Welcome, Guest. Please Login
 
  HomeHelpSearchLogin FAQ Radified Ghost.Classic Ghost.New Bootable CD Blog  
 
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Send Topic Print
Image For Windows (Read 2782 times)
Mr Moose
Technoluster
***
Offline


I Love Radified!

Posts: 189
Wisconsin


Back to top
Image For Windows
Jul 6th, 2017 at 9:48pm
 
Hi Brian,

I'm starting a new topic for this subject.

I just finished reading the first 35 pages of the online manual for Terabyte's  Image For Windows.
You've said that you highly recommend this software. And now I know why you said that you would help me set it up.
After just reading the first 35 pages, (out of 235) my head is spinning.
This software makes Ghost look like child's play (Ghost was easy to setup, and understand)
You also said I can use BBM to image C: drive.
I can buy IFW for $38.50 and that price doesn't include BBM which I already have.
I'm not concerned about the extra money if buying IFW is the better way to go.
So, I would like to hear your thoughts?

Thanks Bill.
 
 
IP Logged
 

Brian
Demigod
******
Offline



Posts: 6304
NSW, Australia


Back to top
Re: Image For Windows
Reply #1 - Jul 7th, 2017 at 2:02am
 
Bill,

The IFW manual can be a nightmare. Use it for reference rather than reading start to finish because you won't use most of the special switches. They are there because individuals have requested them. TeraByte Unlimited makes three imaging apps. Image for DOS (which you have), Image for Linux and Image for Windows. They all create the same image and each can restore images created by the other two apps. There is a Simple Mode where you can image and restore with 3 to 4 mouse clicks but I don't use it.

If you image infrequently just use your IFD. IFD does offline imaging. If you image frequently or desire to image while Windows is running, get IFW. An IFW purchase is valid for 5 home computers and includes IFL and IFD.

Speed wise, IFL is the fastest and IFD is the slowest. I use IFL for restores.

If you are happy with IFD you don't need IFW. It's your choice.
 
 
IP Logged
 
Mr Moose
Technoluster
***
Offline


I Love Radified!

Posts: 189
Wisconsin


Back to top
Re: Image For Windows
Reply #2 - Jul 7th, 2017 at 3:06pm
 
Brian,

Thanks for clearing that up for me.
The fact that IFD comes with BBM, that is what I'll use.
One question I have, that I can't find a answer to, is there any problem with storing the image I create with IFD to my external HDD, then restoring that image back to a SSD?
That might sound like a beginners question, but with SSD I am new to them, and when were talking about backing up C: drive, it can't fail.
Is there a way to validate the image I create with IFD that comes with BBM? Or do I need to test it out with another drive?
Assuming that there's no difference using a HDD or a SSD, that only spare drives I have are HDD.
So with those questions out of the way, how do I set this up?

Thanks, Bill.
 
 
IP Logged
 
Brian
Demigod
******
Offline



Posts: 6304
NSW, Australia


Back to top
Re: Image For Windows
Reply #3 - Jul 7th, 2017 at 4:20pm
 
Mr Moose wrote on Jul 7th, 2017 at 3:06pm:
is there any problem with storing the image I create with IFD to my external HDD, then restoring that image back to a SSD?


No, but depending on your BIOS you might need to use the BIOS interface instead of the USB interface. More on that later.

Mr Moose wrote on Jul 7th, 2017 at 3:06pm:
Is there a way to validate the image I create with IFD that comes with BBM? 


On the Options screen select Validate.

Try creating a backup image to an internal HD. Boot BIBM, click Disk Imaging...

http://radified.com/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1495508533/45#58

Follow Reply #58.

 
 
IP Logged
 
Mr Moose
Technoluster
***
Offline


I Love Radified!

Posts: 189
Wisconsin


Back to top
Re: Image For Windows
Reply #4 - Jul 7th, 2017 at 8:18pm
 
My external enclosure and my PC has a  eSATA connection, if that would work?
I used that connection with Ghost. (come to think about it, the last image I made with Ghost, I used USB)
But if not, I can add another drive inside.
 
