Images are more important than ever

[fafhrd]

To return to the original theme of the thread, the use of disk images to make sure that you have a working system, the very neat feature of native boot from VHD has not had much of an airing here.

With only a few percent drop in performance it is possible to use a Virtual Hard Disk copy of your system that boots directly from the Windows 7 bootloader. Now we are talking files, not partitions.

The disk2vhd utility from the Sysinternals Suite of tools can create the VHD from your Windows 7 system, and EasyBCD can load the .vhd file as a bootable image that is accessed as an entry in the boot menu. Of course, this file can readily be cloned, and run on real hardware, unlike a .vhd in Virtual PC, VirtualBox or VMWare hypervisors.

Is anybody here doing this?

 

[Bare Foot Kid]

Is anybody here doing this?

I have in the past but not at present.

Create a Windows 7 VHD at Boot to Start with from Boot

click to enlarge

​

 

[kado897]

I will make a decision in the next few days.

As promised decision made.

I have decided not to do it at this time as I don't think the risks outweigh the benefits.

Plan B.

I have been thinking for a while that a Desktop would be a good idea. The laptop can then revert to being a test machine for any "experimentation" I might want to do. I guess it will be a few months before I can get the necessary cash together for that but planning is starting now.

I will open a new thread when the time comes.

 

[Bare Foot Kid]

Hello Keith.


I hope our long-winded discourse didn't dissuade you from having a go.


You would be better served with a thread of your own in the Installation sub-forum.

My apologies and if you need further assistance you can PM me and I will do what I can.

 

[whs]

You figure on building the desktop yourself or buy one?

Btw: did you have a look at my post #48. This was a follow-up on what SIW had suggested. That method would be very risk free and simple to do.

 

[kado897]

Hello Keith.


I hope our long-winded discourse didn't dissuade you from having a go.


You would be better served with a thread of your own in the Installation sub-forum.

My apologies and if you need further assistance you can PM me and I will do what I can.

Not at all. I very much appreciate the advice given. It is better to understand the views and concerns of of everyone up front.

 

[kado897]

You figure on building the desktop yourself or buy one?

Btw: did you have a look at my post #48. This was a follow-up on what SIW had suggested. That method would be very risk free and simple to do.

I had sort of missed those in the general mix. I wasn't aware that the recovery partition couldn't be used for a repair install since SP1. It doesn't change my decision though. I now have my heart set on a desktop.

BTW does SP1 affect anything else like recovery disks etc?

 

[whs]

Yeah, desktops are a lot nicer than laptops. I only use the laptop when I have no other option. But some people prefer laptops - e.g. my wife. Just make sure you get a nice big screen (22" minimum). If you install an SSD or a Revo drive for the OS, then you really only need a midrange processor. This one is the best beat for the buck ( Newegg.com - AMD Phenom II X6 1100T Black Edition Thuban 3.3GHz, 3.7GHz Turbo 6 x 512KB L2 Cache 6MB L3 Cache Socket AM3 125W Six-Core Desktop Processor HDE00ZFBGRBOX ). I am not a gamer, so I use midrange graphics which come a lot cheaper. But if you do modern games, you can spend a fortune on a graphics card. The rest is pretty stock - a nice big box with good ventilation, a reliable PSU (I like Antec) and a mobo that matches the CPU. I would not look for USB3, but an eSata port is nice.

 

[mjf]

I had sort of missed those in the general mix. I wasn't aware that the recovery partition couldn't be used for a repair install since SP1. It doesn't change my decision though. I now have my heart set on a desktop.

BTW does SP1 affect anything else like recovery disks etc?

Kado897,
I don't believe SP1 has any affect on the recovery partition (how could it). I thought the issue was with system restores hence the title of the thread.

I had a vested interest in changing my Acer Boot/system partition to logical and it simply didn't work. My intention was to present a fact not promote "long-winded discourse".

I'll be buying a second desktop soon and I will look out for your new thread on the topic. I'm having a computer shop assemble it (cheaper for me) based on my specs which are yet to be determined.

 

[kado897]

I had sort of missed those in the general mix. I wasn't aware that the recovery partition couldn't be used for a repair install since SP1. It doesn't change my decision though. I now have my heart set on a desktop.

BTW does SP1 affect anything else like recovery disks etc?

Kado897,
I don't believe SP1 has any affect on the recovery partition (how could it). I thought the issue was with system restores hence the title of the thread.

I had a vested interest in changing my Acer Boot/system partition to logical and it simply didn't work. My intention was to present a fact not promote "long-winded discourse".

I'll be buying a second desktop soon and I will look out for your new thread on the topic. I'm having a computer shop assemble it (cheaper for me) based on my specs which are yet to be determined.

I don't know but SIW2 is pretty knowledgeable in this area. I havn't yet finalized my thoughts on the new desktop yet.

 

[z3r010]

Kado897,
I don't believe SP1 has any affect on the recovery partition (how could it). I thought the issue was with system restores hence the title of the thread.

