Backup/Restore suggestions for XP, and Vista

"Anna" <myname@myisp.net> wrote:

>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.
>Anna

<sigh>

Here we go again! <g>

PD43 wrote:
> "Anna" <myname@myisp.net> wrote:
>
>> 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.
>> Anna
>
> <sigh>
>
> Here we go again! <g>

You don't want to stay in this thread, PD. It's too long for you to
follow.

Anna wrote:
> "Anonymous" <com@com.com> wrote in message
> news:5q1Xj.3224$ah4.2192@flpi148.ffdc.sbc.com...
>> I've had similar replies, including the suggestion to use the
>> Acronis Workstation version, rather than Home.
>>
>> Like you, my years of Ntbackup usage have been quite
>> positive, meeting all my needs for a backup.
>>
>> However, although Ntbackup will easily protect against
>> accidental loss, it is either unable, or quite cumbersome
>> at providing recovery, or bare metal restore.
>>
>> I have to admit that the backup product from CMS looks
>> quite attractive though. Because I like the idea of simply
>> rebooting the backup image for a quick recovery. Watch
>> this video:
>> http://www.cmsproducts.com/video/desktop_backup.html
>>
>> Unfortunately, I'm not familiar with E/SATA, and support
>> would require my upgrade. But, I'd get the functionality
>> described, in addition to the significantly higher speeds.
>>
>> One of the Amazon reviewers complaints on Acronis TI
>> Home was that E/SATA was not currently supported. I
>> guess I would've thought a backup product would simply
>> rely on the OS for peripheral access.
>>
>> I'm currently investigating this "boot from backup" on an
>> external drive issue. What it takes? (E/SATA, Firewire,
>> etc?), and what I've have to upgrade. But, I like the idea.
>>
>> Not only is it easier, but simple testing of a crash recovery
>> requires no intermediate restore. Much less exposure to
>> error.
>>
>> Additionally, because the backup image is stored in native
>> format(non-composite), even lost file restores are easier.
>> And FAT limitations are avoided for users of that archi-
>> tecture.
>>
>> Thanks.
>
>
> 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.
> Anna

Just to be complete, Anna, you should point out that he doesn't HAVE to use
SATA or eSATA for backups, however. He could instead just use his
existing setup, and get an external USB HD enclosure (containing a regular
PATA hard drive) for backup purposes too (i.e., for storing and restoring a
backup image). That's what I'm doing over here, and it works great.
Granted, it's not as fast, but it doesn't really take me that long, either.

>> "Anonymous" <com@com.com> wrote in message
>> news:5q1Xj.3224$ah4.2192@flpi148.ffdc.sbc.com...
>>> I've had similar replies, including the suggestion to use the
>>> Acronis Workstation version, rather than Home.
>>>
>>> Like you, my years of Ntbackup usage have been quite
>>> positive, meeting all my needs for a backup.
>>>
>>> However, although Ntbackup will easily protect against
>>> accidental loss, it is either unable, or quite cumbersome
>>> at providing recovery, or bare metal restore.
>>>
>>> I have to admit that the backup product from CMS looks
>>> quite attractive though. Because I like the idea of simply
>>> rebooting the backup image for a quick recovery. Watch
>>> this video:
>>> http://www.cmsproducts.com/video/desktop_backup.html
>>>
>>> Unfortunately, I'm not familiar with E/SATA, and support
>>> would require my upgrade. But, I'd get the functionality
>>> described, in addition to the significantly higher speeds.
>>>
>>> One of the Amazon reviewers complaints on Acronis TI
>>> Home was that E/SATA was not currently supported. I
>>> guess I would've thought a backup product would simply
>>> rely on the OS for peripheral access.
>>>
>>> I'm currently investigating this "boot from backup" on an
>>> external drive issue. What it takes? (E/SATA, Firewire,
>>> etc?), and what I've have to upgrade. But, I like the idea.
>>>
>>> Not only is it easier, but simple testing of a crash recovery
>>> requires no intermediate restore. Much less exposure to
>>> error.
>>>
>>> Additionally, because the backup image is stored in native
>>> format(non-composite), even lost file restores are easier.
>>> And FAT limitations are avoided for users of that archi-
>>> tecture.
>>>
>>> Thanks.


> 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.
>> Anna


"Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:u6jcxcvtIHA.4376@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Just to be complete, Anna, you should point out that he doesn't HAVE to
> use SATA or eSATA for backups, however. He could instead just use his
> existing setup, and get an external USB HD enclosure (containing a regular
> PATA hard drive) for backup purposes too (i.e., for storing and restoring
> a backup image). That's what I'm doing over here, and it works great.
> Granted, it's not as fast, but it doesn't really take me that long,
> either.


