Closed

Best disk cloning software

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.configuration_manage,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

I need to clone the hard disk containing my XP OS and applications. I know
that there are now several 'cloning' packages available. Can anyone advise
on the pros and cons of each?

Many thanks.
12 answers Last reply
More about best disk cloning software
  1. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.configuration_manage (More info?)

    Are you cloning for the purpose of duplicating the setup
    on another system, or for backup purposes?
    I've personally used the Symantec ghost product and have
    foudn it to work very effectively under both
    circumstances.

    Tina

    >-----Original Message-----
    >I need to clone the hard disk containing my XP OS and
    applications. I know
    >that there are now several 'cloning' packages available.
    Can anyone advise
    >on the pros and cons of each?
    >
    >Many thanks.
    >
    >
    >.
    >
  2. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.configuration_manage,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    "Andrew Chalk" <achalk@XXXmagnacartasoftware.com> wrote in message
    news:O5BPKRhgEHA.1048@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
    > I need to clone the hard disk containing my XP OS and applications. I know
    > that there are now several 'cloning' packages available. Can anyone advise
    > on the pros and cons of each?
    >
    > Many thanks.
    >
    >

    I used to use Norton Ghost - it was quick & easy to use. Then they added
    lots of features & it became far too complex for my tastes.
  3. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.configuration_manage,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    In article <O5BPKRhgEHA.1048@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl>,
    Andrew Chalk <achalk@XXXmagnacartasoftware.com> wrote:
    >I need to clone the hard disk containing my XP OS and applications. I know
    >that there are now several 'cloning' packages available. Can anyone advise
    >on the pros and cons of each?
    >
    >Many thanks.
    >
    >

    I like Acronis Total Image. It's an image backup tool
    that also clones disks.


    --
    Al Dykes
    -----------
    adykes at p a n i x . c o m
  4. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.configuration_manage,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    I also have to ask, what are you cloning it to? If you are cloning to
    another hard drive, I highly recommend saving your money and using the
    software that came with the drive you are cloning to. MaxBlast is for
    Maxtor drives, SeaTools for Seagate drives, etc. You can get a good
    bootdisk with all of these on it from http://www.ultimatebootcd.com/

    ----
    Nathan McNulty


    Andrew Chalk wrote:
    > I need to clone the hard disk containing my XP OS and applications. I know
    > that there are now several 'cloning' packages available. Can anyone advise
    > on the pros and cons of each?
    >
    > Many thanks.
    >
    >
  5. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.configuration_manage,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    "Rufio" <Bran_britain@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    news:oNqTc.41131$Oi.9723@fed1read04...
    > > I need to clone the hard disk containing my XP OS and applications. I
    know
    > > that there are now several 'cloning' packages available. Can anyone
    advise
    > > on the pros and cons of each?
    > >
    > > Many thanks.
    > >
    > >

    > "Andrew Chalk" <achalk@XXXmagnacartasoftware.com> wrote in message
    > news:O5BPKRhgEHA.1048@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
    > I used to use Norton Ghost - it was quick & easy to use. Then they added
    > lots of features & it became far too complex for my tastes.

    Rufio:
    No doubt you'll receive a variety of responses to your inquiry, each one
    touting this or that imaging program. The likelihood is you probably won't
    go wrong with any of the more-popular ones. For myself I prefer Symantec's
    Norton
    Ghost program. I've been using the various versions for nearly four years
    now and I find this program simple to use, straightforward in operation, and
    most importantly - effective in what does, i.e., cloning one hard disk to
    another hard disk.

    I'm always puzzled when I come across statements like Rufio's who
    denigrate the Ghost program because of its alleged complexity. I frequently
    wonder whether we're all using the same program. I have often remarked that
    I wish every software program I use was as simple, straightforward, and
    effective to use as Symantec's Norton Ghost program.

    Let me state at the outset that I use Ghost for one and only one purpose -
    to clone the contents of one hard drive to another hard drive. By making a
    bit-for-bit copy (not technically precise perhaps, but correct for all
    practical purposes) through the cloning process of one's working hard drive,
    you have,
    what seems to me, the ultimate backup system. I have used various versions
    of Ghost over the years, including the present 2003 version. During that
    time I estimate I've cloned a multitude of hard drives more than a thousand
    times. And done so with nary a hiccup. Ghost's ease of use together with its
    reasonable speed make it a joy to use.

