I started using Vista recently, after I bought a laptop with Vista
preinstalled. When prompted, I made a Vista recovery disc. So,
hopefully, I am protected, if the operating system gets corrupted on
my hard drive. Next, I wanted to also back up the rest of my hard
drive (data, programs, file structure, etc.) so that if my hard drive
got corrupted, I can reinstall Vista using the recovery disc, then
reinstall the rest of my data and program files using my hard drive
backup copy.

To make a hard drive backup copy, I purchased a standalone hard drive
with a USB plug. The portable drive is about 50GB bigger than my
laptop's hard drive. I then used Vista's Control Panel/System and
Maintenance/Backup Your Computer.

This method of backing up my hard drive took ages (several hours)
which surprised me, as the entire contents of my hard drive only
amounts to 96.5 GB. I later foud out why: Vista had, wile in the
process of backing up my hard drive, compressed everything into a lot
of roughly-equal-sized zip files.

What I am aiming for is a way to reinstall my entire hard drive
contents, Vista and all, in a simple, quick way, so that my laptop
will be the same as it was before the file corruption occurred.

To achieve this, can I not simply drag-and-drop my laptop's C: drive
into the standalone drive? I think that avoiding file compression
would also lessen the possibility of data degradation or corruption
during the process. I've known image files, in particular, suffer
badly from the compression and subsequent decompression.

Then, when I want to retore my hard drive, I can simply drag-and-drop
the contents of the standalobe drive into "computer" in Vista's file
manager, yes?


Many thanks,

JimD

[email]jimdaley@kiliouji.net[/email] wrote:[color=blue]
> I started using Vista recently, after I bought a laptop with Vista
> preinstalled. When prompted, I made a Vista recovery disc. So,
> hopefully, I am protected, if the operating system gets corrupted on
> my hard drive. Next, I wanted to also back up the rest of my hard
> drive (data, programs, file structure, etc.) so that if my hard drive
> got corrupted, I can reinstall Vista using the recovery disc, then
> reinstall the rest of my data and program files using my hard drive
> backup copy.
>
> To make a hard drive backup copy, I purchased a standalone hard drive
> with a USB plug. The portable drive is about 50GB bigger than my
> laptop's hard drive. I then used Vista's Control Panel/System and
> Maintenance/Backup Your Computer.
>
> This method of backing up my hard drive took ages (several hours)
> which surprised me, as the entire contents of my hard drive only
> amounts to 96.5 GB. I later foud out why: Vista had, wile in the
> process of backing up my hard drive, compressed everything into a lot
> of roughly-equal-sized zip files.
>
> What I am aiming for is a way to reinstall my entire hard drive
> contents, Vista and all, in a simple, quick way, so that my laptop
> will be the same as it was before the file corruption occurred.
>
> To achieve this, can I not simply drag-and-drop my laptop's C: drive
> into the standalone drive? I think that avoiding file compression
> would also lessen the possibility of data degradation or corruption
> during the process. I've known image files, in particular, suffer
> badly from the compression and subsequent decompression.
>
> Then, when I want to retore my hard drive, I can simply drag-and-drop
> the contents of the standalobe drive into "computer" in Vista's file
> manager, yes?
>
>
> Many thanks,
>
> JimD
>[/color]


No, absolutely not, you cannot "Drag and Drop" to restore an operating
system, after all if you OS dies you are not going to be able to boot
and even see "Computer" are you? Even if you could see it there is no
way Vista will allow you to overwrite system files that are in use.

You won't find any "Free" software that's any good for making quality
backups. If your system is important to you then buy something like Acronis

[url]http://www.acronis.com/promo/choose_true_image/?source=us_google&ad=acronis&c=2625058277&k=acronis&gclid=CPPvleOSuZoCFSMgDQodm11vbw[/url]


or 7Tools

[url]http://7tools.paragon-software.com/exact_image/[/url]

and if you choose to search for others get some reviews first or check
back here.

And yes it does take a long time to make a back up copy, and yes you
will have to read the manual.

