>> Anna wrote:
>> I'm sure you understand that when we talk about eSATA or just plain SATA
>> in this context of backup programs, we're simply talking about the HDD
>> that will be involved in the backup and/or restore process. And that HDD
>> will be a SATA (not a PATA) HDD. The distinction between SATA & eSATA is
>> simply the connector that a SATA HDD will be connected to. The >> "e" in
>> eSATA stands for "external". A number of motherboards are equipped >>
>> with an eSATA port and a number of desktop computer cases are similarly
>> >> equipped.
>> The eSATA port is considered a more secure SATA connector than the
>> "regular" or "normal" SATA connector and the eSATA data cable will be
>> equipped with an eSATA connector, not a "regular" SATA connector. But >>
>> for all practical purposes a SATA HDD will perform just as well connected
>> >> to either type of port - SATA or eSATA.
>>
>> The important point to remember here is that connecting a external SATA
>> HDD to *either* a SATA or eSATA port will give the user SATA-to-SATA
>> connectivity (as opposed to USB connectivity for example). Obviously
>> we're presuming that the PC has SATA capability, i.e., it supports SATA
>> hard drives.
>>
>> Having SATA-to-SATA connectivity is most advantageous when using an
>> external SATA HDD as the recipient of the backed-up contents of one's
>> internal day-to-day working HDD. There are two significant advantages...
>> 1. The data transfer rate is considerably higher than, for example, a USB
>> external HDD device.
>> 2. Assuming the SATA HDD contained in a SATA external enclosure is the
>> recipient of the cloned contents of the user's internal HDD through the
>> use of a disk-cloning program, e.g., the Acronis one that has been
>> mentioned, the SATA HDD will be a bootable device even though it's being
>> used in an external capacity. The system will treat that drive as an
>> *internal* HDD because of its SATA-to-SATA connectivity notwithstanding
>> the fact that it is physically external to the machine.
>>
>> (BTW, that CMS device you mention is really nothing more than an external
>> >> enclosure that provides both USB & SATA connectivity. There are scores
>> of >> similar enclosures on the market. You can simply install your own
>> SATA >> HDD into the enclosure.)
>>
>> The Acronis True Image program that has been recommended to you is a fine
>> program with many satisfied users. You should consider it, especially
>> since there's a trial version available.
>>
>> However, for a variety of reasons, the disk-cloning program we greatly
>> prefer is the Casper 4 program. If you (or anyone coming upon this
>> thread) want some details about that program I'll post such.
>>
>> First of all, understand that the SATA/eSATA interface is not "glitchy".
>> By & large it makes for a day-in day-out stable connection between the
>> HDD and the system (the motherboard) and yields the advantages I have
>> enumerated. That previous thread you referred to re possible
>> incompatibilities between the older SATA HDDs (with the 1.5 Gb/s data
>> interface) and the newer (so-called) SATA-II HDDs (with the 3.0 Gb/s data
>> interface) is of no relevance re the issue under discussion here. So put
>> any of your doubts to rest as to any "faults" re using an external SATA
>> HDD for backup purposes.
>>
>> Since you already have USB external enclosures I would see no reason why
>> you shouldn't use them as recipients of the disk clone (or disk image)
>> assuming you would be using a disk cloning or disk imaging program in
>> establishing & maintaining a comprehensive backup program. This would >>
>> be the same setup as the one "Bill in Co." is using (as well as many
>> other users) and it would basically serve the purpose.
>>
>> My recommendation for using an external SATA HDD with SATA-to-
>> SATA connectivity for that purpose would yield the advantages I detailed
>> >> above, but obviously it would entail an add'l cost to the user should
>> the user >> already have a USB (or Firewire) external enclosure
>> containing an existing HDD. Whether the user would want to incur the
>> add'l expense in purchasing >> the components I have indicated to secure
>> the advantages I've indicated is obviously a decision that would have to
>> be made by him or her.
>> Anna


"Anonymous" <com@com.com> wrote in message
news:VkkXj.4757$nl7.1747@flpi146.ffdc.sbc.com...
> Yeah, I assumed that there were other vendors, beside CMS,
> with a similar offering.
>
> The usb externals have performed well for me over the years.
> I just agonize over the work that will be required for a bare
> metal recovery. I just think it's time for me to address such
> a possibility/eventuality.
>
> I was steering toward an external ATA solution because it is
> bootable, and for a speed increase. (although the speed is
> not really an need issue).
>
> I like the CMS product because the backup image looks
> identical to the source drive. IOW, it's natively organized,
> as opposed to a single extent composite. In the time of a
> failure, this swap seems like a much better solution to gain
> lost access quickly. Without fumbling/waiting for a recov-
> ery.
>
> But, your explanation/comments have helped me understand
> some of the issues, and technicalities behind the curtain.
>
> One thing that I'm still stuck on though. Assuming an EHDD
> boot for recovery, how are all OS C:\ references resolved
> subsequently. Is the EHDD assigned C:\ as the boot drive?
>
> Or, are all C:\ references resolved on the fly?
>
> Thanks....


When you use a disk-cloning program such as Acronis True Image, or
Symantec's Ghost, or our favorite, the Casper 4 program, and you use that
type of program to clone the contents of your "source" HDD to a USB external
HDD as apparently you intend to do...

For all practical purposes, the USBEHD - the recipient of the clone - will
be a precise copy of the source HDD, however, it is ordinarily not a
bootable device although some users have indicated they have been able to
boot to a cloned USBEHD. We have never achieved that capability (at least in
an XP environment).

If & when the time comes that you wish to restore your system to a bootable,
functional state (presumably because the internal source HDD has become
defective or the OS has become corrupt & dysfunctional), then you would
simply clone back the contents on the USBEHD to the internal HDD. The system
would retain the C: letter drive assignment. It is immaterial as to the
drive letter designation on the cloned USBEHD while it is merely functioning
as the repository of the cloned contents of the internal (source) HDD.
You're using that device basically as a retainer of the contents of your
internal (source) HDD and ultimately as a vehicle for cloning the contents
on the external HDD back to your internal HDD for restoration purposes. As
I've indicated, under those circumstances you will thus have a bootable,
functioning system with the C: drive letter assignment.
Anna