Bill:
True enough and it's a virtual certainty that the great majority of users
like yourself who already use a disk-cloning program as a comprehensive
backup tool do indeed use a USB-connected external HDD as the recipient of
the cloned contents of their day-to-day working HDD. I wouldn't dispute that
for a moment.

But...

In my view the superiority of using a SATA-to-SATA connection for that
purpose via a SATA/eSATA external enclosure as I have described above
warrants its use rather than a USB connected HDD wherever that inherent SATA
capability exists. Obviously the user must have a SATA-capable system and a
SATA or eSATA port to which the external device is connected. In that
connection I might add that many, if not most, of the SATA/eSATA external
enclosures now come with an auxiliary eSATA bracket that is affixed to the
backplane of the computer case and the attached (inner) cable is simply
connected to one of the motherboard's SATA connectors. And, of course, more
& more desktop cases (as well as more & more motherboards) are now coming
equipped with an eSATA port

(We're talking about desktop machines here, not laptops/notebooks. While the
SATA-to-SATA connectivity can be established with those latter machines the
component to do so is different.)

So, as in the OP's case where a user is considering the possibility of using
a disk-cloning program as a comprehensive backup system, and his or her
system supports SATA capability, I believe they should give serious
consideration to what I've suggested.
Anna

"Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:u6jcxcvtIHA.4376@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Anna wrote:
>> "Anonymous" <com@com.com> wrote in message
>> news:5q1Xj.3224$ah4.2192@flpi148.ffdc.sbc.com...
>>> I've had similar replies, including the suggestion to use the
>>> Acronis Workstation version, rather than Home.
>>>
>>> Like you, my years of Ntbackup usage have been quite
>>> positive, meeting all my needs for a backup.
>>>
>>> However, although Ntbackup will easily protect against
>>> accidental loss, it is either unable, or quite cumbersome
>>> at providing recovery, or bare metal restore.
>>>
>>> I have to admit that the backup product from CMS looks
>>> quite attractive though. Because I like the idea of simply
>>> rebooting the backup image for a quick recovery. Watch
>>> this video:
>>> http://www.cmsproducts.com/video/desktop_backup.html
>>>
>>> Unfortunately, I'm not familiar with E/SATA, and support
>>> would require my upgrade. But, I'd get the functionality
>>> described, in addition to the significantly higher speeds.
>>>
>>> One of the Amazon reviewers complaints on Acronis TI
>>> Home was that E/SATA was not currently supported. I
>>> guess I would've thought a backup product would simply
>>> rely on the OS for peripheral access.
>>>
>>> I'm currently investigating this "boot from backup" on an
>>> external drive issue. What it takes? (E/SATA, Firewire,
>>> etc?), and what I've have to upgrade. But, I like the idea.
>>>
>>> Not only is it easier, but simple testing of a crash recovery
>>> requires no intermediate restore. Much less exposure to
>>> error.
>>>
>>> Additionally, because the backup image is stored in native
>>> format(non-composite), even lost file restores are easier.
>>> And FAT limitations are avoided for users of that archi-
>>> tecture.
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>
>>
>> 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.
>> Anna
>






I'm not fully up to speed on E/SATA, but I've been reading.

Your comments/explanations will help with that understanding.

I think it was another thread of yours where I read about
the interface being "glitchy". Or, at least, the interface when
added with a upgrade card, I think.

The thread concerned another's question concerning whether
a 3.0 ATA unit would synchronize at the existing 1.5 level.

As I said, I'm researching the details. But, that was the first
indication I'd seen of any faults.






> Just to be complete, Anna, you should point out that he doesn't HAVE to
> use SATA or eSATA for backups, however. He could instead just use his
> existing setup, and get an external USB HD enclosure (containing a regular
> PATA hard drive) for backup purposes too (i.e., for storing and restoring
> a backup image). That's what I'm doing over here, and it works great.
> Granted, it's not as fast, but it doesn't really take me that long,
> either.
>






I do currently have two external drives in use for backup via
a usb2.0 interface. I'm researching a new strategy because
I don't have a viable crash recovery solution(at least not with-
out a ton of rebuild work involved). And while researching
the new path, thought I'd upgrade to an ATA interface to
gain the extra speed. Although, I'm not unhappy with the
usb throughput.

Thanks.