"jimdaley@kiliouji.net" wrote:
[color=blue]
>
> I started using Vista recently, after I bought a laptop with Vista
> preinstalled. When prompted, I made a Vista recovery disc. So,
> hopefully, I am protected, if the operating system gets corrupted on
> my hard drive. Next, I wanted to also back up the rest of my hard
> drive (data, programs, file structure, etc.) so that if my hard drive
> got corrupted, I can reinstall Vista using the recovery disc, then
> reinstall the rest of my data and program files using my hard drive
> backup copy.
>
> To make a hard drive backup copy, I purchased a standalone hard drive
> with a USB plug. The portable drive is about 50GB bigger than my
> laptop's hard drive. I then used Vista's Control Panel/System and
> Maintenance/Backup Your Computer.
>
> This method of backing up my hard drive took ages (several hours)
> which surprised me, as the entire contents of my hard drive only
> amounts to 96.5 GB. I later foud out why: Vista had, wile in the
> process of backing up my hard drive, compressed everything into a lot
> of roughly-equal-sized zip files.
>
> What I am aiming for is a way to reinstall my entire hard drive
> contents, Vista and all, in a simple, quick way, so that my laptop
> will be the same as it was before the file corruption occurred.
>
> To achieve this, can I not simply drag-and-drop my laptop's C: drive
> into the standalone drive? I think that avoiding file compression
> would also lessen the possibility of data degradation or corruption
> during the process. I've known image files, in particular, suffer
> badly from the compression and subsequent decompression.
>
> Then, when I want to retore my hard drive, I can simply drag-and-drop
> the contents of the standalobe drive into "computer" in Vista's file
> manager, yes?
>
>
> Many thanks,
>
> JimD
>
>[/color]
Another program for you to have a look:

[url]http://www.macrium.com/reflectfree.asp[/url]

<jimdaley@kiliouji.net> wrote in message
news:6h7l05t9qgeaq7iehir283lpu4fvo0m4ok@4ax.com...[color=blue]
>
> I started using Vista recently, after I bought a laptop with Vista
> preinstalled. When prompted, I made a Vista recovery disc. So,
> hopefully, I am protected, if the operating system gets corrupted on
> my hard drive. Next, I wanted to also back up the rest of my hard
> drive (data, programs, file structure, etc.) so that if my hard drive
> got corrupted, I can reinstall Vista using the recovery disc, then
> reinstall the rest of my data and program files using my hard drive
> backup copy.
>
> To make a hard drive backup copy, I purchased a standalone hard drive
> with a USB plug. The portable drive is about 50GB bigger than my
> laptop's hard drive. I then used Vista's Control Panel/System and
> Maintenance/Backup Your Computer.
>
> This method of backing up my hard drive took ages (several hours)
> which surprised me, as the entire contents of my hard drive only
> amounts to 96.5 GB. I later foud out why: Vista had, wile in the
> process of backing up my hard drive, compressed everything into a lot
> of roughly-equal-sized zip files.
>
> What I am aiming for is a way to reinstall my entire hard drive
> contents, Vista and all, in a simple, quick way, so that my laptop
> will be the same as it was before the file corruption occurred.
>
> To achieve this, can I not simply drag-and-drop my laptop's C: drive
> into the standalone drive? I think that avoiding file compression
> would also lessen the possibility of data degradation or corruption
> during the process. I've known image files, in particular, suffer
> badly from the compression and subsequent decompression.
>
> Then, when I want to retore my hard drive, I can simply drag-and-drop
> the contents of the standalobe drive into "computer" in Vista's file
> manager, yes?
>
>
> Many thanks,
>
> JimD[/color]


Jim
As you have heard, and no doubt will continue to hear, various comprehensive
backup programs will be recommended to you. There's a bewildering variety of
those programs "out there" - just do a Google search on "vista backup
programs" - and you'll see what I mean. Each user has, for one reason or
another, his or her own favorite.

Fortunately many of these commercial programs have demo or trial versions of
their products available, so a user such as yourself can give them some sort
of a "test drive" to determine if this or that one is more suitable for
one's needs. And whenever possible you should avail yourself of this
opportunity to work with these programs before making a final decision as to
which program you should employ/purchase.