 
IP Logged
 
Brian
Demigod
******
Offline



Posts: 6304
NSW, Australia


Back to top
Re: Image For Windows
Reply #5 - Jul 7th, 2017 at 9:11pm
 
eSATA is great. As good as an internal HD for IFD.

IFD doesn't support USB3 so any connected USB3 devices will run at USB2 speeds.

Let me know if you have any issues with my Reply #58. Use eSATA or an internal HD for your first tests, We'll try USB later.
 
 
IP Logged
 

NightOwl
Radministrator
*****
Offline


"I tought I saw a puddy
tat..."

Posts: 5801
Olympia, WA--Puget Sound--USA


Back to top
Re: Image For Windows
Reply #6 - Jul 8th, 2017 at 1:15am
 
@
Mr Moose

Mr Moose wrote on Jul 6th, 2017 at 9:48pm:
After just reading the first 35 pages, (out of 235) my head is spinning.

Don't feel bad!  I had essentially the same reaction!

All those options--not for the faint of heart.

Sure points out all the information I could know about imaging of different types of systems that I don't have much knowledge about!

Brian offered to walk me through it--with his help, it was easy--so you're in good hands.

Mr Moose wrote on Jul 6th, 2017 at 9:48pm:
I can buy IFW for $38.50 and that price doesn't include BBM which I already have.

What version of Boot It Bare Medal do you have?  You probably have v3.xx, so I suspect you have the option to update to the latest version available.

But, heck, for $11.50 more ($49.98), you can have the whole suite of TeraByte's imaging programs.  Image for Linux is amazing.

https://www.terabyteunlimited.com/purchase-image-for-windows.htm

I've never been a fan of imaging software that works from within Windows live--well, for example the Ghost problem you are having where you can no longer get the C:/ drive to show up!  But, I have not heard of similar problems with Image for Windows. 

What say you Brian?  Are there know issues using Image for Windows that causes it to choke from within Windows?

If you want that type of imaging software, then you might want to consider getting the TeraByte's suite--so you can do your imaging from within Windows like you have been doing with Ghost.



 

____________________________________________________________________________________________

No question is stupid ... but, possibly the answers are Wink !
 
IP Logged
 
Brian
Demigod
******
Offline



Posts: 6304
NSW, Australia


Back to top
Re: Image For Windows
Reply #7 - Jul 8th, 2017 at 2:59am
 
@
NightOwl

Bill has ver 1.37 BIBM. Ver 1.38 was released last week so he should upgrade. We all should. I'm not sure but he might be eligible for a 50% discount on IFW if he decides to go that way.

NightOwl wrote on Jul 8th, 2017 at 1:15am:
I've never been a fan of imaging software that works from within Windows live

NightOwl wrote on Jul 8th, 2017 at 1:15am:
Are there know issues using Image for Windows that causes it to choke from within Windows?


Since PowerQuest Drive Image I've been a fan of live imaging. There has been heated discussion about the merits of live vs cold imaging but it's rare to hear of someone who isn't a live imaging user these days. Congratulations NightOwl. The heated discussion, more warm than heated, will probably start again arguing the merits of classic live imaging vs metadata live imaging.

http://radified.com/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1496268489

I've never had an issue with IFW backups or restores. Since metadata imaging was introduced a few versions ago I've changed from using PHYLock to VSS. No problems, probably easier. TeraByte recommendation.



 
 
IP Logged
 
NightOwl
Radministrator
*****
Offline


"I tought I saw a puddy
tat..."

Posts: 5801
Olympia, WA--Puget Sound--USA


Back to top
Re: Image For Windows
Reply #8 - Jul 8th, 2017 at 2:54pm
 
@
Brian

Brian wrote on Jul 8th, 2017 at 2:59am:
There has been heated discussion about the merits of live vs cold imaging but it's rare to hear of someone who isn't a live imaging user these days. Congratulations NightOwl.

