Is there more reliable imaging program than Ghost?

[bevills1]

Recently I tried Norton Ghost for the first time to image old hard drive to a new one which worked perfectly for Windows 98SE, but it was a failure on another attempt for Windows 2000 for both the partitiion to partition and partition to image methods tried. In the Windows 2000 attempts everything seemd to complete normally in Ghost, but an error was given that certain files were missing or corrupt when trying to boot to new drive after Ghost finished. Does anyone know any imaging programs that are more reliable?

[havaham]

Acronis True Image.

http://www.acronis.com/

Restored 3 hard drives including a server.

[deckard8]

Casper - The friendly ghost ?

http://www.fssdev.com/products/casperxp/

[RLT69]

I have used Norton Ghost for several years, both the Enterprise version and the home versions. It is a very reliable program.

What version of Ghost were you using? Did it support Windows 2000? What was the configuration of you hard drive: did you have one partition or several?

Since it worked perfectly in 98SE and not with 2000, your version might not support 2000.

Thing is, without detailed information, noone can diagnose your problem. Going out and spending more money on a new program, might not fix your problem. Need to know what the problem is first.

I would not blame Ghost here until I know what the problem is. I have used Ghost for several years and have imaged well over 20 computers, running Windows 2000 (some with XP).

[greymalkin]

yep..never had a problem with ghost.

Why do people always blame the software?

[AngusMacGyver]

I agree. Ghost is the best imaging program i have ever tested.
It's true it is DOS based, but it works fine. I usually make images with lan boot disk to a file server and when there is a fail is due to a network or a HD problem.
Good luck.

[doppletwo]

I have been working in an lab where Ghost is used at least 10 times a day.


I have never seen it go wrong.


It's a testing lab so it is our job to break software, but Norton Ghost works for us everytime.


But I do have to admit we never use the partition to partition feature.


We used it to have images of different OSs and and Service Packs and such ready to go with basic drivers without having to do another install.


Also moving images between harddrives just seems like a bad idea, but I guess you have your reasons.

[bevills1]

According to my 2002 version both Windows 2000 and XP are supported as well as earlier Windows versions. I have a dual boot system with Windows 98SE on primary partition of source master drive plus 2 more partitions on source master drive, and Windows 2000 was on primary partition of slave drive plus 3 more partitions on source slave drive. Target drive setup was similarly with exception of Windows 2000 being on first extended partition of master drive. Could the errors be due to Windows 2000 being imaged from a primary source partition to an extended target partition?

[kschang]

Most likely, it's because people aren't using the program for its intended purpose.

Ghost is really meant for a corporate environment where you have a bevy of identical PC's. Save the stuff on the network and all that. Got a problem? Wipe out the whole thing and reload the image, and you'll be done in minutes, not hours. Need to push through some OS updates? No problem! Just update the image, and push it again.

It's NOT meant as a "backup" program at all, though it "could" sorta do that. It's also not meant to be used as a migration tool from old HD to new HD, though it could sorta do that too. But that's like driving a Ferrari down to corner grocery store to get some milk. It'll probably get the job done, but it won't be very convenient.

[bits]

True Image!

[greymalkin]

Got a problem? Wipe out the whole thing and reload the image, and you'll be done in minutes, not hours....

...It's NOT meant as a "backup" program at all, though it "could" sorta do that. It's also not meant to be used as a migration tool from old HD to new HD, though it could sorta do that too.

I don't see how it "sorta" does either one of these function..if anything it is the ultimate backup solution. Why just backup your data when you can back up your os and all your settings too. It does it and does it well.

Same goes for migrating to a larger HD.

Just because it has more features than that doesn't mean it's only "sorta" doing the lesser tasks.

[RLT69]

It's also not meant to be used as a migration tool from old HD to new HD, though it could sorta do that too.

What? Sure it can. I've been doing that for years! Read the documentation, you know the part where it talks about cloneing from hard drive to hard drive. Ghost does it rather well.

According to my 2002 version both Windows 2000 and XP are supported as well as earlier Windows versions. I have a dual boot system with Windows 98SE on primary partition of source master drive plus 2 more partitions on source master drive, and Windows 2000 was on primary partition of slave drive plus 3 more partitions on source slave drive. Target drive setup was similarly with exception of Windows 2000 being on first extended partition of master drive. Could the errors be due to Windows 2000 being imaged from a primary source partition to an extended target partition?

I don't know where to begin. That is one complex configuration you have there.

Short answer would be, yes. What is your boot OS on your new hard drive? Put simply, if Win2000 is your boot OS then you need to have it on your primary partition. If not, then I suppose that configuration would work. To make things easier you might want to try taking the Win2000 partition from the old hard drive and making an image out of that [partition to image]. Then restore from image on the new hard drive [image to partition] to the particular parition. That should work.

Unless you really need all those partitions, I would cut down on them.

You might also want to check symantec's knowledge base and see if anyone is having the same problem. I suspect the problem is to do with your hard drive's configuration.

