Backup Software - Is Drive Image 7 crap?

Author

Is Drive Image 7 crap?

Eithera

2004-08-14, 5:45 pm

Here in the UK Drive Image7 is still on sale with no sign of Norton
Ghost 9 that I understand has included the taken-over DI7. I have
Drive Image 2002 (not the one that says that it is for Win ... up to
Me) and have successfully used it to duplicate my C drive onto an
additional HD (which works fine as a bootable drive even when
connected on its own).

Reading that DI7 is a much improved version for WinXP (that I use), I
bought it and used it to copy the C drive – the coping took about 20
minutes while still in Windows (the 2002 works by booting and then
coping, taking about 90 minutes). Disaster. The duplicated drive had
files missing/ corrupted, System Restore was crashing, some
configurations gone etc. I tried several duplications but with total
dissatisfaction. Eventually, I used the 2002 version to duplicate my C
drive and, as before, total success. What is wrong with this crap
Drive Image7 or is there anything that I didn't do right? Many thanks
in advance.

Farouk Dindar

2004-08-14, 5:45 pm

What is wrong with this crap
>Drive Image7 or is there anything that I didn't do right? Many thanks
>in advance.

I had the similar experience with Drive Image 7.

I had also used version 2 with no problems.

I am now using True Image 6 (not 7) and Partition Expert
is my pair and they are working fine.

In our condominium there is no floor 4 , 13, 14 , and 24

With the bad luck I had with drive image 7 and acronis true image
7 would add 7 to the list of unlucky numbers :-)

Farouk Dindar

Toronto

Martin Jay

2004-08-16, 7:45 am

In message <NevTc.41567$Mq1.2247878@news20.bellglobal.com>, Farouk
Dindar <remove_fdindar@attglobal.net> writes

[vbcol=seagreen]
>I had the similar experience with Drive Image 7.

[Snip]

>I am now using True Image 6 (not 7) and Partition Expert
>is my pair and they are working fine.

[Snip]

>With the bad luck I had with drive image 7 and acronis true image
>7 would add 7 to the list of unlucky numbers :-)

IIRC, the downside of using True Image 6 is that it doesn't have a
'check image' function. And, presumably, by using it you're missing out
of lots of bug fixes.

Oh, and I think the ability to mount an image as a drive was introduced
in True Image 7, which is extremely useful for grabbing the occasional
lost file.

I bought True Image 8 a few days ago. It works flawlessly, however the
differences between it and True Image 7 aren't obvious. It seems more
like a minor update than a new version.
--
Martin Jay

Farouk Dindar

2004-08-16, 8:45 pm

>
>Oh, and I think the ability to mount an image as a drive was introduced
>in True Image 7, which is extremely useful for grabbing the occasional
>lost file.

You can do that with True Image 6 and in fact it is my test of the images
integrity.

Farouk