"Anonymous" <com@com.com> wrote in message
news:5q1Xj.3224$ah4.2192@flpi148.ffdc.sbc.com...
>
> "Tuttle" <nospamhere@notarealaddressnospam.gs> wrote in message
> news:OcOY39rtIHA.5500@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Anonymous" <com@com.com>
> > Newsgroups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
> > Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2008 12:35 PM
> > Subject: Re: Backup/Restore suggestions for XP, and Vista
> >
> >
> >>
> >> "dadiOH" <dadiOH@invalid.com> wrote in message
> >> news:Ot2vzSntIHA.5268@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> >> > Anonymous wrote:
> >> >> Any suggestions for "complete" backup/restore SW for XP
> >> >> Pro? And that can be eventually migrated to Vista?
> >> >>
> >> >> I need "complete" backup/restore for data retention, image
> >> >> recovery, boot restore, (int)(ext)ernal large HD, and (E)-
> >> >> SATA support.
> >> >>
> >> >> The obvious answers, Acronis and Ghost, seem not to have
> >> >> unanimously glowing feedback on Amazon.
> >> >>
> >> >> Or, are the feedback just flawed?
> >
> > All backup software will have some negative feedback, imaging software
> > even
> > moreso.
> >
> > I've used several tools over the years. My current favourite is Acronis
> > True
> > Image Home.
> >
> > Acronis True Image Home can do a complete image of your drive, so in the
> > event of a drive failure you just install a replacement drive and
restore
> > your recent image to the new drive. Everything will be exactly as you
left
> > it before the old drive failed: Windows (or whatever OS you use), all
> > applications, all your settings and config, all your data.
> >
> > Or, you can use Acronis True Image Home to backup just your documents
and
> > settings, or just specific files, or whatever you want. You can schedule
> > automated backups, can do full, incremental and differential backups,
etc.
> > It's a great tool that has saved me a few times.
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> I've had similar replies, including the suggestion to use the
> Acronis Workstation version, rather than Home.
>
> Like you, my years of Ntbackup usage have been quite
> positive, meeting all my needs for a backup.
>
> However, although Ntbackup will easily protect against
> accidental loss, it is either unable, or quite cumbersome
> at providing recovery, or bare metal restore.
>
> I have to admit that the backup product from CMS looks
> quite attractive though. Because I like the idea of simply
> rebooting the backup image for a quick recovery. Watch
> this video:
> http://www.cmsproducts.com/video/desktop_backup.html
>
> Unfortunately, I'm not familiar with E/SATA, and support
> would require my upgrade. But, I'd get the functionality
> described, in addition to the significantly higher speeds.
>
> One of the Amazon reviewers complaints on Acronis TI
> Home was that E/SATA was not currently supported. I
> guess I would've thought a backup product would simply
> rely on the OS for peripheral access.
>
> I'm currently investigating this "boot from backup" on an
> external drive issue. What it takes? (E/SATA, Firewire,
> etc?), and what I've have to upgrade. But, I like the idea.
>
> Not only is it easier, but simple testing of a crash recovery
> requires no intermediate restore. Much less exposure to
> error.
>
> Additionally, because the backup image is stored in native
> format(non-composite), even lost file restores are easier.
> And FAT limitations are avoided for users of that archi-
> tecture.

As far as I know, Acronis True image supports SATA drives. In fact I have a
SATA drive in my new external USB drive.