Anyway, with that out-of-the-way, let me give you my recommendation along
with the ones you've already rec'd and probably will continue to receive.

Over the years (primarily with the XP OS) we've worked with a fairly large
variety of comprehensive backup programs. By "comprehensive" I mean a
program that will back up the *entire* contents of one's day-to-day working
HDD, i.e., the OS together will all programs & data. In effect, a precise
copy of one's "source" HDD.

The program we're particularly fond of is the Casper 5 program. Casper 5 is
a disk-cloning program; it does not have disk-imaging capability.

The Casper program is extremely simple to use even for an inexperienced
user, reasonably quick in operation, and quite effective. There's virtually
no learning curve in undertaking the disk cloning process as one navigates
through the few easy-to-understand screens with a final mouse-click on the
button on the screen which will trigger the disk-cloning process. After
undertaking one or two disk-cloning operations it should take the user no
more than 15 - 20 seconds or so to get to that point.

But the truly significant advantage of the Casper 5.0 disk cloning program
compared with other disk cloning programs that we're familiar with, e.g.,
Acronis True Image, is its ability to create *incremental* disk clones
following the creation of the original (first) disk clone. Employing what
Casper calls its "SmartClone" technology the program can create subsequent
disk clones of the source HDD usually at a fraction of the time it takes to
create a "full" disk clone. This results in a decided incentive for the user
to undertake frequent complete backups of his or her system knowing that
they can create "incremental" disk clones in a relatively short period of
time. Understand that this "incremental disk clone" is a *complete* clone
(copy) of the "source" HDD.

Bear in mind that the recipient of the clone - the "destination" HDD
(internal or external) - would contain the *complete* contents of one's
internal HDD (presumably the boot drive). Since that destination drive would
be a precise copy of the source HDD, its contents would be immediately
accessible to the user and potentially bootable. Naturally its contents
could be cloned back to a internal HDD should a restoration of the system be
necessary. Again, what better backup system can one have? And again -
because the Casper disk-cloning operation takes a relatively short period of
time to complete its disk-cloning operations there's a strong incentive for
the user to more frequently keep their backups up-to-date than they might
otherwise do. As an example, using the Casper 5 program, I recently backed
up one of my HDDs that contained nearly 50 GB of data to another internal
HDD in the system. That "source" HDD has been previously backed up, i.e.,
cloned five days ago. Naturally during that 5-day period changes had been
made to the system - programs & data added, deleted, modified, etc., etc., -
more or less the typical type of changes one makes to their systems over a
period of time. It took me (or rather it took Casper!) just about four
minutes to complete the disk-cloning operation. And now I have a precise
copy of my source disk, my day-to-day working HDD. Completely bootable &
functional in all respects.

Again, I want to emphasize that the main advantage of the Casper 5 program
in comparison with other disk-cloning programs is its rather remarkable
ability to *routinely* clone the contents of one HDD to another HDD
(following the initial disk-cloning process) in a fraction of the time it
generally takes for other disk-cloning (as well as disk-imaging) programs to
complete the process. In my experience this is a strong incentive for the
user to back up their systems on a frequent basis - perhaps even once a day
or two or three times a week - knowing that the disk-cloning operation will
take only a few short minutes to complete the process. And at the end of
that process the user will have at hand a "perfect copy" of their day-to-day
working HDD. Again, what better backup system can one have?

The Casper 5.0 program is also capable of scheduling the disk-cloning
process on a daily, weekly, or other time period selected by the user so
that should the user prefer he or she could arrange for automatic backups at
pre-determined times.

There's a trial version available at...
[url]http://www.fssdev.com/products/casper/trial/[/url] and although it's somewhat
crippled it should give one a good idea as to how the program works.

