Now that Windows Vista has been released, do we know if Ghost 2003/Ghost 8.2 is compatible?  If not compatible, are there known work-around solutions to identified problems?

While not confirmed, some users have reported difficulties:
     http://www.annoyances.org/exec/forum/winvista/t1152641527
     http://forums.windrivers.com/archive/index.php/t-77138.html

Who will the first to “test drive” Ghost 2003/Ghost 8.2 with Windows Vista and report back the results?  ”Inquiring minds want to know!”

P.S.:  I am cautiously hoping that the operating system and the application are compatible (or, at least can productively coexist).  Many individuals have a long history (and comfort level) with Ghost 2003/Ghost 8.2, a relationship that ideally will transition into the world of Windows Vista.

Rad, it’s only speculation at this point in time, but based upon this thread, it appears that Ghost 2003/Ghost 8.2 may have difficulty with the new MBR structure used by Windows Vista (see Reply #4), and possibly with the new “soft link” and BitLocker features, too (see Reply #11).

I do not believe that Ghost 9/Ghost 10 is compatible with Windows Vista.  Symantec is scheduled to release Ghost 12 in late April, 2007 for this need.

Windows Vista Ultimate does include its own image backup capability (see this Microsoft presentation), although I have not yet read any feedback from users on the tool.

I am hoping that some enterprising and adventurous member of the forum acquires a copy of Windows Vista and reports back the results of image creation/restoration using Ghost 2003/Ghost 8.2.

Useful comments on this topic can be found at:
     http://forums.microsoft.com/TechNet/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=598662&SiteID=17
     http://www.chrissanders.org/?p=50

I have used Symantec Ghost 8.3, in dos of course.

While i was testing Vista, yeah it does work.

Some people like me say that Ghost (in dos) is much faster in a simpler menu.

MBR is e wierd thing. Same ghost for the dos explorer. It can read NTFS and MBR. But, once you change a partitions specs it might not be able to 'see' the folder and files in the dos explorer (Dos browser bij Ghost)

This realy is the only bad thing about ghost. So, having vista changing also MBR it might need better testing.

Aslong as you keep it very simple:

1) have a partition D:\ and put there the *.GHO
2) Have a partition C:\ OS

This works if your do NOT change the D:\ partition specs. like : MBR, Increaings, Decreasing space etc.

Wy i am telling this is because NO body can tell me this is true.
The symantec support is very bad. This forum is the best support.

Acronis support is great!! Yes, even if you do not buy True image yet they ging in 24 hours support (free) via email.

This is a thing that Symantec / Norton will never do. Pleae note this is my experiance, maybe some others have luck.

This i understand wy users tell to use acronis.
But realy Ghost is faster UI wise (Again -> i am only talking about DOS)

You do not need to install ghost in windows, why the hell would you

The test: How about imaging 300 GB ?

Will ghost do this as save as Acronis? No idea, i have still to test this.

Now, Vista, till now i installed vista on C:\ made a Vista.gho on D:\
Then i format C:\ and installed Windows Xp or 2003 test version on C:\

Here we go :

Make a new image of C:\ with windows XP in dos (again) and put that image on D:\

So, we have now on D:\

Winxp.GHO
Vista.GHO

and the running system is windows xp.

Lets start booting from diskette and put back the prevouse installed Vista, so overwriting Winxp.

Yes peeps that does work.

But, i do not know if running checkdisk after the reset that there wil be 0 problems.

You alwas get small incoisensec (sorry for my spelling)
in $$1 or soms thing like this.

Ghost weak part is MBR, NTFS Bootsector. If changed it can not read the folders and files in dos anymore.

Aslong as symantec is not willing to help with this supject, i make up my own mind and stay believeing this.

So from my tests say a OS of 4 GB.

Yes, aslong as you DO NOT change or resize the D:\ Ghost used partition all is oke.
If checkdisk makes errors no idea, but it looks oke.

Restoring visa.gho to C = oke
Restoring later winxp.gho over c:\vista = still oke.