Tuttle wrote:
> "Anonymous" <com@com.com> wrote in message
> news:5q1Xj.3224$ah4.2192@flpi148.ffdc.sbc.com...
>>
>> "Tuttle" <nospamhere@notarealaddressnospam.gs> wrote in message
>> news:OcOY39rtIHA.5500@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Anonymous" <com@com.com>
>>> Newsgroups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
>>> Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2008 12:35 PM
>>> Subject: Re: Backup/Restore suggestions for XP, and Vista
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> "dadiOH" <dadiOH@invalid.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:Ot2vzSntIHA.5268@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>>>> Anonymous wrote:
>>>>>> Any suggestions for "complete" backup/restore SW for XP
>>>>>> Pro? And that can be eventually migrated to Vista?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I need "complete" backup/restore for data retention, image
>>>>>> recovery, boot restore, (int)(ext)ernal large HD, and (E)-
>>>>>> SATA support.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The obvious answers, Acronis and Ghost, seem not to have
>>>>>> unanimously glowing feedback on Amazon.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Or, are the feedback just flawed?
>>>
>>> All backup software will have some negative feedback, imaging software
>>> even
>>> moreso.
>>>
>>> I've used several tools over the years. My current favourite is Acronis
>>> True
>>> Image Home.
>>>
>>> Acronis True Image Home can do a complete image of your drive, so in the
>>> event of a drive failure you just install a replacement drive and
>>> restore
>>> your recent image to the new drive. Everything will be exactly as you
>>> left
>>> it before the old drive failed: Windows (or whatever OS you use), all
>>> applications, all your settings and config, all your data.
>>>
>>> Or, you can use Acronis True Image Home to backup just your documents
>>> and
>>> settings, or just specific files, or whatever you want. You can schedule
>>> automated backups, can do full, incremental and differential backups,
>>> etc.
>>> It's a great tool that has saved me a few times.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> I've had similar replies, including the suggestion to use the
>> Acronis Workstation version, rather than Home.
>>
>> Like you, my years of Ntbackup usage have been quite
>> positive, meeting all my needs for a backup.
>>
>> However, although Ntbackup will easily protect against
>> accidental loss, it is either unable, or quite cumbersome
>> at providing recovery, or bare metal restore.
>>
>> I have to admit that the backup product from CMS looks
>> quite attractive though. Because I like the idea of simply
>> rebooting the backup image for a quick recovery. Watch
>> this video:
>> http://www.cmsproducts.com/video/desktop_backup.html
>>
>> Unfortunately, I'm not familiar with E/SATA, and support
>> would require my upgrade. But, I'd get the functionality
>> described, in addition to the significantly higher speeds.
>>
>> One of the Amazon reviewers complaints on Acronis TI
>> Home was that E/SATA was not currently supported. I
>> guess I would've thought a backup product would simply
>> rely on the OS for peripheral access.
>>
>> I'm currently investigating this "boot from backup" on an
>> external drive issue. What it takes? (E/SATA, Firewire,
>> etc?), and what I've have to upgrade. But, I like the idea.
>>
>> Not only is it easier, but simple testing of a crash recovery
>> requires no intermediate restore. Much less exposure to
>> error.
>>
>> Additionally, because the backup image is stored in native
>> format(non-composite), even lost file restores are easier.
>> And FAT limitations are avoided for users of that archi-
>> tecture.
>
> As far as I know, Acronis True image supports SATA drives. In fact I have
> a
> SATA drive in my new external USB drive.

And I'm using TI to backup my internal SATA system drive, to an external USB
enclosure (with an older PATA drive inside) without problems. But as Anna
has said, the newer, all SATA approach, is preferable, but not a necessity
(for just backing up via imaging, at least).

>>> "Anonymous" <com@com.com> wrote in message
>>> news:5q1Xj.3224$ah4.2192@flpi148.ffdc.sbc.com...
>>>> I've had similar replies, including the suggestion to use the
>>>> Acronis Workstation version, rather than Home.
>>>>
>>>> Like you, my years of Ntbackup usage have been quite
>>>> positive, meeting all my needs for a backup.
>>>>
>>>> However, although Ntbackup will easily protect against
>>>> accidental loss, it is either unable, or quite cumbersome
>>>> at providing recovery, or bare metal restore.
>>>>
>>>> I have to admit that the backup product from CMS looks
>>>> quite attractive though. Because I like the idea of simply
>>>> rebooting the backup image for a quick recovery. Watch
>>>> this video:
>>>> http://www.cmsproducts.com/video/desktop_backup.html
>>>>
>>>> Unfortunately, I'm not familiar with E/SATA, and support
>>>> would require my upgrade. But, I'd get the functionality
>>>> described, in addition to the significantly higher speeds.
>>>>
>>>> One of the Amazon reviewers complaints on Acronis TI
>>>> Home was that E/SATA was not currently supported. I
>>>> guess I would've thought a backup product would simply
>>>> rely on the OS for peripheral access.
>>>>
>>>> I'm currently investigating this "boot from backup" on an
>>>> external drive issue. What it takes? (E/SATA, Firewire,
>>>> etc?), and what I've have to upgrade. But, I like the idea.
>>>>
>>>> Not only is it easier, but simple testing of a crash recovery
>>>> requires no intermediate restore. Much less exposure to
>>>> error.
>>>>
>>>> Additionally, because the backup image is stored in native
>>>> format(non-composite), even lost file restores are easier.
>>>> And FAT limitations are avoided for users of that archi-
>>>> tecture.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks.


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.
Anna


> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:u6jcxcvtIHA.4376@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> Just to be complete, Anna, you should point out that he doesn't HAVE to
>> use SATA or eSATA for backups, however. He could instead just use his
>> existing setup, and get an external USB HD enclosure (containing a
>> regular PATA hard drive) for backup purposes too (i.e., for storing and
>> restoring a backup image). That's what I'm doing over here, and it
>> works great. Granted, it's not as fast, but it doesn't really take me
>> that long, either.