The downside to the Casper 5 program as compared with the Acronis and most
other disk-cloning programs is the cost of the program which comes to $49.95
for the program + $9.95 for the "Casper Startup Disk" (the program to create
the bootable CD containing the Casper program - needed to access the program
in the event of a failed HDD when the user is unable to access the installed
Casper program). This "Startup Disk" is really an essential piece of the
program; I can't imagine a Casper user not having this media. It's a pity
that this "Startup Disk" is an added-cost option; in our view it should be
provided as part of the overall program and included in the program's $49.95
cost. We have complained to the developer about this but alas that
additional cost for the "Startup Disk" is still present.

So the cost of the program is more expensive than the others. Be that as it
may, in our view it's still well worth the additional cost considering its
overall effectiveness and the fact that one will be using the program many,
many times over the weeks, months, and years ahead. We've introduced the
program to many users (including former ATI users) and I can't recall a
single person who regretted his/her purchase. AFAIK, the program is
available only through download from the developer.

One thing more...

You've indicated that you desire a "drag & drop" type of program presumably
for recovery purposes so as to return your system to a bootable, functional
state should that need arise. I'm not aware of any comprehensive backup
program that has that particular kind of capability and that includes the
Casper 5 program. But the process of disk-to-disk (or
partition-to-partition) cloning is a relatively simple process whether for
backup or recovery purposes so I really don't think you have to be overly
concerned about that aspect.

What *is* important in my view is that aside from the overall effectiveness
of the program (doing what it's supposed to do) and simplicity of operation,
is the speed of the backup operation so that the user is encouraged to
employ the program frequently in order to maintain up-to-date comprehensive
backups of his or her system. As I've described above, it is this aspect
that sets Casper aside from other disk-cloning/disk-imaging programs that
I've used. As a general proposition, on a day-to-day basis, for nearly every
PC user, it's the backup speed of the program, not the speed of the recovery
process that's the crucial element involved here. Ordinarily one will be
backing up his or her system many, many times before one will need to invoke
a recovery/restore process.

One final comment...
I haven't had a great deal of experience with the Vista OS as compared with
the XP OS, however, from the little experience I've personally had using
Casper 5 with Vista and more importantly, the feedback I've gotten from
Vista users of Casper, I'm comfortable with recommending this program with
Vista.
Anna

"Anna" <myname@myisp.net> wrote:
[color=blue]
>The downside to the Casper 5 program as compared with the Acronis and most
>other disk-cloning programs is the cost of the program which comes to $49.95
>for the program + $9.95 for the "Casper Startup Disk" (the program to create
>the bootable CD containing the Casper program - needed to access the program
>in the event of a failed HDD when the user is unable to access the installed
>Casper program).[/color]

Another downside is that Casper can ONLY clone your disk. Acronis
True Image (and other imaging/cloning programs) can clone AND a lot
more - for about $25 less.

Want to backup only your DATA? NO PROBLEM for Acronis True Image!
Want to restore selective files from either a full system backup or a
data backup? NO PROBLEM. Acronis has a browser that you use to find
what you want to restore (if it's only a selective restoration) and it
will put everything in the proper place.

I do believe that if you fully investigate cloning and imaging, you
will decide to buy Acronis True Image.

Anna, I beta test Casper and agree it is an excellent backup application,
however, my main 'beef' with Casper is that it will not allow you to backup
directly to a set of CD/DVDs which, I have to say, is extremely
disappointing. Every beta of casper I test I always ask 'where is the CD/DVD
backup support?' Perhaps if I complain long enough ffsdev will finally get
the message.

While I like Casper, I much prefer Acronis True Image for backing up my own
system, this does offer the all important CD/DVD backup option along with
cloning and the all important incremental backups.

--
John Barnett MVP
Windows XP Associate Expert
Windows Desktop Experience

Web: [url]http://www.winuser.co.uk[/url]
Web: [url]http://www.silversurfer-guide.com[/url]
Web: [url]http://xphelpandsupport.mvps.org[/url]
Web: [url]http://vistasupport.mvps.org[/url]


The information in this mail/post is supplied "as is". No warranty of any
kind, either expressed or implied, is made in relation to the accuracy,
reliability or content of this mail/post. The Author shall not be liable for
any direct, indirect, incidental or consequential damages arising out of the
use of, or inability to use, information or opinions expressed in this
mail/post..


