Results 1 to 3 of 3
  1. #1
    3 Star Lounger
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Chandler, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    258
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Win backup versus Norton Ghost

    I have an external 80 gig disk that I use strictly for Backups. I run windows 2000 supplied backup monthly and then transfer the *.bkf file to the external disk. I only use NTFS on my system.

    I have never had to recover - so no real experience with using windows 2000 recovery tools since I got the external hard drive. Prior to getting the external hard drive, I had a major hard drive failure about 2 years ago. At that time I had a CD library with "Zip" files of everything except programs and the recovery wasn't too bad considering the alternatives. I replaced drive, rebuilt win2000 using original package and service pack cd's, rebuilt program library and then rebuilt files.

    Just read an article touting Norton Ghost as a much better solution to backup / recovery than anything else.

    I would like to get ideas, comments, opinions, etc from folks who have actually had to recover from a "crash and burn" hard drive failure, about the recovery process using Norton Ghost.

    Thanks

    Tom

  2. #2
    Plutonium Lounger
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Lexington, Kentucky, USA
    Posts
    12,107
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Re: Win backup versus Norton Ghost

    I moved your question to this board because this is a frequently discussed topic here in The Lounge. If you search this forum, you'll get lots of reading material such as <!post=this thread,351120>this thread<!/post> or even <!post=this one,316800>this one<!/post>. I haven't used Ghost for a long time, but have been a long-time user of PowerQuest's Drive Image (now owned by Symantec) and most recently, Acronis TrueImage. I think all three imaging products function in "about" the same manner. If you make a complete drive image backup (I do mine once per week) the process of recovery from a drive failure can be a matter of 30 minutes to an hour, depending on the location of your backup image - another hard drive vs. CDs for example. I've done many restorations using both Drive Image and now a few with TrueImage and all have gone smoothly and quickly.

    In between weekly drive images, I backup other critical files every night (bookmarks, documents, Quicken financial, email, etc.) using NTI Backup Now! This is not a free product and I "only" bought the lesser priced file-level since I did not want their imaging product. Of course, there are freebies, not the least of which is batch files or zip file processing.

  3. #3
    Uranium Lounger viking33's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Cape Cod, Massachusetts, USA
    Posts
    6,308
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Re: Win backup versus Norton Ghost

    Tom,
    Like Big Al, I am a supporter of True Image rather than Ghost. I had Ghost as part of Norton Systemworks and I never could get it working properly for one reason or another.
    The only advantage to having Ghost was that it gave me a discounted price in buying True Image. I'm sure you will find users who love Ghost but I'm not one of them.
    Check the links that Al pointed you to.
    BOB
    http://lounge.windowssecrets.com/S/flags/USA.gif http://lounge.windowssecrets.com/S/f...sachusetts.gif


    Long ago, there was a time when men cursed and beat on the ground with sticks. It was called witchcraft.
    Today it is called golf!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •