|
Home > Archive > Backup Software > April 2005 > TerraByte Image: Image size question...
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
TerraByte Image: Image size question...
|
|
| (Pete Cresswell) 2005-03-26, 8:45 pm |
| Just d/l'd the demo.
Ran it against a 34-gig system disk that had about 15 gigs used.
But the image was only about 1.3 gigs.
Does this sound right?
I wrote to a USB2 NTFS disk.
Made a couple of tries to it as a "Disk", but kept getting "Write error or disk
full".
Tried it as "Partition" and wound up with the 1.3 gig image file.
Am I on the right track?
Next step will be to resurrect an old box, do the backup, hose the system, and
try a restore....
--
PeteCresswell
| |
| (Pete Cresswell) 2005-03-27, 7:45 am |
| Per (Pete Cresswell):
>But the image was only about 1.3 gigs.
>
>Does this sound right?
I think I've answered my own question. It's wrong.
Did a second backup using "Partition" instead of "File" and got a much, much
larger image file (that worked upon restore)...
I see what other posters mean about the speed diff between a DOS0-based utility
and DriveImage 7. DI7 is just soooooooo slow.... and it dropped the ball in
my little test. Was able to restore form TerraByte's image, but not from
DriveImage 7's image.
I guess TerraByte gets my eighteen bucks. Wish I'd known about it before I
dropped a bundle on DriveImage...
--
PeteCresswell
| |
|
| I have been using Image for Windows, Image for DOS and BootIt for 2 years
and never had a single problem. I started imaging with Ghost and even
bought Ghost 2003 which is good. I also used Drive Image 4, and 2000, plus
True Image 6 and 7. IMHO Terabyte products are better.
Look at this site to see how the program looks and works.
Image for DOS and Image for Windows: http://www.heffy.com/image.htm
"(Pete Cresswell)" <x@y.z.invalid> wrote in message
news:u9ed4110uei1j4sst3ucuamhdjbjrt5u5o@
4ax.com...
> Per (Pete Cresswell):
>
> I think I've answered my own question. It's wrong.
>
> Did a second backup using "Partition" instead of "File" and got a much,
> much
> larger image file (that worked upon restore)...
>
> I see what other posters mean about the speed diff between a DOS0-based
> utility
> and DriveImage 7. DI7 is just soooooooo slow.... and it dropped the
> ball in
> my little test. Was able to restore form TerraByte's image, but not from
> DriveImage 7's image.
>
> I guess TerraByte gets my eighteen bucks. Wish I'd known about it before
> I
> dropped a bundle on DriveImage...
> --
> PeteCresswell
| |
| (Pete Cresswell) 2005-04-01, 8:45 pm |
| Per a61:
>I have been using Image for Windows, Image for DOS and BootIt for 2 years
>and never had a single problem.
I signed up for Image... and said "what the heck" for the extra eight bucks for
the Windows version.
Now that I have it and have used both, I need to ask: why use the windows
version at all? Seems to take a *lot* longer to run....longer enough that
re-booting into DOS and running the DOS version saves considerable time.
--
PeteCresswell
| |
| Dale Ellis 2005-04-02, 2:46 am |
| Run IFW (with Phylock on) while doing other tasks in Windows. Or create a
batch file to run it at the end of the day, followed by a system shutdown.
Images created with either can be restored by both programs _plus_
BootItNG.
Dale
(Pete Cresswell) wrote:
> I signed up for Image... and said "what the heck" for the extra eight
> bucks for the Windows version.
>
> Now that I have it and have used both, I need to ask: why use the windows
> version at all? Seems to take a *lot* longer to run....longer enough
> that re-booting into DOS and running the DOS version saves considerable
> time.
| |
| (Pete Cresswell) 2005-04-02, 7:45 am |
| Per Dale Ellis:
> Or create a
>batch file to run it at the end of the day, followed by a system shutdown.
That makes sense - no reboot, and nobody cares how long it takes.
--
PeteCresswell
|
|
|
|
|