"Anna" <myname@myisp.net> wrote in message
news:#$fJtE#0JHA.4880@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...[color=blue]
>
> <jimdaley@kiliouji.net> wrote in message
> news:6h7l05t9qgeaq7iehir283lpu4fvo0m4ok@4ax.com...[color=green]
>>
>> I started using Vista recently, after I bought a laptop with Vista
>> preinstalled. When prompted, I made a Vista recovery disc. So,
>> hopefully, I am protected, if the operating system gets corrupted on
>> my hard drive. Next, I wanted to also back up the rest of my hard
>> drive (data, programs, file structure, etc.) so that if my hard drive
>> got corrupted, I can reinstall Vista using the recovery disc, then
>> reinstall the rest of my data and program files using my hard drive
>> backup copy.
>>
>> To make a hard drive backup copy, I purchased a standalone hard drive
>> with a USB plug. The portable drive is about 50GB bigger than my
>> laptop's hard drive. I then used Vista's Control Panel/System and
>> Maintenance/Backup Your Computer.
>>
>> This method of backing up my hard drive took ages (several hours)
>> which surprised me, as the entire contents of my hard drive only
>> amounts to 96.5 GB. I later foud out why: Vista had, wile in the
>> process of backing up my hard drive, compressed everything into a lot
>> of roughly-equal-sized zip files.
>>
>> What I am aiming for is a way to reinstall my entire hard drive
>> contents, Vista and all, in a simple, quick way, so that my laptop
>> will be the same as it was before the file corruption occurred.
>>
>> To achieve this, can I not simply drag-and-drop my laptop's C: drive
>> into the standalone drive? I think that avoiding file compression
>> would also lessen the possibility of data degradation or corruption
>> during the process. I've known image files, in particular, suffer
>> badly from the compression and subsequent decompression.
>>
>> Then, when I want to retore my hard drive, I can simply drag-and-drop
>> the contents of the standalobe drive into "computer" in Vista's file
>> manager, yes?
>>
>>
>> Many thanks,
>>
>> JimD[/color]
>
>
> Jim
> As you have heard, and no doubt will continue to hear, various
> comprehensive backup programs will be recommended to you. There's a
> bewildering variety of those programs "out there" - just do a Google
> search on "vista backup programs" - and you'll see what I mean. Each user
> has, for one reason or another, his or her own favorite.
>
> Fortunately many of these commercial programs have demo or trial versions
> of their products available, so a user such as yourself can give them some
> sort of a "test drive" to determine if this or that one is more suitable
> for one's needs. And whenever possible you should avail yourself of this
> opportunity to work with these programs before making a final decision as
> to which program you should employ/purchase.
>
> Anyway, with that out-of-the-way, let me give you my recommendation along
> with the ones you've already rec'd and probably will continue to receive.
>
> Over the years (primarily with the XP OS) we've worked with a fairly large
> variety of comprehensive backup programs. By "comprehensive" I mean a
> program that will back up the *entire* contents of one's day-to-day
> working HDD, i.e., the OS together will all programs & data. In effect, a
> precise copy of one's "source" HDD.
>
> The program we're particularly fond of is the Casper 5 program. Casper 5
> is a disk-cloning program; it does not have disk-imaging capability.
>
> The Casper program is extremely simple to use even for an inexperienced
> user, reasonably quick in operation, and quite effective. There's
> virtually no learning curve in undertaking the disk cloning process as one
> navigates through the few easy-to-understand screens with a final
> mouse-click on the button on the screen which will trigger the
> disk-cloning process. After undertaking one or two disk-cloning operations
> it should take the user no more than 15 - 20 seconds or so to get to that
> point.
>
> But the truly significant advantage of the Casper 5.0 disk cloning program
> compared with other disk cloning programs that we're familiar with, e.g.,
> Acronis True Image, is its ability to create *incremental* disk clones
> following the creation of the original (first) disk clone. Employing what
> Casper calls its "SmartClone" technology the program can create subsequent
> disk clones of the source HDD usually at a fraction of the time it takes
> to create a "full" disk clone. This results in a decided incentive for the
> user to undertake frequent complete backups of his or her system knowing
> that they can create "incremental" disk clones in a relatively short
> period of time. Understand that this "incremental disk clone" is a
> *complete* clone (copy) of the "source" HDD.
>
> Bear in mind that the recipient of the clone - the "destination" HDD
> (internal or external) - would contain the *complete* contents of one's
> internal HDD (presumably the boot drive). Since that destination drive
> would be a precise copy of the source HDD, its contents would be
> immediately accessible to the user and potentially bootable. Naturally its
> contents could be cloned back to a internal HDD should a restoration of
> the system be necessary. Again, what better backup system can one have?
> And again - because the Casper disk-cloning operation takes a relatively