[bevills1]

On my dual boot system or any multi boot system a boot loader gives choice of which OS to boot, either Windows 98 or Windows 2000 are choices in my setup. Unfortunately Windows Me and earlier versions including Windows 98 have 32 GB limit on partition size which is why I need more partitions than if operating Windows 2000 or later on a single OS system. I can check Symantec, but my suspicion is either my problem is a rare occurence or Ghost reliability is just hit and miss.

[Nelson37]

I have used Ghost well over a hundred times, counting other techs I know the numbers probably run into the thousands over the last 10 to 15 years. NEVER repeat NEVER had a failure, other than straightforward drive failures. If it won't spin, it won't copy.

Standard procedure is to put the drives on seperate channels. Having two dissimilar drives on the same channel is most likely your problem. This is a mistake and should not be done at any time, particularly if you intend to copy large amounts of data, such as the entire drive.

If you boot with a win98 floppy then even the older versions will copy anything up to and including 2003 server drives.

No, there is nothing more reliable than Ghost. SFAIK, there is nothing at all with a longer track record. Hit or miss my ass, you have done something wrong or have some sort of hardware error. It's that simple.

[RLT69]

On my dual boot system or any multi boot system a boot loader gives choice of which OS to boot, either Windows 98 or Windows 2000 are choices in my setup. Unfortunately Windows Me and earlier versions including Windows 98 have 32 GB limit on partition size which is why I need more partitions than if operating Windows 2000 or later on a single OS system. I can check Symantec, but my suspicion is either my problem is a rare occurence or Ghost reliability is just hit and miss.

I'm familiar with using bootloaders (linux and windows). It sounds like your configuration is causing the problem. It's definitely not Ghost.

If you are moving everything to one hard drive, you might want to try this approach:

1. Create the necessary number of partitions on the new hd
2. Ghost (clone) old 98 partition to 1st partition on new hd.
3. Ghost (clone) old 2000 partition to 2nd partition on new hd.

You may or may not need to edit the boot.ini file on the 2000 partition. 2000 has it's own bootloader and should pick up the 98 install and present you with a choice of between 98 or 2000, this where the editing of the boot.ini file may be needed.

I've had a triple boot system (98-2000-linux) working. Thus, you can do this. The problem is you are pulling 2000 off a different hard drive than the 98 partition, which is probably screwing up the bootloader.

It might be worth searching on linux and multi booting. Articles on that topic give some very useful information. It might help you.

[Nelson37]

After re-reading your description, I cannot figure out exactly what you have and what you are trying to do. There seem to be too many drives described.

You cannot create a new boot partition on a multi-boot drive using an imaging program. The boot loader will have no knowledge of the new image. Ghost the entire drive.

[InXess]

If you move from 1 drive to another ghost the entire drive, not separate partitions. You may end up with overlapping part. that cause corruption. Before Norton bought Ghost it was an imaging program like DriveImage. Nothing corporate or enterprise-like about it.
I have the best experience with Acronis mentioned above. Always 100% no matter what environment, boot type etc. Stopped using Ghost years ago, never liked it too much. Try Acronis TrueImage. You'll never look back. Image of active partition while in use (XP) no problem. Great stuff.

[Dv8ted2]

My co-workers and I have imaged hundreds of computers using ghost. Ghost is very reliable.

[dipstick]

Ghost is 100% reliable. The problem here is the way the user setup his dual-boot system.

You installed 98 on 1st partition of HDD-1, then installed W2K on 1st partition of HDD-2. You let W2K create the bootloader for you. This is your big mistake! W2k installed files it needs in the 98 partition of HDD-1. The only way it could work correctly is if it's setup the way it is now.

This is the way I setup my dual-boot:
1) Install XP on 1st partition of HDD.
2) Hide the 1st partition and install 98 on 2nd partition.
3) Unhide 1st partition and create my own bootloader. (you can do all this with a free program called Ranish Partition Manager, among others)

With this setup, I can migrate any OS to any partition with no problems, because each one is bootable all by themselfs. Each one also report themselves as C: drive.

[RLT69]

If you move from 1 drive to another ghost the entire drive, not separate partitions. You may end up with overlapping part. that cause corruption. Before Norton bought Ghost it was an imaging program like DriveImage.

If you create partitions on the new hard drive then Ghost old partititons to the new partitions YOU WILL NOT end up with overlapping partitions. I have copied partition to partition time and time again.

There is nothing wrong with Ghost!

Acronis True Image will have the same problem period! The problem is with bevills1's setup. bevills1's needs to create his own bootloader and follow the dipstick 's instructions. That should fix his problem.

Nelson37 raises an important point, what's your new configuration? Which configuration is the new hard drive using, the master hard drive or the slave hard drive or are you changing it?

If all you are doing is replacing the slave drive in your current configuration with a new hard drive, then all you have to do is clone the HARD DRIVE [drive-to-drive] not clone the partition. This should work. If, however, you are chaning the configuration, then you need to follow dipstick 's instructions.