After installing Vista you get $Recycler folder in D:\
When resetting winxp.gho to C:\(OS) you can delete that folder.
When later resetting Vista.gho (over the same C:\ partition) you have the new $Recycler in D:\ and the Recycler form XP with the ID number in it.

To sum up:

1) Symantec need better help via email, even if a custommer does not yet know what to buy. Normal shops give advice before you buy, so i see no differance in webshops / email support.

2) Symantec nees to repair teh way Ghost.exe reads file structures -Bitmap - NTFS specs - Boot sector etc.

Till now all goes well if you again  do NOT change the partition D:\ where you put your GHO's from dos when imaging the C:\ install OS (say 20 GB)

The above problems are 0,0 to Acronis in DOS.
And i am talking about version 8.x. I did not buy 9.0 acronis true image.


The big question because Vista is also getting bigger then say XP. Is what program is more SAVE

Say you what to image 200 GB ? to D:\
So, C:\ OS is like 200 GB.

Moste people say Acronis is mutch saver than Ghost in dos, because of the better reading of NTFS structures.
And yeah i do believe that.

Again, for the easy UI i still use Ghost.

i will test a partition of 260 GB and put it on D:\. Will than delete all data from that 260 GB partition and see IF ghost resets the data correct.

only dos, only dos!!!! This realy is the only way to test if Acronis OR Ghost is save to use.


Imagen? if your Windows is gone? What will you use to rest ? ---> DOS boot!!

So please use and test ghost in dos.

Change the partition specs of D:\ and you will see that Ghost in dos got a problem 'seeing' the data.
My advice is, make a partition for the images on d:\ and do NOT change the internal specs like NTFS bootsector, 2nd bootsector, partition tables etc.
Then from my experiance you are pretty fine

Symantec USE your support to custommers els you will not win from actronis.

Greets,
Fonk

Yeah, FAT23 works better because it is better supported, even tough NTFS works.

No Ben, my 2nd Partition in Drive 1 (Total 320 GB)
Is NTFS and about 300 GB space.

You should have:

Primary Master IDE
Primary Partition 1 (Active) C:\ (Your OS)

Primary Partition 2 (Not Active) D:\ (Your DATA en GHO)

Active = The bootable startup Partition. This is normaly C:\

I only use Primary Partitions not Extended or Logical Drives, cause for me it makes things to complex.
I also use only Basic drive setup, not Dynamic
Wy?

Because if anything ever goes wrong the dos utilities to recover your broken partitions are mutch better supported with the normal Basic drives then Dynamic.

However, if you have RAID thats a other subject

Yes, I'm curious as well.

Is this something that you say you've accomplished Fonk?

I just acquired a couple Vista versions and was meaning to try it....  unfortunately my computers won't support it I don't think (they're old, problems with the Vista Setup which is different than XP).

I will try both Ghost 8.2/2003 when I do it as well.

FYI – Acronis True Image 10 Home claims to support Windows Vista.

http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=68
it proves that Vista backup works using Vista imaging utility.

Surprisingly, the image file that CompletePC Backup produces doesn’t use the Windows Imaging (WIM) format used in Vista’s installation process. Instead, it creates a large file with a VHD file name extension, plus a slew of small XML files. That VHD extension is the same one used by virtual hard drives in both Virtual Server 2005 and Virtual PC, but I haven’t been able to confirm whether the two formats are actually the same. If the formats are identical, then (in theory) one could extract individual files from a backup image with relative ease.


Like commercial backup software such as Symantec Ghost, Vista backup can take a complete image of your hard drive, track changes and continue to backup only those changes, and of course backup individual files, specific file types and folders.

Just like Ghost, Vista backup lets you restore a complete hard drive from an image, which is most useful for corporations, that create a drive image which is then gets duplicated on many computers.

Maybe the most significant new feature Microsot introduced with Vista backup is the Previous Versions feature.
Have you ever accidentally saved over a file you were working on? Accidental file deletion or modification is a common cause of data loss. This feature automatically creates point-in-time copies of files as you work, so you can quickly and easily retrieve versions of a document you may have accidentally deleted, even after you emptied your recycle bin.