> short period of time to complete its disk-cloning operations there's a
> strong incentive for the user to more frequently keep their backups
> up-to-date than they might otherwise do. As an example, using the Casper 5
> program, I recently backed up one of my HDDs that contained nearly 50 GB
> of data to another internal HDD in the system. That "source" HDD has been
> previously backed up, i.e., cloned five days ago. Naturally during that
> 5-day period changes had been made to the system - programs & data added,
> deleted, modified, etc., etc., - more or less the typical type of changes
> one makes to their systems over a period of time. It took me (or rather it
> took Casper!) just about four minutes to complete the disk-cloning
> operation. And now I have a precise copy of my source disk, my day-to-day
> working HDD. Completely bootable & functional in all respects.
>
> Again, I want to emphasize that the main advantage of the Casper 5 program
> in comparison with other disk-cloning programs is its rather remarkable
> ability to *routinely* clone the contents of one HDD to another HDD
> (following the initial disk-cloning process) in a fraction of the time it
> generally takes for other disk-cloning (as well as disk-imaging) programs
> to complete the process. In my experience this is a strong incentive for
> the user to back up their systems on a frequent basis - perhaps even once
> a day or two or three times a week - knowing that the disk-cloning
> operation will
> take only a few short minutes to complete the process. And at the end of
> that process the user will have at hand a "perfect copy" of their
> day-to-day working HDD. Again, what better backup system can one have?
>
> The Casper 5.0 program is also capable of scheduling the disk-cloning
> process on a daily, weekly, or other time period selected by the user so
> that should the user prefer he or she could arrange for automatic backups
> at pre-determined times.
>
> There's a trial version available at...
> [url]http://www.fssdev.com/products/casper/trial/[/url] and although it's somewhat
> crippled it should give one a good idea as to how the program works.
>
> The downside to the Casper 5 program as compared with the Acronis and
> most other disk-cloning programs is the cost of the program which comes to
> $49.95 for the program + $9.95 for the "Casper Startup Disk" (the program
> to create the bootable CD containing the Casper program - needed to access
> the program in the event of a failed HDD when the user is unable to access
> the installed Casper program). This "Startup Disk" is really an essential
> piece of the program; I can't imagine a Casper user not having this media.
> It's a pity that this "Startup Disk" is an added-cost option; in our view
> it should be provided as part of the overall program and included in the
> program's $49.95 cost. We have complained to the developer about this but
> alas that additional cost for the "Startup Disk" is still present.
>
> So the cost of the program is more expensive than the others. Be that as
> it may, in our view it's still well worth the additional cost considering
> its overall effectiveness and the fact that one will be using the program
> many, many times over the weeks, months, and years ahead. We've introduced
> the program to many users (including former ATI users) and I can't recall
> a single person who regretted his/her purchase. AFAIK, the program is
> available only through download from the developer.
>
> One thing more...
>
> You've indicated that you desire a "drag & drop" type of program
> presumably for recovery purposes so as to return your system to a
> bootable, functional state should that need arise. I'm not aware of any
> comprehensive backup program that has that particular kind of capability
> and that includes the Casper 5 program. But the process of disk-to-disk
> (or partition-to-partition) cloning is a relatively simple process whether
> for backup or recovery purposes so I really don't think you have to be
> overly concerned about that aspect.
>
> What *is* important in my view is that aside from the overall
> effectiveness of the program (doing what it's supposed to do) and
> simplicity of operation, is the speed of the backup operation so that the
> user is encouraged to employ the program frequently in order to maintain
> up-to-date comprehensive backups of his or her system. As I've described
> above, it is this aspect that sets Casper aside from other
> disk-cloning/disk-imaging programs that I've used. As a general
> proposition, on a day-to-day basis, for nearly every PC user, it's the
> backup speed of the program, not the speed of the recovery process that's
> the crucial element involved here. Ordinarily one will be backing up his
> or her system many, many times before one will need to invoke a
> recovery/restore process.
>
> One final comment...
> I haven't had a great deal of experience with the Vista OS as compared
> with the XP OS, however, from the little experience I've personally had
> using Casper 5 with Vista and more importantly, the feedback I've gotten
> from Vista users of Casper, I'm comfortable with recommending this program
> with Vista.
> Anna
>
>
> __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus
> signature database 4072 (20090513) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.
>
> [url]http://www.eset.com[/url]
>
>
>[/color]

