Guest Bill in Co. Posted February 21, 2008 Posted February 21, 2008 Re: Acronis 7/XP Questions Anna wrote: >> Anna wrote: >>> Anyway, thanks for bringing to my attention the fact that you can use >>> Windows Explorer to directly access files & folders on the disk-image >>> "archive" created through the Acronis program as you did in a previous >>> post. >>> I was unaware of that capability and such goes far in minimizing one of >>> my >>> perceived negatives concerning the Acronis program as compared with a >>> disk-cloning program such as the Casper 4 program we've been discussing. >>> Anna > > > "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message > news:ueHEfJBdIHA.3400@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... >> Yeah - and it's kind of amazing that it even allows that, I think, since >> they're supposedly compressed. But I gave one possible explanation for >> that in the other post, but that's only my supposition. >> >> However, I am still unclear about one thing: From what you're saying, >> (if >> I read this right), you are saying that you can do an incremental backup >> with Casper (to save only the recent changes of the source drive), and >> then restore that back with the original source directory dates being >> retained in the restoration, which seems a bit amazing to me. I guess >> I >> wouldn't have expected that. But then again, I haven't played around >> with TI True Image's incremental backups, either, just prefering to do >> the >> whole enchilada, (and thereby not having to keep track of the separate >> incremental restoration images each time). > > > Bill: > Yes, you have it pretty much right. Although we're most impressed with the > simplicity of design of the Casper 4 program which makes it so easy to use > for even an inexperienced user and its general all-around effectiveness in > cloning the contents of one HDD to another HDD... I understand that it's easier to use, from what you've said. But more below. > Its most important advantage (as compared with other disk-cloning > programs) > insofar as we are concerned is its rather extroardinary ability to create > "incremental clones", using what Casper refers to as its "SmartClone" > technology. The result of this is that it takes the user only a fraction > of > the time to create subsequent clones of the source HDD than it would > otherwise take using the typical disk-cloning methodology. > > As an example... > > When a typical disk-cloning program undertakes its disk-to-disk cloning > process it does so without regard that the "source" and "destination" HDDs > involved in the disk-cloning operation are the *identical* drives that had > been involved when a prior disk-cloning operation had been undertaken. It > doesn't matter to the disk-cloning program whether the HDD now being > cloned > was cloned an hour ago, or a day ago, or whenever. The now disk cloning > operation will proceed as if the HDD recipient of the clone, i.e., the > destination HDD is bare of data, even though that same destination HDD was > the recipient of a prior clone from the same source HDD 10 minutes ago. > > As a result... > > The disk-cloning operation will take a substantial amount of time to "do > its > work" each time the disk-cloning operation is undertaken, without regard > to > the fact that perhaps only a relatively few changes involving the source > HDD's data has changed since the last disk-cloning operation. So let's say > it takes about 30 minutes or so to clone the contents of a HDD containing > 40 > GB of data. Two days later the user decides to again back up his or her > system by undertaking another disk-cloning operation. Presumably the data > changes over those two days haven't been especially large. But it will > take > the disk-cloning program about the same period of time to perform the > disk-cloning operation as it did originally. And so on and so on in the > following days. > > But with the Casper 4 program, the program will recognize only the change > in > data that has occurred from its last disk-cloning operation and proceed to > "do its work" on that basis. Thus, given the example above it will > probably > take less than 3 or 4 minutes to complete the disk-cloning operation. And > so > on and so forth. But I don't understand how that is possible *using a sector-to-sector restoration process* (which you seem to be implying it IS using): For a file based (and not disk sector-based) copying process, I understand how the incremental backup can work - but not by using a raw sector-to-sector copying process, which is necessary IF you want to retain the original source directory timestamps. > So you can see what a valuable incentive this is for users to > systematically > & routinely backup their systems with the Casper 4 program - knowing that > the expenditure of time to complete the disk-cloning operation will be > relatively slight. > > And the recipient of the clone - the destination HDD - will be a copy of > the > source HDD with all its data immediately accessible in precisely the same > way one would access data from their source HDD - their day-to-day working > HDD in most cases. And the destination HDD, should it be an internal HDD > or > installed as a internal HDD from an exterior enclosure will be immediately > bootable without the need of any recovery process. > > It's worth considering... > Anna
