Bootable copy of XP partition.
in [Windows XP]
|
Prev: how to delete 'undeleteable' folder?
Next: Can NOT access Web-Site, ..... What's wrong with????
From: mm on 23 Jun 2010 14:04 On Tue, 22 Jun 2010 23:44:33 -0700, "bobster" <fauxie(a)bogus.net> wrote: >Yes, you will have the major elements to have a "hot spare" backup by having >the 2 SATA drives installed in internal HD positions 1 and 2. Drive 2 must >be at least as large as drive 1 and be properly formatted. Then all you >have to do is clone your position 1 "C" drive to your position 2 drive using >a good clone app of which there are several - some even freeware. I also thought that if I set it up as an "array", whatever that is, it would automatically write the same things to each drive at the same time, within a second or two. I appreciate Ken's warning, and I would continue to have an external backup, but I liked this idea SATA array idea, because I thought it would be automatic. > I know >that this results in a bootable hot spare because I have been using this >configuration for about 2 years, as well as an externally SATA drive mounted >in a VanTec enclosure which is also bootable. I have also tried connecting >this externally mounted HD via a USB2 connection and it was bootable also. I don't understand this. I assumed the USB port couldn't do anything until after the OS booted, and by then it was already booted and couldn't boot from the USB device. >I prefer to use the SATA3 connection as it seems faster. > >Again, there are many ways to have a bootable backup but if you already have >a proper MOBO and two SATA drives, and get a good clone app, IMHO, nothing >could be simpler. > > >"mm" <NOPSAMmm2005(a)bigfoot.com> wrote in message >news:qf1326lbku2dqgavo08149tipmve9mkqka(a)4ax.com... >On Tue, 22 Jun 2010 14:00:24 -0700, "bobster" <fauxie(a)bogus.net> >wrote: > >> >>I am not an MVP nor even a techie wannabe > >Well I know far less than any of you, but I got the impression that an >array of two SATA drives, set to keep one identical to the other, is >done in order to have an always present backup. > >A friend gave me a mobo and two SATA drives, but I havent' yet >assembled a computer around it. > >If I eventually do, won't I have my HD backup, like the OP wants? >
From: bobster on 23 Jun 2010 14:28 Ken, An internal second drive backup does have some of the potential disadvantages that you mention. My personal belief and experience is that those occurrences are very rare (Except for a virus attack, I've never had one of those things happen). Much more likely for the average home user is non-recoverable "C" drive crash, a virus infestation, a drive physical failure or a self induced screw up by visiting a "bad" site or opening an infected email attachment. Reversion to an internal second drive would allow recovery from any or all of those. Thus I don't consider it the weakest of all backup forms, in fact I have found it to be a very good approach and have used it to "recover" many times. That being said, I agree with you that there are better forms of backup. My personal "best choice" --- a belt, suspenders and thumb-tack approach, and the one I use myself is: 1) A second internal HD, physically identical to the "C" drive. 2) A third, physically identical HD mounted in an external eSATA enclosure 3) A fourth HD stored in my bank safe deposit box. (protects against computer theft or home fire) Using a good clone app (I use Casper 6.0), I clone my "C" drive to the second internal and external drives about once a week. About every 6 months, I insert my fourth HD into the external enclosure and clone my "C" drive to it, then return it to my safe deposit box. All HDs are WD 320gig drives, about $50 each, and the external enclosure is a VanTec eSATA unit $35-40. Sounds complicated but in fact is really quite simple. The cost of the extra hardware is not trivial, but for me, the peace of mind is well worth it. As I said in a previous post, a very valuable side benefit is that I can do all the experimenting, fooling around, etc. I want with my "C" drive with the knowledge that recovery is just a click or two away. As an aside, thanks for all of your past posts and good advice. Hope they will continue in the future regardless of what MS does with their forums. "Ken Blake, MVP" <kblake(a)this.is.an.invalid.domain> wrote in message news:jo9426hdhef9uhacmg5jnburj3cuhgktlj(a)4ax.com... On Tue, 22 Jun 2010 23:58:20 -0400, mm <NOPSAMmm2005(a)bigfoot.com> wrote: > On Tue, 22 Jun 2010 14:00:24 -0700, "bobster" <fauxie(a)bogus.net> > wrote: > > > > >I am not an MVP nor even a techie wannabe > > Well I know far less than any of you, but I got the impression that an > array of two SATA drives, set to keep one identical to the other, is > done in order to have an always present backup. > > A friend gave me a mobo and two SATA drives, but I havent' yet > assembled a computer around it. > > If I eventually do, won't I have my HD backup, like the OP wants? What you are planning on doing is the weakest form of backup there is. I don't recommend backup to a second non-removable hard drive because it leaves you susceptible to simultaneous loss of the original and backup to many of the most common dangers: severe power glitches, nearby lightning strikes, virus attacks, even theft of the computer. In my view, secure backup needs to be on removable media, and not kept in the computer. For really secure backup (needed, for example, if the life of your business depends on your data) you should have multiple generations of backup, and at least one of those generations should be stored off-site. -- Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP (Windows Desktop Experience) since 2003 Please Reply to the Newsgroup
From: bobster on 23 Jun 2010 15:11 Daave, You said, "If you plug a usb hard drive > in and reboot, it does not see the drive until XP has loaded. Too > late to boot it. > > Love to know how to get around that. " I only used the USB2 approach once to clone my "C" drive to a second drive located in an external enclosure. As I recall, I then physically removed the HD from the enclosure and installed it into the second internal slot and it booted just fine. Thus, the only use of the USB2 link was to make the clone, not to subsequently boot from the enclosure via the USB2 link. The point being that one can make an HD clone using a USB2 link but that to use that clone as a boot device, it must be connected either via an eSATA link or physically installed in an internal HD slot. I subsequently discovered the eSATA cable that came with the enclosure and used it from that point on. I have heard that some clone apps now have the ability to make bootable clones via USB2 links using an external enclosure and also to boot directly via the USB2 link. Don't know how they do it. "Daave" <daave(a)example.com> wrote in message news:e3ZirLkELHA.4816(a)TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... Inline. Bob Taylor wrote: > bobster wrote: >> Bob, >> >> Maybe I'm missing something here but it looks like you are making a >> fairly simple problem way too difficult. You definitely can boot >> from an externally mounted HD. bobster, often this is not the case!!! > What you are missing is that I was told this and have actually tried > it, but perhaps you know a way around. If you plug a usb hard drive > in and reboot, it does not see the drive until XP has loaded. Too > late to boot it. > > Love to know how to get around that. Bob: People have had mixed success with making ordinary USB external hard drives bootable (it's rarely recommended). The motherboard and BIOS must support the method and you would need to configure the BIOS correctly. The easiest way to do this is to use an eSATA hard drive (of course the motherboard must support eSATA). How about telling us about your hardware?
