to the OS.

 

[kurttrail]

I would check to make sure that there wasn't anything in the
recycling bin in your XP image. That could potentially bloat the
image to a larger size, though you'd have to have a lot of junk to
get it that big...

What version of Ghost are you using to create the images?

Can't you accept the fact that 2K has a smaller footprint than XP?

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei!"

 

[Mike Kolitz]

Our Ghost images for Windows 2000 and Windows XP are about 600MB and about
720MB respectively. Both using high compression, both in a similar
configuration.

--
Mike Kolitz MCSE 2000
MS-MVP - Windows Setup and Deployment

Remember to check Windows Update often,
and apply the patches marked as Critical!
http://windowsupdate.microsoft.com

Protect your PC!
http://www.microsoft.com/security/protect

 

[Guest]

Um, well, lets see..

Every OS has been ever so much larger than the last one. Remeber when
Windows 3.11 was on floppies?

WinXP is the latest OS and of course it's gonna take a much larger chunk out
of your system. Hell, it only has over 1 Million lines of code in it.

Wait till you see what the 64-Bit version will do.

The space needed is normal so don't freak out. Read the system requirements
and you see.

 

[Armando]

Paul,

If it crashes often then obviously you're the one screwing it up. I've been
running XP at work, 8-9 hours a day, 5 days a week for the last 2 years and
I don't shut it off on the weekends. It's been running solid without a
reboot for over 6 months without a hiccup, and my laptop at home running it
has never crashed either (mind you neither has my slackware linux box).

Perhaps if you knew what you were doing then you'd know that using the
proper tools you can strip out a lot of the extra features to streamline an
image, and we at work seem to have no problem doing this. But obviously the
only thing you know how to do is hang around in newsgroups and whine like a
lame puppy because you don't have a clue what you're doing. Instead of
trying to offer a viable answer to someone in need, you automatically attack
the software to hide your own blatant ineptitude and lack of any knowledge
whatsoever. I see a hundred people like you in newsgroups and mailing lists
every week and I and other people on those lists are constantly forced to
delete messages from people like you that do nothing but show us exactly how
many useless twits there are in this world.

Here's an idea for you - stop whining like a little bitch: either help
people out, or get the hell out. It's not a hard choice - and all it takes
is to click on the 'Unsubscribe' button - if you can find it that is.

And to quote you - Peace!

Armando
Self-Appointed "Moron Basher"

P.S. I'll fully expect your response to contain something along the lines of
you being a network administrator or running (pick one - Unix, Linux,
FreeBSD) on all your machines, or asking me some trivial bit of knowledge
that you looked up on the Internet to try and make make yourself look smart,
or something else not-so-clever like that. Anytime I cut and paste one of my
'moron basher' messages into a newsgroup, that's all the responses I ever
get. Funny isn't it?

 

[kurttrail]

Paul,

If it crashes often then obviously you're the one screwing it up.
I've been running XP at work, 8-9 hours a day, 5 days a week for the
last 2 years and I don't shut it off on the weekends. It's been
running solid without a reboot for over 6 months without a hiccup,
and my laptop at home running it has never crashed either (mind you
neither has my slackware linux box).

Perhaps if you knew what you were doing then you'd know that using the
proper tools you can strip out a lot of the extra features to
streamline an image, and we at work seem to have no problem doing
this. But obviously the only thing you know how to do is hang around
in newsgroups and whine like a lame puppy because you don't have a
clue what you're doing. Instead of trying to offer a viable answer to
someone in need, you automatically attack the software to hide your
own blatant ineptitude and lack of any knowledge whatsoever. I see a
hundred people like you in newsgroups and mailing lists every week
and I and other people on those lists are constantly forced to delete
messages from people like you that do nothing but show us exactly how
many useless twits there are in this world.

Here's an idea for you - stop whining like a little bitch: either help
people out, or get the hell out. It's not a hard choice - and all it
takes is to click on the 'Unsubscribe' button - if you can find it
that is.

And to quote you - Peace!

Armando
Self-Appointed "Moron Basher"

P.S. I'll fully expect your response to contain something along the
lines of you being a network administrator or running (pick one -
Unix, Linux, FreeBSD) on all your machines, or asking me some trivial
bit of knowledge that you looked up on the Internet to try and make
make yourself look smart, or something else not-so-clever like that.
Anytime I cut and paste one of my 'moron basher' messages into a
newsgroup, that's all the responses I ever get. Funny isn't it?

Sounds to me like you are the one that is doing all of the whining around
here, as all I did was compare one MS OS with another one. And nothing in
your whole delusional diatribe about me disputed my contention that all XP
is, is 2K with a lot of bloatware, just like ME was 98SE with a lot of
useless experimental XP bloat.

I don't need to go off on wild imaginary tangents to try to build myself up
in my own mind, though obviously you do. Funny, isn't it? <vbg>

Naw! The funny part is that you don't see that you basically did what you
predicted I would do! You should just drop the "Basher" part of your sig
for being a closer resemblence to the truth! ;-)

Now it's time for my prediction, either you'll run away with your tail
tucked, or you go on whining & ranting about me, but whatever you'll do, you
definitely won't argue about whether XP isn't just 2K with a lot of
bloatware, or not, like a rational human being.

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei!"

 

[Buckwheat]

Actually, I was under the impression that when Ghost makes its image, it
uses the whole partition. Ergo, if both OSes are on a 4 GB partition, the
images should be relatively the same size. Obviously, this isn't the case.

So, you just take it for granted, without asking questions, when the next
generation of OS is larger? "It's the latest version so I guess its
supposed to be double the size." Not a very wise philosophy, my friend.

No one is freaking. Just asking questions.