Guest Anna Posted February 21, 2008 Posted February 21, 2008 Re: Acronis 7/XP Questions >>> Anna wrote: >> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message >> news:ueHEfJBdIHA.3400@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... (SNIP) >>> However, I am still unclear about one thing: From what you're saying, >>> (if >>> I read this right), you are saying that you can do an incremental backup >>> with Casper (to save only the recent changes of the source drive), and >>> then restore that back with the original source directory dates being >>> retained in the restoration, which seems a bit amazing to me. I guess >>> I wouldn't have expected that. (SNIP) >> Anna wrote: >> Bill: >> Yes, you have it pretty much right. Although we're most impressed with >> the >> simplicity of design of the Casper 4 program which makes it so easy to >> use >> for even an inexperienced user and its general all-around effectiveness >> in >> cloning the contents of one HDD to another HDD... >> >> Its most important advantage (as compared with other disk-cloning >> programs) >> insofar as we are concerned is its rather extroardinary ability to create >> "incremental clones", using what Casper refers to as its "SmartClone" >> technology. The result of this is that it takes the user only a fraction >> of the time to create subsequent clones of the source HDD than it would >> otherwise take using the typical disk-cloning methodology. >> >> As an example... >> >> When a typical disk-cloning program undertakes its disk-to-disk cloning >> process it does so without regard that the "source" and "destination" >> HDDs >> involved in the disk-cloning operation are the *identical* drives that >> had >> been involved when a prior disk-cloning operation had been undertaken. It >> doesn't matter to the disk-cloning program whether the HDD now being >> cloned was cloned an hour ago, or a day ago, or whenever. The now disk >> cloning >> operation will proceed as if the HDD recipient of the clone, i.e., the >> destination HDD is bare of data, even though that same destination HDD >> was >> the recipient of a prior clone from the same source HDD 10 minutes ago. >> >> As a result... >> >> The disk-cloning operation will take a substantial amount of time to "do >> its work" each time the disk-cloning operation is undertaken, without >> regard to the fact that perhaps only a relatively few changes involving >> the source >> HDD's data has changed since the last disk-cloning operation. So let's >> say >> it takes about 30 minutes or so to clone the contents of a HDD containing >> 40 GB of data. Two days later the user decides to again back up his or >> her >> system by undertaking another disk-cloning operation. Presumably the data >> changes over those two days haven't been especially large. But it will >> take the disk-cloning program about the same period of time to perform >> the >> disk-cloning operation as it did originally. And so on and so on in the >> following days. >> >> But with the Casper 4 program, the program will recognize only the change >> in data that has occurred from its last disk-cloning operation and >> proceed to >> "do its work" on that basis. Thus, given the example above it will >> probably take less >> than 3 or 4 minutes to complete the disk-cloning >> operation. And so on and so forth. >> >> So you can see what a valuable incentive this is for users to >> systematically & routinely backup their systems with the Casper 4 >> program - knowing that the expenditure of time to complete the >> disk-cloning operation will >> be relatively slight. >> >> And the recipient of the clone - the destination HDD - will be a copy of >> the source HDD with all its data immediately accessible in precisely the >> same >> way one would access data from their source HDD - their day-to-day >> working >> HDD in most cases. And the destination HDD, should it be an internal HDD >> or installed as a internal HDD from an exterior enclosure will be >> immediately >> bootable without the need of any recovery process. >> >> It's worth considering... >> Anna "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:uG9yeMDdIHA.4312@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... > I understand that it's easier to use, from what you've said. But more > below. > > But I don't understand how that is possible *using a sector-to-sector > restoration process* (which you seem to be implying it IS using): > > For a file based (and not disk sector-based) copying process, I understand > how the incremental backup can work - but not by using a raw > sector-to-sector copying process, which is necessary IF you want to retain > the original source directory timestamps. Bill: I honestly don't know what more I can say or how much clearer I can make this. But let me put it this way in one more effort to do so... If you would examine the "source" HDD - the drive that was cloned today - and compare it on a side-by-side basis with the "destination" HDD - the drive that was the recipient of the clone... The drives would be identical with respect to the data contained on each. Identical. If, for example, one of the folders on the source HDD was named "Bill's Latest Exploits" and was created 11/10/06, then the same folder named "Bill's Latest Exploits" with the date of creation shown as 11/10/06 would be listed on the destination drive. Identical. If, for example, one of the files on the source HDD had the name "Pike's Peak climb" dated 3/8/07, then the same file on the destination HDD would be listed as "Pike's Peak climb" bearing the same 3/8/07 date. Identical. I trust this clarifies things. Anna