Tell us what the new configuration will look like and we can better help you.

[lordsmurf]

Ghost is finicky and often fails. Especially the part where you image to DVDs.

I have Ghost on 2 computers, works perfect. I tried to use it on 2 others, totally failed. It's the bloated software. I've got several different versions. Ghost 2003 was probably the worst one.

I far prefer Paragon Drive Backup 6. That software is faster, more precise, does not fail, and I like the features a lot more.

[Dv8ted2]

Ghost is finicky and often fails.

It depends on which version you are using. Versions 7.7 and 8 are very reliable.

[RLT69]

Ghost is finicky and often fails. Especially the part where you image to DVDs.

I have Ghost on 2 computers, works perfect. I tried to use it on 2 others, totally failed. It's the bloated software. I've got several different versions. Ghost 2003 was probably the worst one.

I've used Ghost to image to DVDs and NEVER, I repeat, NEVER had a problem. I have cloned HDs using Ghost images from DVD and NEVER, I repeat NEVER had a problem. I have Ghosted over 20 computers and a couple servers without problem. I have also used Ghost 2003 and it works. Ghost 2004 is bloated because it requires the .NET framework to be installed.

I recommend using the Ghost boot disk and not the Windows approach to do your cloning. You will have PROBLEM FREE cloning doing it that way. I don't care for cloning in the Windows environment - that may be why people are having problems. But I have cloned in the Windows environment and has worked. If people are having problems, try using the Ghost boot disk approach.

[Dv8ted2]

I use a Barts PE disc and then use ghost from there. It works like a champ.

[ricoman]

GHOST is good, but most seem to prefer Acronis True Image. See reviews from CNET, PCworld and PC Magazine (and others). It's cheaper too, Newegg had it for $29.99 w/free shipping the other day.

[bevills1]

The suggestion by RLT69 is exactly what I did, i.e. Windows 98 on primary partition of new drive and Windows 2000 on second partition of new drive, and the Windows 98 imaged perfectly with no problems. The Widnows 2000 imaging seemed to complete normally in Ghost, but Windows 2000 gave error that certain files were missing or corrupt and failed to boot in Windows 2000. The boot.ini file was edited to account for new setup partitions. If having 2 disimilar drives on same channel can cause problems as Nelson37 suggests, then that's likely the cause of my problems. However, I doubt that's true because new drives are most often going to be disimilar from older drives. I had to do fresh install of Windows 2000 since Ghost imaging failed resulting in Windows 2000 failing to boot, and during reinstall Windows 2000 detected the boot.ini file perfectly indicating it was correctly edited. The dipstick surrestion may work, but I'm doubtful and think Ghost just incorrectly miaged some files causing file corruption. If files become corrupt, hiding partitions isn't going to solve that problem. I'm going to retry Ghosting the new Windows 2000 partition in a few days just for the heck of it to see whether Ghost proves unreliable again or whether this may have been a rare occurence as I suspect. There've been times I've downloaded some program that failed to install due to corrupt files, and download and install again fixed the problem. Some here probably have experienced this too, and I want to determine if this was the same kind of problem I experienced with Ghost in this instance.

[InXess]

Don't know what ver. u use but this behavior was typical for some imaging programs that were not XP (or win2000) compatible. Then you get missing files etc. Use something that IS XP compatible. Check Symantec forums for references regarding similar issues with DriveImage even though XP was out and the product was supposedly good with XP. Again, Acronis ver. 8 (not sure, too lazy to check) is 100% XP compatible (will image whether files are in use or not as opposed to your experience).

[bevills1]

As stated in my second 2/24/06 post here my 2002 version supports both Windows 2000 and XP as well as earlier Windows versions at least according to documentation with software and info on the retail box. Also I once tried installing SystemWorks 2000 in the Windows 2000 setup which gave error message that SystemWorks 2000 wasn't supported and could not be installed. I seriously doubt compatibility is an issue in this case unless Symantec was untruthful about support on the 2002 product.

[dipstick]

Compatability is not the issue. I also use Norton Ghost 2002 with XP and 98 and it works just fine.

Like I said earlier, the reason it gave you problems is because of the way you set up the dual-boot.

Win 98 restored fine as Partition-1 because it was originally the primary Boot partition. When you restored the Image of W2k to Partition-2, it couldn't boot because the Boot.ini file is on the Win98 root partition and it's still calling to boot W2k from the 2nd HDD as it was originally setup. You may be able to edit the Boot.ini to call W2k on 2nd partition where you restored it.

[bevills1]

As stated in my first 2/27/06 post here boot.ini was edited to reflect new configuration to boot Win2k from second partition of new drive, and Win2k was not calling to boot from second drive after Ghost imaging completed and Win2k boot attempt on new drive failed. Boot.ini was simply not the problem either, and the fact the fresh Win2k install recognized the boot.ini exactly as it was edited, as stated in first 2/27/06 post too, further demonstrates boot.ini was not the issue.