From: Ken Blake, MVP on 23 Jun 2010 16:28 On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 11:28:00 -0700, "bobster" <fauxie(a)bogus.net> wrote: > Ken, > > An internal second drive backup does have some of the potential > disadvantages that you mention. My personal belief and experience is that > those occurrences are very rare (Except for a virus attack, I've never had > one of those things happen). Much more likely for the average home user is > non-recoverable "C" drive crash, a virus infestation, a drive physical > failure or a self induced screw up by visiting a "bad" site or opening an > infected email attachment. Reversion to an internal second drive would > allow recovery from any or all of those. Thus I don't consider it the > weakest of all backup forms, in fact I have found it to be a very good > approach and have used it to "recover" many times. Then we disagree there. But considering what you say below, we don't seem to disagree all that much. > That being said, I agree with you that there are better forms of backup. My > personal "best choice" --- a belt, suspenders and thumb-tack approach, and > the one I use myself is: > > 1) A second internal HD, physically identical to the "C" drive. > > 2) A third, physically identical HD mounted in an external eSATA enclosure > > 3) A fourth HD stored in my bank safe deposit box. (protects against > computer theft or home fire) Since you do 2 and 3 as well as 1, we're actually pretty close in our opinions. > As an aside, thanks for all of your past posts and good advice. You're welcome, and thanks very much for the kind words. > Hope they will continue in the future regardless of what MS does with their forums. We'll see what happens with the newsgroups. I'm spending more time now in the web-based Microsoft forums (using the NNTP Bridges), and I'm afraid that these newsgroups may gradually peter out. -- Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP (Windows Desktop Experience) since 2003 Please Reply to the Newsgroup
From: mm on 23 Jun 2010 20:56
On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 13:28:36 -0700, "Ken Blake, MVP" <kblake(a)this.is.an.invalid.domain> wrote: >On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 11:28:00 -0700, "bobster" <fauxie(a)bogus.net> >wrote: > >> Ken, >> >> An internal second drive backup does have some of the potential >> disadvantages that you mention. My personal belief and experience is that >> those occurrences are very rare (Except for a virus attack, I've never had >> one of those things happen). Much more likely for the average home user is >> non-recoverable "C" drive crash, a virus infestation, a drive physical >> failure or a self induced screw up by visiting a "bad" site or opening an >> infected email attachment. And I've wondered about some of these things tooo. If no drive fails but I screw up my data on the first drive, how long before the second drive is just as screwed up? If the duplicating is automatic, it sounds like it will happen in a few seconds, and for sure, before I have time to stop it. So a second drive in an array would only be protection against the physical failure of the first drive, right? >> Reversion to an internal second drive would >> allow recovery from any or all of those. Thus I don't consider it the >> weakest of all backup forms, in fact I have found it to be a very good >> approach and have used it to "recover" many times. > >> That being said, I agree with you that there are better forms of backup. My >> personal "best choice" --- a belt, suspenders and thumb-tack approach, and >> the one I use myself is: >> >> 1) A second internal HD, physically identical to the "C" drive. >> >> 2) A third, physically identical HD mounted in an external eSATA enclosure >> >> 3) A fourth HD stored in my bank safe deposit box. (protects against >> computer theft or home fire) > > >Since you do 2 and 3 as well as 1, we're actually pretty close in our >opinions. > > >> As an aside, thanks for all of your past posts and good advice. > > >You're welcome, and thanks very much for the kind words. > > >> Hope they will continue in the future regardless of what MS does with their forums. > >We'll see what happens with the newsgroups. I'm spending more time now >in the web-based Microsoft forums (using the NNTP Bridges), and I'm >afraid that these newsgroups may gradually peter out. I sure hope not. Newsgroups are far more efficient that web forums, allow easy saving of replies on one's own computers for future referecne, and work for people with dial-up, just as well as with highspeed. A lot of people I think don't know about newgroups and we shoudl tell people. |