• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Does this HDD cloning software exist?

AnitaPeterson

AnitaPeterson

Diamond Member
Hi there,

I've just had a fifth Maxtor HDD die on me in the last 4 years... My last one in use... So I've sworn off all Maxtor products from now on, and I need to get my OS and programs all reinstalled on a new drive (the one that just died doesn't seem to be spinning, it just squeaks from time to time).

I've decided to take the plunge and organize a safe backup system for my two main machines. Which means that I'll be cloning the C:/ drives on a regular basis on two spare HDs...

The idea is that the HDD's *SHOULD* be ready to replace the main (C:/) drives in these two machines, if necessary.

I haven't used HD cloning applications on over 4 years, so I'm a bit rusty. I'm looking for a particular set of features, and I hope there is at least one piece of software which offers them:

1) Ease of use. No command prompt or complicated instruction lines with brackets and slashes. This is 2006, after all...
2) 100% cloning. If I take HDD A and I clone it with HDD B, I want both HDs to be fully compatible with the computer they'll be sitting in.
3) Size independent. If HDD X is 80 GB, and HDD Y is 120 GB, and I clone X over Y, I want Y to keep reporting its correct size. Similarly, if HDD X is 200 GB (but only 60 GB used) and I'm cloning X over Y, this should work just as well.
4) If possible, the cloning should work over USB, SATA, IDE and/or FireWire...

Does this mythical software exist?
 
I know this isn't really answering the question you're asking but unless you're wanting the "backups" to be protected from viruses/malware it really sounds like you'd be happier running a RAID 1 setup. It would be far less actual work involved for you in the long run and the backups would always be current to the exact moment of possible failure. Even in the event you wanted to do it that way to protect from viruses and/or malware, for that to be effective you'd have to assume you caught the offending malware before ghosting over the backup onto the secondary drives.
 
I just use dd

It's worked for decades, no reason to improve it. Although I supose someone could write a gui front end to dd.
 
I perfer to make a file that I can then put on disks or backup somewhere to be extracted on a new drive later.

Something like

dd if=/dev/hda | gzip > /mnt/other_drive/backup.img.gz

and extract it with something like

gzip -dc /mnt/other_drive/backup.img.gz | dd of=/dev/hda

or if I want to split it into 4 gig files for dvd burning

dd if=/dev/hda | gzip -c | split -b 4096m - /mnt/other_drive/backup.img.gz.

Personally, I think a GUI would make this process even more complex then it needs to be.
 
The fastest and most accurate cloning software I have found today is Acronis' TrueImage 9.0. I clone several drives every week on three machines.

TrueImage will automagically prepare you a full bootable CD that you can then use on any computer. Boot to it, it loads, then use an easy Linux-based GUI to get to the cloning function. It handles externals, USB 2, SCSI, Firewire, SATA, PATA - whatever.

 
Originally posted by: YBS1
I know this isn't really answering the question you're asking but unless you're wanting the "backups" to be protected from viruses/malware it really sounds like you'd be happier running a RAID 1 setup. It would be far less actual work involved for you in the long run and the backups would always be current to the exact moment of possible failure. Even in the event you wanted to do it that way to protect from viruses and/or malware, for that to be effective you'd have to assume you caught the offending malware before ghosting over the backup onto the secondary drives.
Click to expand...


Raid is not a backup
Raid is not a backup

A drive image is not a backup
A drive image is not a backup
 
Originally posted by: nweaver
Originally posted by: YBS1
I know this isn't really answering the question you're asking but unless you're wanting the "backups" to be protected from viruses/malware it really sounds like you'd be happier running a RAID 1 setup. It would be far less actual work involved for you in the long run and the backups would always be current to the exact moment of possible failure. Even in the event you wanted to do it that way to protect from viruses and/or malware, for that to be effective you'd have to assume you caught the offending malware before ghosting over the backup onto the secondary drives.
Click to expand...


Raid is not a backup
Raid is not a backup

A drive image is not a backup
A drive image is not a backup
Click to expand...

Then what exactly does count as a backup? Diamond tablets etched with binary code?

RAID, alright, it's still susceptible to data corruption, user error, and power surges, but not drive failure. Drive image though? Isn't that a complete backup?
 
An array, just like a single drive, is succeptable to file system corruption/deletion/infection, physical failure and/or damage, theft, &c.

Volume images (especially OS) to removeable media are an excellent companion to drive clones.

I shun incremental backups because they are dependent upon one another, do not offer the redundancy of consecutive backups and would not be as simple to restore.

True Image is good, especially for beginners. Ghost has the advantage of being compact enough to fit on a floppy plus being able to run automatically from a command file to avoid having to manually navigate through the GUI each time. With either software though, I recommend eschewing their Windows interface, except perhaps for selective file restoration from images in the case of Ghost since it can be done from an equally svelte single executable.

As far as Symantec slipping... they have always been crap. Indeed, they buy companies like Binary Research and PowerQuest and crappify their good software. Can Acronis be next? :Q
 
My drive images are not used as backups, they are used to build other like computers, or to get a snapshot of a system that I can use later if I change my mind (for example, I have an image of a gentoo base build with X installed, but not gnome, KDE, or etc. I can revert to this, and be 90% there to a fully functional desktop with my choice of UI's). For backups I run a cron job that backs up only vital files (config files)(with rsync). My home folder data is backed up on a manual basis (it is copied to my file server via cron job nightly (with rysnc), but I make manaul dvd backups of important items (tax returns, etc) that are placed in lockbox offsite.

At work we store all info on our SAN, and do tape backups which are placed in our alternate location (city one's tapes are put in safe at city two, city two's tapes at city one).
 
Originally posted by: nweaver
Originally posted by: YBS1
I know this isn't really answering the question you're asking but unless you're wanting the "backups" to be protected from viruses/malware it really sounds like you'd be happier running a RAID 1 setup. It would be far less actual work involved for you in the long run and the backups would always be current to the exact moment of possible failure. Even in the event you wanted to do it that way to protect from viruses and/or malware, for that to be effective you'd have to assume you caught the offending malware before ghosting over the backup onto the secondary drives.
Click to expand...


Raid is not a backup
Raid is not a backup

A drive image is not a backup
A drive image is not a backup
Click to expand...

Read the original post
Read the original post

Read the original post
Read the original post

He doesn't imply anywhere he's backing up important dated corporate financial data/medical records here. It's obvious he's just tired of having to "rebuild" his system time after time from hdd failures. I seriously doubt he wants to build a huge library of dated and sorted tape backups and if you're trying to imply optical storage media...I'll put my trust in a hdd before I would a dvd/cd. For his purposes RAID or drive images are a backup. Besides, isn't it just common sense to backup anything important to multiple types of media anyway?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top