__________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 4072 (20090513) __________

The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.

[url]http://www.eset.com[/url]

"John Barnett MVP" <freelance@invalid.invalid> wrote:
[color=blue]
>Anna, I beta test Casper and agree it is an excellent backup application,
>however, my main 'beef' with Casper is that it will not allow you to backup
>directly to a set of CD/DVDs which, I have to say, is extremely
>disappointing. Every beta of casper I test I always ask 'where is the CD/DVD
>backup support?' Perhaps if I complain long enough ffsdev will finally get
>the message.
>
>While I like Casper, I much prefer Acronis True Image for backing up my own
>system, this does offer the all important CD/DVD backup option along with
>cloning and the all important incremental backups.[/color]

99.97% of the people in these and the XP groups who recommend a backup
program recommend Acronis True Image.

Anna is the only one who exclusively recommends Casper. I've seen
maybe two others say that they use Casper - in addition to myself.

I own both - and use both on a daily basis. If I were forced to
discard one, it would be Casper, because it has fewer features.

Thanks to everyone for the quality and detail of your replies.

The only backup program I have used in the past was Acronis. However,
I never had occasion to put it to the test by attempting to use it to
restore my system.

Has anyone here actually put Acronis to the test in that way, on a
Vista system? What was the result?

After seeing Acronis still recommended, ten years after after I last
used it, I'm inclined to use it again, not the least, because I might
still be somewhat familiar with it.

Having said that, the program Anna mentioned sounds good too. Perhaps
I'll look at that too.

JimD

[email]jimdaley@kiliouji.net[/email] wrote:
[color=blue]
>
>Thanks to everyone for the quality and detail of your replies.
>
>The only backup program I have used in the past was Acronis. However,
>I never had occasion to put it to the test by attempting to use it to
>restore my system.
>
>Has anyone here actually put Acronis to the test in that way, on a
>Vista system? What was the result?[/color]

Nobody has ever put it to the test. We just have FAITH.

Idiot.
[color=blue]
>After seeing Acronis still recommended, ten years after after I last
>used it, I'm inclined to use it again, not the least, because I might
>still be somewhat familiar with it.
>
>Having said that, the program Anna mentioned sounds good too. Perhaps
>I'll look at that too.
>
>JimD[/color]

<jimdaley@kiliouji.net> wrote in message
news:mvjo05ljokqqkv8ck2lik45744v18kpu56@4ax.com...[color=blue]
>
> Thanks to everyone for the quality and detail of your replies.
>
> The only backup program I have used in the past was Acronis. However,
> I never had occasion to put it to the test by attempting to use it to
> restore my system.
>
> Has anyone here actually put Acronis to the test in that way, on a
> Vista system? What was the result?
>
> After seeing Acronis still recommended, ten years after after I last
> used it, I'm inclined to use it again, not the least, because I might
> still be somewhat familiar with it.
>
> Having said that, the program Anna mentioned sounds good too. Perhaps
> I'll look at that too.
>
> JimD[/color]

the only way to insure that ANY backup program works is to try it. Make a
backup and then actually do a restore. I have tried many different
ones...Acronis and Casper included and have found that none of them are 100%
foolproof. Alot depends on your installation...for instance Casper and
Acronis work great with a single O/S, but sometimes have problems retoring a
dual boot configuration...especially if a Linux distro is installed too. The
one that has worked for me in most configurations is Paragon so I have it on
my 2 multiple boot computers, but I still use Casper on my main box running
XP because it's faster