Hey Brian, thanks ...... oh, hmmm, you're dissing me for being an old fuddy Luddite, aren't you?   Cool

NightOwl wrote on Jul 8th, 2017 at 1:15am:
If you want that type of imaging software, then you might want to consider getting the TeraByte's suite--so you can do your imaging from within Windows like you have been doing with Ghost.

Gee, I was encouraging Mr. Moose to get the full TeraByte Suite so he could do live imaging from Windows!

Brian wrote on Jul 7th, 2017 at 2:02am:
just use your IFD. IFD does offline imaging.

You're encouraging him to use Image for DOS.  At least, I'm using Image for Linux!

Brian wrote on Jul 8th, 2017 at 2:59am:
the merits of classic live imaging vs metadata live imaging.

http://radified.com/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1496268489

I think we need to have a discussion of what exactly *metadata* imaging is vs classic live imaging!  How does it work, what does it do, how is information saved and restored, etc. ?

I have not noted that new way of imaging.  I need to learn more ......

Maybe a new topic?


 

____________________________________________________________________________________________

No question is stupid ... but, possibly the answers are Wink !
 
IP Logged
 
Brian
Demigod
******
Offline



Posts: 6304
NSW, Australia


Back to top
Re: Image For Windows
Reply #9 - Jul 8th, 2017 at 6:23pm
 
@
NightOwl


Don't ask me to describe how metadata imaging works as I can't explain it to myself. What is clear is it only applies to Changes Only images, differentials and incrementals. The full image is created as it was in the past except there is an extra metadata hash file which is the basis for future Changes Only images. When you create or restore a Changes Only image with "metadata" selected as an option, create and restore are much faster. Metadata imaging can be done online or cold. IFW, IFL and IFD support metadata imaging.

Macrium Reflect has been doing metadata imaging for a few years and I haven't read of any complaints. TeraByte has added this option in the last few months and does provide a caution message. "NOTE: You should only use this option if you understand its impact on restore operations." TeraByte Support was asked what this meant and provided this "clear" answer...
 
 
IP Logged
 
Brian
Demigod
******
Offline



Posts: 6304
NSW, Australia


Back to top
Re: Image For Windows
Reply #10 - Jul 8th, 2017 at 6:24pm
 
"For normal backups that don't use /usemd, you can continue to use either.
VSS is recommended for /usemd because of open files that stay open nearly
all the time that have only updates over existing data (no
additions/truncations) and which metadata is not updated until the file is
closed. In windows 10, there are a lot of these type of caching files which
are also set to not update any timestamp information even when the handle is
closed. For those files, the only metadata change may be the USN when the
USN Journal is enabled on the volume. Sticking with those type of files
(ones where there are no timestamp updates at all, and only a USN update
when the USN Journal is enabled); when VSS starts, it triggers the USN to
update on the open file. When PHYLock starts and even though requests both
locking and volume flush on the volume, Windows ignores and does not update
the USN on the files. The difference can be explained with an example:
Take file X that has no timestamp updates, file updates with no appending or
truncation, does have USN updates. Backup A includes file X, Backup B, C
the file X was not changed and therefore data used from A. Backup D, File
X is open and has been updated but the USN is still as it was in A, B, C.
The file data is backed up both using VSS and PHYLock, the difference is in
the VSS version USN is different than ABC, PHYlock the same as ABC. Now
file X is closed with no other updates other than what was already done
prior. Backup E VSS version would skip the data and use what is in D,
PHYLock version would see change and backup the data in to E. Now it's
time to restore, if we just booted and restored back to B, all fine in all
versions, however, if you first restored D version then right after that the
B version, the D restored with VSS version will have a USN different than B
so will restore file X data from B, PHYLock version has the same USN so
ignores restore file X data. So the PHYLock restored version of B has D's
data for file X. The byte-for-byte validation would confirm and fail since
it's done over the entire data. Of course these are special files, special
restores, but to ensure best metadata state, VSS should be used (If Windows
were changed to flush the metadata of open handles on lock or volume flush
request, then the difference goes away at the metadata level and either
would give the same metadata results)."
 
