New
#21
It's true that two AVs are a very bad idea but comparing that to two backup systems is comparing apples to kumquats. I actually have three backup systems in place: imaging my OS and programs (the entire boot drive on my desktop rig and the System Reserved and C: partitions on my notebooks), folder file syncing for data drives (on the desktop) or partition (on the notebooks), and Carbonite.com for my desktop to backup data only. Also, keep in mind Norton programs are completely different beasts from what we have been advising (curiously, though, Ghost was the best of the bunch I used). I will not touch anything from Symantec (including Norton) anymore; it's a waste of money when there are programs that are better than theirs. Even the free version of Macrium Reflect beats the holy hairy heck out of Ghost.
If you are imaging your entire computer, that can take an enormous amount of time and space. By separating your OS and programs form your data and imaging just that, your images will be much smaller, allowing you to keep multiple images and eliminating the need for incremental imaging, and will reduce the frequency you need to make images (I image only once a week and before making changes to my system, such installing a new program or updates). Smaller images also means that
Incremental imaging is generally not recommended here because it's much easier to loose much of your backup if one of the incremental images gets lost or corrupted. Full images are much safer.
With the exception of Adobe Acrobat, Western Digital, and Carbonite (and, ironically, they are the ones I've called the least), I've never had good phone tech help. I still feel it's overrated.