    After creating the Ghost bootable floppy disk from the Ghost program and
    booting up with that disk, the user makes a few simple keyclicks and the
    cloning process begins. What could be more simple or more effective?

    Art
  6. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.configuration_manage,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    Art - wasn't me trying to do the clone. But as for the Ghost issue - I once
    downloaded a trial version of the basic edition of ghost. But another time I
    tried to find a download from Symantec, all I could get was their enterprise
    version - there was no trial version of the basic package. That's what the
    problem was. i wasn't surprised by the complexity, I was more surprised that
    there was no trial version of the basic edition - the one time I used it, it
    was pretty good.

    I do disk copies so rarely, that I won't buy the package - there will be a
    new O/S & the package won't work, before I need to use it again.

    Ah - how I miss XCOPY :o)


    "Art" <noonehere@longone.net> wrote in message
    news:OW6T0TjgEHA.3964@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
    > "Rufio" <Bran_britain@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    > news:oNqTc.41131$Oi.9723@fed1read04...
    > > > I need to clone the hard disk containing my XP OS and applications. I
    > know
    > > > that there are now several 'cloning' packages available. Can anyone
    > advise
    > > > on the pros and cons of each?
    > > >
    > > > Many thanks.
    > > >
    > > >
    >
    > > "Andrew Chalk" <achalk@XXXmagnacartasoftware.com> wrote in message
    > > news:O5BPKRhgEHA.1048@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
    > > I used to use Norton Ghost - it was quick & easy to use. Then they added
    > > lots of features & it became far too complex for my tastes.
    >
    > Rufio:
    > No doubt you'll receive a variety of responses to your inquiry, each one
    > touting this or that imaging program. The likelihood is you probably won't
    > go wrong with any of the more-popular ones. For myself I prefer Symantec's
    > Norton
    > Ghost program. I've been using the various versions for nearly four years
    > now and I find this program simple to use, straightforward in operation,
    and
    > most importantly - effective in what does, i.e., cloning one hard disk to
    > another hard disk.
    >
    > I'm always puzzled when I come across statements like Rufio's who
    > denigrate the Ghost program because of its alleged complexity. I
    frequently
    > wonder whether we're all using the same program. I have often remarked
    that
    > I wish every software program I use was as simple, straightforward, and
    > effective to use as Symantec's Norton Ghost program.
    >
    > Let me state at the outset that I use Ghost for one and only one purpose -
    > to clone the contents of one hard drive to another hard drive. By making a
    > bit-for-bit copy (not technically precise perhaps, but correct for all
    > practical purposes) through the cloning process of one's working hard
    drive,
    > you have,
    > what seems to me, the ultimate backup system. I have used various versions
    > of Ghost over the years, including the present 2003 version. During that
    > time I estimate I've cloned a multitude of hard drives more than a
    thousand
    > times. And done so with nary a hiccup. Ghost's ease of use together with
    its
    > reasonable speed make it a joy to use.
    >
    > After creating the Ghost bootable floppy disk from the Ghost program and
    > booting up with that disk, the user makes a few simple keyclicks and the
    > cloning process begins. What could be more simple or more effective?
    >
    > Art
    >
    >
    >
  7. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.configuration_manage,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    What if I want to clone to a file for later copying to a disk. MaxBalst, for
    one, won't do this.

    What about ghost/driveimage?


    "Nathan McNulty" <nospam@msn.com> wrote in message
    news:%231YoOcjgEHA.3916@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
    > I also have to ask, what are you cloning it to? If you are cloning to
    > another hard drive, I highly recommend saving your money and using the
    > software that came with the drive you are cloning to. MaxBlast is for
    > Maxtor drives, SeaTools for Seagate drives, etc. You can get a good
    > bootdisk with all of these on it from http://www.ultimatebootcd.com/
    >
    > ----
    > Nathan McNulty
    >
    >
    > Andrew Chalk wrote:
    > > I need to clone the hard disk containing my XP OS and applications. I
    know
    > > that there are now several 'cloning' packages available. Can anyone
    advise
    > > on the pros and cons of each?
    > >
    > > Many thanks.
    > >
    > >
  8. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.configuration_manage,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    I've used Drive Image for years and liked it's interface but have since
    switched to Ghost 2003.

    "Andrew Chalk" <achalk@XXXmagnacartasoftware.com> wrote in message
    news:O5BPKRhgEHA.1048@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
    I need to clone the hard disk containing my XP OS and applications. I know
    that there are now several 'cloning' packages available. Can anyone advise
    on the pros and cons of each?