Guest Bill in Co. Posted February 21, 2008 Posted February 21, 2008 Re: Acronis 7/XP Questions Anna wrote: >>>> Anna wrote: >>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message >>> news:ueHEfJBdIHA.3400@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... > (SNIP) >>>> However, I am still unclear about one thing: From what you're saying, >>>> (if >>>> I read this right), you are saying that you can do an incremental >>>> backup >>>> with Casper (to save only the recent changes of the source drive), and >>>> then restore that back with the original source directory dates being >>>> retained in the restoration, which seems a bit amazing to me. I >>>> guess >>>> I wouldn't have expected that. > (SNIP) > > >>> Anna wrote: >>> Bill: >>> Yes, you have it pretty much right. Although we're most impressed with >>> the >>> simplicity of design of the Casper 4 program which makes it so easy to >>> use >>> for even an inexperienced user and its general all-around effectiveness >>> in >>> cloning the contents of one HDD to another HDD... >>> >>> Its most important advantage (as compared with other disk-cloning >>> programs) >>> insofar as we are concerned is its rather extroardinary ability to >>> create >>> "incremental clones", using what Casper refers to as its "SmartClone" >>> technology. The result of this is that it takes the user only a fraction >>> of the time to create subsequent clones of the source HDD than it would >>> otherwise take using the typical disk-cloning methodology. >>> >>> As an example... >>> >>> When a typical disk-cloning program undertakes its disk-to-disk cloning >>> process it does so without regard that the "source" and "destination" >>> HDDs >>> involved in the disk-cloning operation are the *identical* drives that >>> had >>> been involved when a prior disk-cloning operation had been undertaken. >>> It >>> doesn't matter to the disk-cloning program whether the HDD now being >>> cloned was cloned an hour ago, or a day ago, or whenever. The now disk >>> cloning >>> operation will proceed as if the HDD recipient of the clone, i.e., the >>> destination HDD is bare of data, even though that same destination HDD >>> was >>> the recipient of a prior clone from the same source HDD 10 minutes ago. >>> >>> As a result... >>> >>> The disk-cloning operation will take a substantial amount of time to "do >>> its work" each time the disk-cloning operation is undertaken, without >>> regard to the fact that perhaps only a relatively few changes involving >>> the source >>> HDD's data has changed since the last disk-cloning operation. So let's >>> say >>> it takes about 30 minutes or so to clone the contents of a HDD >>> containing >>> 40 GB of data. Two days later the user decides to again back up his or >>> her >>> system by undertaking another disk-cloning operation. Presumably the >>> data >>> changes over those two days haven't been especially large. But it will >>> take the disk-cloning program about the same period of time to perform >>> the >>> disk-cloning operation as it did originally. And so on and so on in the >>> following days. >>> >>> But with the Casper 4 program, the program will recognize only the >>> change >>> in data that has occurred from its last disk-cloning operation and >>> proceed to >>> "do its work" on that basis. Thus, given the example above it will >>> probably take less >> than 3 or 4 minutes to complete the disk-cloning >>> operation. And so on and so forth. >>> >>> So you can see what a valuable incentive this is for users to >>> systematically & routinely backup their systems with the Casper 4 >>> program - knowing that the expenditure of time to complete the >>> disk-cloning operation will >> be relatively slight. >>> >>> And the recipient of the clone - the destination HDD - will be a copy of >>> the source HDD with all its data immediately accessible in precisely the >>> same >>> way one would access data from their source HDD - their day-to-day >>> working >>> HDD in most cases. And the destination HDD, should it be an internal HDD >>> or installed as a internal HDD from an exterior enclosure will be >>> immediately >>> bootable without the need of any recovery process. >>> >>> It's worth considering... >>> Anna > > > "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message > news:uG9yeMDdIHA.4312@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... >> I understand that it's easier to use, from