 

[Buckwheat]

Good points. Thanks.

I would check to make sure that there wasn't anything in the recycling bin
in your XP image. That could potentially bloat the image to a larger size,
though you'd have to have a lot of junk to get it that big...

What version of Ghost are you using to create the images?

--
Mike Kolitz MCSE 2000
MS-MVP - Windows Setup and Deployment

Remember to check Windows Update often,
and apply the patches marked as Critical!
http://windowsupdate.microsoft.com

Protect your PC!
http://www.microsoft.com/security/protect

 

[Buckwheat]

More good points, thanks.

 

[Buckwheat]

Who is Paul??

So, you haven't applied any updates or patches to it in 6 months?? (I.e.
which required a reboot)

Other than that, I agree with you. "kurttrail" should change his name to
"kurtTROLL".

Here is a good site about dealing with trolls like kurttrail:

http://members.aol.com/intwg/trolls.htm

Ultimately, don't feed the troll or he will get bigger and prolific in his
troll behavior.

 

[kurttrail]

Who is Paul??

So, you haven't applied any updates or patches to it in 6 months??
(I.e. which required a reboot)

Other than that, I agree with you. "kurttrail" should change his
name to "kurtTROLL".

Here is a good site about dealing with trolls like kurttrail:

http://members.aol.com/intwg/trolls.htm

Ultimately, don't feed the troll or he will get bigger and prolific
in his troll behavior.

What you morons don't understand, is that if I really were a troll,
telling people not to feed me would also tend to re-enforce ever greater
acts of troll-like behavior.

If you really don't want to feed someone you have a suspicion is a
troll, the best course of action is to ignore them completely, and if
you want to warn someone you do it out of public view. Unfortunately
for all you MicroBorg, I am not a troll, and I am very hard, if not
nearly impossible to ignore.

I'm supposed to be the troll, yet none of you have yet to argue against
my point the XP is just an obese version of 2K. I love the just like
you irrational types that have to attack the messenger, instead of
trying to dispell the message, because you are to stupid to have any
rational argument to the contrary.

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei!"

 

[kurttrail]

Actually, I was under the impression that when Ghost makes its image,
it uses the whole partition.

Size relates to used disk space, not total partition size.

Ergo, if both OSes are on a 4 GB
partition, the images should be relatively the same size. Obviously,
this isn't the case.

So, you just take it for granted, without asking questions, when the
next generation of OS is larger?

Well, when MS develops a new OS that has a smaller footprint than its
predecessor, let us all know, and I'll bet we'll stop assuming that each
MS OS will be larger, but until MS actually does, it would be foolish to
expect them to develop a new OS that is smaller that what it is
replacing.

"It's the latest version so I guess
its supposed to be double the size." Not a very wise philosophy, my
friend.

Tell it to MS, as I doubt Karl is responsible for MS's bloatware OS
"philosophy."

No one is freaking. Just asking questions.

Well you freak out enough to seem to be blaming Karl for MS bloating up
it OS's over each new generation.

If the freak fits, wear it!

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei!"

 

[Joh N.]

kurttrail, after spending 3 minutes figuring out which end of the pen to use,
wrote:

What you morons don't understand, is that if I really were a troll,
telling people not to feed me would also tend to re-enforce ever greater
acts of troll-like behavior.

If you really don't want to feed someone you have a suspicion is a
troll, the best course of action is to ignore them completely, and if
you want to warn someone you do it out of public view. Unfortunately
for all you MicroBorg, I am not a troll, and I am very hard, if not
nearly impossible to ignore.

I'm supposed to be the troll, yet none of you have yet to argue against
my point the XP is just an obese version of 2K. I love the just like
you irrational types that have to attack the messenger, instead of
trying to dispell the message, because you are to stupid to have any
rational argument to the contrary.

--
Peace!
Kurt
Self-anointed Moderator
microscum.pubic.windowsexp.gonorrhea
http://microscum.com
"Trustworthy Computing" is only another example of an Oxymoron!
"Produkt-Aktivierung macht frei!"

Armando and Buckwheat have 'bloated' heads...they believe *their* opinions are
right, no matter what anyone elses opinion(s) is/are. They probably walk around
very carefully to keep from striking their bloated heads on pointy objects.
Luckily you have a far reaching needle!

Joh N.

 

[Buckwheat]

Actually, I just discovered that one of my colleagues dumped the i386
directory onto the HD before I imaged the system. By following all of the
other suggestions and also, turning off "Hibernate" mode, the XP Ghost image
is actually smaller than the Win2k image.

Thanks again to all of the positive and constructive suggestions.

 

[Guest]

Thats good. I'm betting you moved your swap file, disabled hibernate, moved
yur profile / temp / IE temp files onto another partition as well as several
other tweaks to get your OS Partition as small as you can. I know. I
do it to my systems too. I have over 6 partitions on my system now

As far as the Bloatware is concerned, you have to realize that EVERY
application ever made has become larger over time (Linux or some flavor of
it is now on how many cd's? 5-8???? ) And to remeber when you had an entire
OS on a floppy. But you also have to realize that with all the BLOATING
comes al the new features. The LEGO PRICE look and feel, better stability
of files, better recovery / restoration of your system, better hardware
support, better tools to manage your system (from an admin's POV) etc etc
are all part of the BLOAT effect.

So if you want your apps / OS's to get any smaller, tell the vendor to stop
adding in all these new features / tools / options.

 

[Guest]

P.S. Symantec (who makes Ghost) just bought out Powerquest (Who makes Drive
Image). When making Images, you will not backup the entire partition as is,
rahter, you will backup ONLY the data (SmartSector technology) so your
images will indeed be smaller then you expected. Also compression help as
well as we all know