Some OEM's give the option to just restore system files, leaving user files intact (My samsung laptop does), if the system had been upgraded with a service pack then that option would most likely screw it up rather than fix.

 

[mjf]

Kado897,
I don't believe SP1 has any affect on the recovery partition (how could it). I thought the issue was with system restores hence the title of the thread.

Some OEM's give the option to just restore system files, leaving user files intact (My samsung laptop does), if the system had been upgraded with a service pack then that option would most likely screw it up rather than fix.

I agree. Acer has something similar.
I was talking about the (complete) factory restore option. That is, the condition when you first turned the PC on.
Thanks for clarifying the point.
--------------------------------------------
For my ACER at least the factory restore/recovery partition rebuilds the whole system based on the files on that partition alone. These files know nothing about SP1 or anything else on the disk as far as I am aware.
The DVD factory restore disks are basically a copy of that partition and can be used for a new HDD as can an image of the recover partition.

 

[kado897]

I believe mine (HP) is a complete restore.

 

[Bare Foot Kid]

I believe mine (HP) is a complete restore.

You should get a back-up option during the process using the recovery partition, I did, this is from my old HP machine.

​

 

[kado897]

That's good to know, although I am paranoid about backing up files frequently.

 

[unifex]

Moreover, by placing my files on a separate partition/drive allows me to create whatever folder structure I want. With this in mind, I am not sure what is the problem of "integrating a data partition into the Windows data environment". I think the advice whs is giving referrs to the actual standard folders from the C:\Users\YouUsername.

Personally I don't use those folders at all. I put my files into whatever folder I want on my data partition. The standard user folders created by Windows I keep where they were created, or, in case of a SSD, move them to some separate partition. Thi sis because some programs insist on writing their temporary files into this structure and I prefer to avoid extra writing to my SSD. Other than that, I forget them.

As a result, I just need to organise my data in the data partition, but there is nothing special about moving data there, just cut and paste.

Exactly so.

I have NEVER used the C:\Users structure and have NEVER saved anything on C willfully.

Nor do I use libraries.

All personal data is on D. Windows slings some stuff into subfolders of C:\users of its own accord, but I never have to refer to it or deal with it.

I can drag and drop at will without any concern for properties or permissions.

Hmm, sounds like you prefer to do things the old way. But the Windows7 library and folder structure is much more advanced. Why not take advantage of it. And using drag and drop for moving data is really working without a net. There are better and safer ways to copy/move data. I would not want to go 10 years back.

Interesting.

I know two ways of moving/copying data - either through the command prompt or through the GUI. When you are in the command prompt you have to type a command, most usually with the full path of the destination. When you are using the GUI you can either cut and paste, or drag and drop.

Now, am I missing something? Are there any other (new) ways to move a file between folder A and folder B?

 

[whs]

Yes there are, from the context menu. But that is not "new". http://www.sevenforums.com/tutorials/516-context-menu-add-copy-folder-move-folder.html

 

[jimbo45]

Hi there
The whole" Recovery Partition" is just a CON.
You've paid for WINDOWS when you bought you computer so IMO you should get a FULL RETAIL copy of a WINDOWS install disk or at the VERY LEAST the OEM copy.

Then buy something like ACRONIS -- you can restore to your heart's content even if your whole HDD has got trashed.

Typical W7 installations only take at the most around 20 mins to recover the whole partition.

Incidentally ALWAYS split your OS away from the data -- say have around 50 GB for the OS and partition the rest of your HDD into Data etc -- one or more partitions depending on the size of the HDD.

Cheers
jimbo

 

[whs]

The whole" Recovery Partition" is just a CON.
You've paid for WINDOWS when you bought you computer so IMO you should get a FULL RETAIL copy of a WINDOWS install disk or at the VERY LEAST the OEM copy.

The question is how much you would be willing to pay for that. The OEMs pay MS about $40 for a Windows Home Premium that costs aroud $ 200 retail. Making DVDs for each shipped system is a lot of additional cost and a logistics nightmare. And most people will probably never use this DVD because either they have no need or they have lost it by the time they need it. Besides, reinstalling from the recovery partition is a lot more convenient.

But if you call your PC manufacturer, they will ship you a DVD. I got those from Gateway and from HP - both charged $20.

 

[unifex]

Yes there are, from the context menu. But that is not "new". http://www.sevenforums.com/tutorials/516-context-menu-add-copy-folder-move-folder.html

Yes, you can do that as well. But I don't see how's that better (or really different) than copy and paste. And in any case, that has nothing to do with the new user folder structure in Windows 7 being "much more advanced" than simply putting data on a separate partition and organizing it there to ones personal taste.

Libraries on the other hand are not limited to C:\User\ folders. You can use any folders in Libraries. I just don't find it useful to have thousands and thousands of files on one single Explorer page. If I had 15 files scattered over different hard drives, a Library would be useful. But that's me.