what you've said. But more >> below. >> >> But I don't understand how that is possible *using a sector-to-sector >> restoration process* (which you seem to be implying it IS using): >> >> For a file based (and not disk sector-based) copying process, I >> understand >> how the incremental backup can work - but not by using a raw >> sector-to-sector copying process, which is necessary IF you want to >> retain >> the original source directory timestamps. > > > Bill: > I honestly don't know what more I can say or how much clearer I can make > this. But let me put it this way in one more effort to do so... > > If you would examine the "source" HDD - the drive that was cloned today - > and compare it on a side-by-side basis with the "destination" HDD - the > drive that was the recipient of the clone... > > The drives would be identical with respect to the data contained on each. > Identical. > > If, for example, one of the folders on the source HDD was named "Bill's > Latest Exploits" and was created 11/10/06, then the same folder named > "Bill's Latest Exploits" with the date of creation shown as 11/10/06 would > be listed on the destination drive. Identical. > > If, for example, one of the files on the source HDD had the name "Pike's > Peak climb" dated 3/8/07, then the same file on the destination HDD would > be > listed as "Pike's Peak climb" bearing the same 3/8/07 date. Identical. > > I trust this clarifies things. > Anna OK then. I'm just trying to understand technically how it is possible using an incremental backup with *sector-to-sector* partition restoration. It would appear that the program knows exactly which sectors are needed for each incrementally changed, group of files and directories being restored, and restores those. And it doesn't need the whole partition to be able to do so. OK, then. (have never tried that approach) :-)
Guest Timothy Daniels Posted February 21, 2008 Posted February 21, 2008 Re: Acronis 7/XP Questions "Bill in Co." wrote: > I'm just trying to understand technically how it is possible using an > incremental backup with *sector-to-sector* partition restoration. Bill, you're trying to understand - and asking us in so doing - how a proprietary process works. Companies which employ lots of smart people do this to make a profit, and they are able to do that because not many other people can do it. There is no way that anyone would tell you, even if they could, how it works. So desist. Suffice it to know that time stamps are not changed in monolithic and in incremental cloning and leave it at that. *TimDaniels*
Guest Frog Posted February 21, 2008 Posted February 21, 2008 Re: Acronis 7/XP Questions SNIP > > 2. There is nothing - absolutely nothing - that you have to do with respect > to using that drive as the recipient of the clone created by the Casper 4 > program. You do not have to partition that drive; you do not have to format > that drive. All that will be automatically taken care of when you use the > Casper 4 program to clone the contents of your "source" HDD - your > day-to-day internal working HDD - to the USBEHD. The Western Digital/My Book Premium Edition USB connected 500GB hard drive shipped with "a FAT32 partition for full drive capability". Are you saying that Casper 4 will (my words) remove everything off the hard drive and start over in NTSF? If so, that will make my life a whole lot easier. My new hard drive is now registered and I only need to obtain software for making backups at this point. Again, thanks for explaining Casper 4 to me and others in this thread. Frog
Guest Timothy Daniels Posted February 21, 2008 Posted February 21, 2008 Re: Acronis 7/XP Questions "Frog" wrote: > The Western Digital/My Book Premium Edition USB connected > 500GB hard drive shipped with "a FAT32 partition for full drive > capability". Are you saying that Casper 4 will (my words) remove > everything off the hard drive and start over in NTSF? If so, that > will make my life a whole lot easier. > > My new hard drive is now registered and I only need to obtain software for > making backups at this point... If you are making a clone, the formatting information is treated as just data, and it is copied right along with what the user considers to be "data". So for a clone, the formatting on the destination medium is not changed. But for an image file - which is one BIG file that is stored like any other file - the format of the image file on the destination medium corresponds to the formatting of that medium, although its contents retain the original formatting information which will be restored when the image is restored. *TimDaniels*