    Many thanks.
  9. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.configuration_manage,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    I personally use Norton Ghost simply because I got it for free after
    mail in rebates. I used a beta version of Acronis's software which I
    liked even better, but I don't have the money to spend on it right now.

    Truth is, just about any of these will work and you will just have to
    choose the one that fits your price range and needs. ;)

    ----
    Nathan McNulty

    Andrew Chalk wrote:
    > What if I want to clone to a file for later copying to a disk. MaxBalst, for
    > one, won't do this.
    >
    > What about ghost/driveimage?
    >
    >
    > "Nathan McNulty" <nospam@msn.com> wrote in message
    > news:%231YoOcjgEHA.3916@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
    >
    >>I also have to ask, what are you cloning it to? If you are cloning to
    >>another hard drive, I highly recommend saving your money and using the
    >>software that came with the drive you are cloning to. MaxBlast is for
    >>Maxtor drives, SeaTools for Seagate drives, etc. You can get a good
    >>bootdisk with all of these on it from http://www.ultimatebootcd.com/
    >>
    >>----
    >>Nathan McNulty
    >>
    >>
    >>Andrew Chalk wrote:
    >>
    >>>I need to clone the hard disk containing my XP OS and applications. I
    >
    > know
    >
    >>>that there are now several 'cloning' packages available. Can anyone
    >
    > advise
    >
    >>>on the pros and cons of each?
    >>>
    >>>Many thanks.
    >>>
    >>>
    >
    >
    >
  10. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    On Sat, 14 Aug 2004 10:37:05 -0500, "Andrew Chalk"
    <achalk@XXXmagnacartasoftware.com> wrote:

    >I need to clone the hard disk containing my XP OS and applications. I know
    >that there are now several 'cloning' packages available. Can anyone advise
    >on the pros and cons of each?
    >
    >Many thanks.
    >

    I have used Acronis TrueImage, PowerQuest Drive Image, and Norton
    Ghost 2003. All are capable solutions. I use trueImage to Image a
    Partition to file, although Drive Image 7 is faster. I use Drive
    Image to image to DVD, because Acronis requires UDF software to write
    to DVD (RW), which is slow. True Image just came out with a new
    version (8.0), which is almost identical to 7.0 IMO. The biggest draw
    of TrueImage and Drive Image over Ghost is their ability to image your
    system partition while still in windows, and their ability to mount
    image files as a drive and retrieve individual files. Ghost 9.0, due
    in early September will erase those deficiencies. It will be able to
    image in windows, mount images and restore images created by Drive
    Image 7 as well. Symantec bought PowerQuest last December. As far as
    ease of use to me (YMMV), Acronis is easiest, followed by Ghost 2003
    and DI7. Reliability for all is a wash. I have restored between 50 -
    100 images on this system (software development tends to wreak havoc
    on a system sometimes) with the only failure being with Acronis. I
    doubt it was the software though, the drive failed hard the next day.
    I bought a new drive and restored the image the next day. As for me,
    I think I will be a Ghost 9.0 user come September.
  11. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.configuration_manage,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    Thanks to all for replies. I found that WD's tools cannot handle their own
    EZ-DRIVE (EZ-DRIVE disks appear to not like being cloned). I reinstalled
    Win98 on the EZ-drived disk and it preserved my settings while nuking
    EZ-DRIVE.

    Regards
    "Andrew Chalk" <achalk@XXXmagnacartasoftware.com> wrote in message
    news:O5BPKRhgEHA.1048@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
    > I need to clone the hard disk containing my XP OS and applications. I know
    > that there are now several 'cloning' packages available. Can anyone advise
    > on the pros and cons of each?
    >
    > Many thanks.
    >
    >
  12. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.configuration_manage,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

    Found it!

    This may be useful to others:

    Windows configured the secondary IDE device to use DMA. I set it to use PIO
    only and Windows recognized the drive.

    - Andrew

    "Andrew Chalk" <achalk@XXXmagnacartasoftware.com> wrote in message
    news:O5BPKRhgEHA.1048@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
    > I need to clone the hard disk containing my XP OS and applications. I know
    > that there are now several 'cloning' packages available. Can anyone advise
    > on the pros and cons of each?
    >
    > Many thanks.
    >
    >
Ask a new question

Read More

Configuration Microsoft Software Windows XP Product