"Anonymous" <com@com.com> wrote in message
news:Mj7Xj.931$qH4.828@nlpi061.nbdc.sbc.com...
> I'm not fully up to speed on E/SATA, but I've been reading.
>
> Your comments/explanations will help with that understanding.
>
> I think it was another thread of yours where I read about
> the interface being "glitchy". Or, at least, the interface when
> added with a upgrade card, I think.
>
> The thread concerned another's question concerning whether
> a 3.0 ATA unit would synchronize at the existing 1.5 level.
>
> As I said, I'm researching the details. But, that was the first
> indication I'd seen of any faults.
>
> I do currently have two external drives in use for backup via
> a usb2.0 interface. I'm researching a new strategy because
> I don't have a viable crash recovery solution(at least not with-
> out a ton of rebuild work involved). And while researching
> the new path, thought I'd upgrade to an ATA interface to
> gain the extra speed. Although, I'm not unhappy with the
> usb throughput.
>
> Thanks.


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

"Anna" <myname@myisp.net> wrote in message
news:OkiSLg3tIHA.5580@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>
>>>> "Anonymous" <com@com.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:5q1Xj.3224$ah4.2192@flpi148.ffdc.sbc.com...
>>>>> I've had similar replies, including the suggestion to use the
>>>>> Acronis Workstation version, rather than Home.
>>>>>
>>>>> Like you, my years of Ntbackup usage have been quite
>>>>> positive, meeting all my needs for a backup.
>>>>>
>>>>> However, although Ntbackup will easily protect against
>>>>> accidental loss, it is either unable, or quite cumbersome
>>>>> at providing recovery, or bare metal restore.
>>>>>
>>>>> I have to admit that the backup product from CMS looks
>>>>> quite attractive though. Because I like the idea of simply
>>>>> rebooting the backup image for a quick recovery. Watch
>>>>> this video:
>>>>> http://www.cmsproducts.com/video/desktop_backup.html
>>>>>
>>>>> Unfortunately, I'm not familiar with E/SATA, and support
>>>>> would require my upgrade. But, I'd get the functionality
>>>>> described, in addition to the significantly higher speeds.
>>>>>
>>>>> One of the Amazon reviewers complaints on Acronis TI
>>>>> Home was that E/SATA was not currently supported. I
>>>>> guess I would've thought a backup product would simply
>>>>> rely on the OS for peripheral access.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm currently investigating this "boot from backup" on an
>>>>> external drive issue. What it takes? (E/SATA, Firewire,
>>>>> etc?), and what I've have to upgrade. But, I like the idea.
>>>>>
>>>>> Not only is it easier, but simple testing of a crash recovery
>>>>> requires no intermediate restore. Much less exposure to
>>>>> error.
>>>>>
>>>>> Additionally, because the backup image is stored in native
>>>>> format(non-composite), even lost file restores are easier.
>>>>> And FAT limitations are avoided for users of that archi-
>>>>> tecture.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks.
>
>
> 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.
> Anna
>
>
>> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>> news:u6jcxcvtIHA.4376@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> >> Just to be complete, Anna, you should point out that he doesn't HAVE to
>>> use SATA or eSATA for backups, however. He could instead just use his
>>> existing setup, and get an external USB HD enclosure (containing a
>>> regular PATA hard drive) for backup purposes too (i.e., for storing and
>>> restoring a backup image). That's what I'm doing over here, and it
>>> works great. Granted, it's not as fast, but it doesn't really take me
>>> that long, either.
>
>
> "Anonymous" <com@com.com> wrote in message
> news:Mj7Xj.931$qH4.828@nlpi061.nbdc.sbc.com...
>> I'm not fully up to speed on E/SATA, but I've been reading.
>>
>> Your comments/explanations will help with that understanding.
>>
>> I think it was another thread of yours where I read about
>> the interface being "glitchy". Or, at least, the interface when
>> added with a upgrade card, I think.
>>
>> The thread concerned another's question concerning whether
>> a 3.0 ATA unit would synchronize at the existing 1.5 level.
>>
>> As I said, I'm researching the details. But, that was the first
>> indication I'd seen of any faults.
>>
>> I do currently have two external drives in use for backup via
>> a usb2.0 interface. I'm researching a new strategy because
>> I don't have a viable crash recovery solution(at least not with-
>> out a ton of rebuild work involved). And while researching
>> the new path, thought I'd upgrade to an ATA interface to
>> gain the extra speed. Although, I'm not unhappy with the
>> usb throughput.
>>
>> Thanks.
>
>
> 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
>



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....

>> 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