Hi

Sorry, it was actually 1.269 Gig;
It took 12:50 hrs?

It was on a P4/400 512MB PC3200 memory pc.

One hard drive partitioned into 2.  Backed the OS into the 2nd partition.

So what did go wrong - who has the answer - does Norton make user
friendly products?

I still have to check to see if the backup is good!

Thanks

Gunrunnerjohn wrote:

> Well, getting any Windows to install in 2 megs is a neat trick. :-)
>
> Seriously, assuming that you mean gigs, GHOST should take about 10 minutes
 or
> less do do an image file of that installation.  Something is certainly wro
ng...
>
>
> On Wed, 08 Sep 2004 21:02:27 GMT, "@ No Spamearthlink.net" wrote:
>
> 
>
>

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

I don't know about "user friendly", but GHOST has been very reliable for me.
  I
suspect that the response in your other thread about disk structure problems
might have a bearing on the problem.  Clearly, something is amiss with the d
isk
structure or the hardware.


On Thu, 09 Sep 2004 15:45:00 GMT, "@ No Spamearthlink.net" wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
>
>Hi
>
>Sorry, it was actually 1.269 Gig;
>It took 12:50 hrs?
>
>It was on a P4/400 512MB PC3200 memory pc.
>
>One hard drive partitioned into 2.  Backed the OS into the 2nd partition.
>
>So what did go wrong - who has the answer - does Norton make user
>friendly products?
>
>I still have to check to see if the backup is good!
>
>Thanks
>
>Gunrunnerjohn wrote:
> 

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]

Well, the very first time it did backup quicker - later it changed!  I
didn't manually make any changes.

I checked the Harddisk PIO modes - it shows correctly but Not sure what
it does when it boots up using Ghost!

There is NO issues w/ the harddisk - Its relatively new and I had it
zero filled and ran through all the Maxtor checks before putting it on.

Since it worked once, I hope its a software issue but unsure how to fix it.

Gunrunnerjohn wrote:
> I don't know about "user friendly", but GHOST has been very reliable for m
e.  I
> suspect that the response in your other thread about disk structure proble
ms
> might have a bearing on the problem.  Clearly, something is amiss with the
 disk
> structure or the hardware.
>
>
> On Thu, 09 Sep 2004 15:45:00 GMT, "@ No Spamearthlink.net" wrote:
>
> 
>

[ Post a follow-up to this message ]