 
IP Logged
 

NightOwl
Radministrator
*****
Offline


"I tought I saw a puddy
tat..."

Posts: 5801
Olympia, WA--Puget Sound--USA


Back to top
Re: Image For Windows
Reply #11 - Jul 9th, 2017 at 1:09am
 
@
Brian

Brian wrote on Jul 8th, 2017 at 6:23pm:
TeraByte has added this option in the last few months and does provide a caution message. "NOTE: You should only use this option if you understand its impact on restore operations." TeraByte Support was asked what this meant and provided this "clear" answer... 

It was *clear* to me!

Let me translate:

You are a fool to use MetaData imaging while Windows is live.  Windows has files that are *open*, and Windows does not respond to *normal* requests to close those files, or at least update their status when asked.

You will be unable to restore correctly from the resulting image.  You will get a *validation* error saying your restored backup has failed, but we can not tell you what has failed, or how to recover from that failure.

You're on your own, and good luck!





TeraByte just hammered home the nail in the coffin of live *hot* imaging!  Nothing is mentioned, but I'm guessing that if *cold* off line MetaData imaging is used, then the *opened* files and non-updated MetaData file problems are non-existant.

I, personally, would avoid live Windows MetaData imaging like the plague if your backup images are important to you!

But, that's just me  Wink !  I will use *cold* imaging with confidence--or, maybe *live Windows* hot imaging that has a proven track record that does not come with the above TeraByte disclaimer!

I hope the *classic* hot imaging using TeraBytes software has a *fool-proof* track record!

There's absolutely nothing, including how fast a backup or restore can be done, that will motivate me to use a backup system that is not *rock solid* in its ability to help me recover from whatever disaster might befall my computing system.

So, there ....  Angry  !

(See NightOwl's chin sticking out waiting for someone to take a swing at it  Cheesy !)







 

____________________________________________________________________________________________

No question is stupid ... but, possibly the answers are Wink !
 
IP Logged
 
Brian
Demigod
******
Offline



Posts: 6304
NSW, Australia


Back to top
Re: Image For Windows
Reply #12 - Jul 9th, 2017 at 2:39am
 
@
NightOwl

Metadata backup/restores are popular in the group who don't separate their data from the OS partition. A few minutes to restore the OS partition has advantages over a one hour restore. I also suspect that the dangers of metadata backup/restores are more theoretical than real. In the same way live backup/restores haven't caused practical issues in over ten years of use. TeraByte has introduced metadata backup/restores for those who are interested but classic backup/restores will remain the mainstay.

In my case I'm using metadata backup/restores on my test computer and classic backup/restores on my main computer. My OS partition is lean and mean and a classic restore takes 2 minutes as opposed to a metadata restore taking 1 minute. SSD to SSD. "So what" in time. But I'm experimenting with metadata backups on my data partition which contains 400 GB of used space. (I'm still using data backup software too)
 
 
IP Logged
 
Mr Moose
Technoluster
***
Offline


I Love Radified!

Posts: 189
Wisconsin


Back to top
Re: Image For Windows
Reply #13 - Jul 10th, 2017 at 9:02pm
 
Brian,

Saturday I followed reply #58 using my eSATA connection.
It only took a little less than 30 min to write the backup image to my external drive, and at the end it said
(Completed Successfully)
So that's where I'm at right now.

Bill.
 
 
IP Logged
 
Brian
Demigod
******
Offline



Posts: 6304
NSW, Australia


Back to top
Re: Image For Windows
Reply #14 - Jul 11th, 2017 at 3:01am
 
Bill, good news. It works as expected. Out of interest, how long did Ghost take to create an image?
 
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Send Topic Print