I use Acronis True Image exclusively for backing up my machine. Has Acronis
ever failed me? Yes a couple of times but the failures are few and far
between. But, as a safeguard I always create two sets of backup - one on
DVDs and the other on a removable hard drive; if one fails then I at least I
have another backup. Regardless of how much you pay for backup software you
will always get the odd backup that doesn't work the way it should do, but
the same can be said for every software application out there - nothing is
100% guaranteed; a removable drive can fail, a DVD can become scratched.

Over the years I have used many backup application but, so far, I have found
Acronis the more reliable. Windows Vista Ultimate has its own backup
application - Complete PC Backup. I've used it but, frankly, it's useless so
now I don't give it a second thought.

--
John Barnett MVP
Windows XP Associate Expert
Windows Desktop Experience

Web: [url]http://www.winuser.co.uk[/url]
Web: [url]http://www.silversurfer-guide.com[/url]
Web: [url]http://xphelpandsupport.mvps.org[/url]
Web: [url]http://vistasupport.mvps.org[/url]


The information in this mail/post is supplied "as is". No warranty of any
kind, either expressed or implied, is made in relation to the accuracy,
reliability or content of this mail/post. The Author shall not be liable for
any direct, indirect, incidental or consequential damages arising out of the
use of, or inability to use, information or opinions expressed in this
mail/post..


<jimdaley@kiliouji.net> wrote in message
news:mvjo05ljokqqkv8ck2lik45744v18kpu56@4ax.com...[color=blue]
>
> Thanks to everyone for the quality and detail of your replies.
>
> The only backup program I have used in the past was Acronis. However,
> I never had occasion to put it to the test by attempting to use it to
> restore my system.
>
> Has anyone here actually put Acronis to the test in that way, on a
> Vista system? What was the result?
>
> After seeing Acronis still recommended, ten years after after I last
> used it, I'm inclined to use it again, not the least, because I might
> still be somewhat familiar with it.
>
> Having said that, the program Anna mentioned sounds good too. Perhaps
> I'll look at that too.
>
> JimD
>
> __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus
> signature database 4080 (20090515) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.
>
> [url]http://www.eset.com[/url]
>
>
>[/color]

__________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 4080 (20090515) __________

The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.

[url]http://www.eset.com[/url]

"John Barnett MVP" <freelance@invalid.invalid> wrote:
[color=blue]
>I use Acronis True Image exclusively for backing up my machine. Has Acronis
>ever failed me? Yes a couple of times but the failures are few and far
>between. But, as a safeguard I always create two sets of backup - one on
>DVDs and the other on a removable hard drive; if one fails then I at least I
>have another backup.[/color]

I don't waste time with optical media. I have a spare internal drive
just for holding images - and the most recent is updated nightly on a
schedule. I keep copies of the most recent 4 full backup images on an
external drive, just in case.

So far, I've not been disappointed, as every time I've restored from
backup, it's succeeded. If it doesn't, I'll have plenty more to
choose from.
[color=blue]
>Regardless of how much you pay for backup software you
>will always get the odd backup that doesn't work the way it should do, but
>the same can be said for every software application out there - nothing is
>100% guaranteed; a removable drive can fail, a DVD can become scratched.
>
>Over the years I have used many backup application but, so far, I have found
>Acronis the more reliable. Windows Vista Ultimate has its own backup
>application - Complete PC Backup. I've used it but, frankly, it's useless so
>now I don't give it a second thought.[/color]