Guest Anna Posted February 21, 2008 Posted February 21, 2008 Re: Acronis 7/XP Questions >>"Anna" wrote... >> SNIP >> >> 2. There is nothing - absolutely nothing - that you have to do with >> respect to using that drive as the recipient of the clone created by the >> Casper 4 program. You do not have to partition that drive; you do not >> have to format that drive. All that will be automatically taken care of >> when you use the Casper 4 program to clone the contents of your "source" >> HDD - your day-to-day internal working HDD - to the USBEHD. "Frog" <frog@pond.com> wrote in message news:%23$BNfDMdIHA.6136@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... > The Western Digital/My Book Premium Edition USB connected 500GB hard drive > shipped with "a FAT32 partition for full drive capability". Are you > saying that Casper 4 will (my words) remove everything off the hard drive > and start over in NTSF? If so, that will make my life a whole lot easier. > > My new hard drive is now registered and I only need to obtain software for > making backups at this point. Again, thanks for explaining Casper 4 to me > and others in this thread. > > Frog Frog: Absolutely. It's another one of the advantages of a disk-cloning program such as the Casper 4 program. For all practical purposes, the recipient of your disk-clone - your 500 GB external HDD - will simply be a copy of your "source" HDD - the disk that you are cloning from. If that "source" disk is NTFS-formatted (as apparently it is) then that file system will carry over to the cloned external HDD. It's as simple as that. The reason your external HDD came FAT32-formatted from the factory was that users might be using Win9x/Me operating systems that won't recognize a NTFS file system. WindowsXP will recognize a FAT32-formatted system, however, the general recommendation is that for efficiency's sake one's XP OS should be formatted NTFS as yours is. I honestly don't know what you mean when you say "My new hard drive is now registered". I assume you're referring to some sort of registration process with Western Digital. Is that it? Anyway, give the Casper 4 program a try by using the trial version available at http://www.fssdev.com. You might also want to try out other disk-cloning and/or disk-imaging programs such as the Acronis program that has been discussed in this thread. See http://www.acronis.com Good luck. Anna
Guest Frog Posted February 21, 2008 Posted February 21, 2008 Re: Acronis 7/XP Questions Anna wrote: >>> "Anna" wrote... >>> SNIP >>> >>> 2. There is nothing - absolutely nothing - that you have to do with >>> respect to using that drive as the recipient of the clone created by the >>> Casper 4 program. You do not have to partition that drive; you do not >>> have to format that drive. All that will be automatically taken care of >>> when you use the Casper 4 program to clone the contents of your "source" >>> HDD - your day-to-day internal working HDD - to the USBEHD. > > > "Frog" <frog@pond.com> wrote in message > news:%23$BNfDMdIHA.6136@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... >> The Western Digital/My Book Premium Edition USB connected 500GB hard drive >> shipped with "a FAT32 partition for full drive capability". Are you >> saying that Casper 4 will (my words) remove everything off the hard drive >> and start over in NTSF? If so, that will make my life a whole lot easier. >> >> My new hard drive is now registered and I only need to obtain software for >> making backups at this point. Again, thanks for explaining Casper 4 to me >> and others in this thread. >> >> Frog > > > Frog: > Absolutely. It's another one of the advantages of a disk-cloning program > such as the Casper 4 program. For all practical purposes, the recipient of > your disk-clone - your 500 GB external HDD - will simply be a copy of your > "source" HDD - the disk that you are cloning from. If that "source" disk is > NTFS-formatted (as apparently it is) then that file system will carry over > to the cloned external HDD. It's as simple as that. > > The reason your external HDD came FAT32-formatted from the factory was that > users might be using Win9x/Me operating systems that won't recognize a NTFS > file system. WindowsXP will recognize a FAT32-formatted system, however, the > general recommendation is that for efficiency's sake one's XP OS should be > formatted NTFS as yours is. > > I honestly don't know what you mean when you say "My new hard drive is now > registered". I assume you're referring to some sort of registration process > with Western Digital. Is that it? You are correct. Thanks again for help me with this subject. Frog > > Anyway, give the Casper 4 program a try by using the trial version available > at http://www.fssdev.com. You might also want to try out other disk-cloning > and/or disk-imaging programs such as the Acronis program that has been > discussed in this thread. See http://www.acronis.com > > Good luck. > Anna > >
Guest FOORMAATTADIA Posted October 18, 2008 Posted October 18, 2008 Re: Acronis 7/XP Questions *òðàõàåò *íàñëàæäàéñÿ ó÷èò *øëþøêà *ãóáàìè íåçàáûâàåìûõ ÿéöà 'Èãðèâàÿ ìàëûøêà ñ ÷ëåíîì îáîæàåò òâåðäûé ïåíèñ â ñâîåé çàäíèöå' (http://www.give-love.ru/) ïîïêå *ðîòèêå *çðåëûå ëþáîâíèöå óìåëîé *ïðîíçàåò *ïàðíÿìè áóðíîãî 'Ñòðàñòíûé æåðåáåö çàñîâûâàåò ñâîé ÷ëåí â ìîêðóþ êèñêó ìåæäó òðóñèêàìè' (http://www.love-give.com/) îòêðûòûé ÷ëåíàì *äðóãà *ìàëåíüêèå íàñàæèâàþòñÿ ëàñêàì *êîòîðàÿ *êðóïíûé 'Ãîðÿ÷èå ÿçû÷êè ýòèõ êðîøåê äîâåäóò âàñ äî áóðíîãî îðãàçìà' (http://www.pizdyatina.ru/) ëåãêîñòüþ ñâÿçûâàåò âîçáóæäåííîìó *ñâîè *ñêðîìíèöó ïîäðóæêè ðîòèê *òîëñòûé * -- FOORMAATTADIA Posted via http://www.xpheads.com
Recommended Posts