New
#400
There is indeed a lot of confusion about cloning versus imaging and the terms are being mixed up. I for myself have made this easy definition (which may not be comprehensive):
Clone = a system copy that I can boot
Image = a sytem copy that I can restore
I hope that this does not add to the confusion.
I'd go along with that.
I try and look at it that a system image creates an image of the whole drive, which can then be used as a backup restore as and when needed, whereas cloning copies the contents of one hard drive to another.
In other words, imaging relates to a drive you are currently using, while cloning relates to a drive you are going to use.
I hope that makes sense.
There is no effective difference between
1) Cloning to a new HDD and sticking it in the cupboard
2) Reimaging to a new HDD and sticking it in the cupboard
Both achieve the same end result.
Both will immediately boot to the state the computer was in when they were made.
Cloning will include everything even if it isn't needed such as pagefile contents.
I have 2 standby HDDs "in the cupboard" and they were made by imaging.
With Cloning you need the new HDD immediately. With imaging you only need the new HDD when you are ready.
Thanks you fellas I was a bit gung ho with my perceptions on imaging and cloning and far from confusing me it really starts to make a bit of sense so I had better start imaging and I sort of like the idea that Gary put up re incremental imaging too - not conjures up in this sometimes erratic and impetuous mind like keeping my "clone" up to date.
So I am not such an old dog that I cannot learn from all of you eh? In fact it was in a way rather fortuitous that I ranted on about what I do.
Having said that I think I still might keep a clone in the drawer of the original setup in case everything goes belly up with the drive and it's image as four reinstalls just recently have been getting tedious as my OEM didn't come with SP1 on it plus the updates - need I say more.
The idea of imaging is to do it on a regular basis - at least once per week. A 5 year old image (or clone) in the drawer is not very helpful.
During a while I made a full image every morning after boot. That was automatically scheduled and ran in the backgrouns. Now I went back to 2 or 3 times per week depending on activities.
Btw - I hate incremental images because if you lose one in the chain you lose the whole bit. Diffentials are a bit better. But both are more difficult to manage than full images which I prefer. With acres of disk space that most of us have that should not be a problem.
Ok point taken Wolfgang I might just set it up like that only I'll still keep that clone in the drawer as a ready to go install, and save at least some updates etc. .
At the moment it i s difficult for me to do an image at boot every three or four days because of work and the limited time I have before having to leave but I suppose I could leave it for an evening time slot when I am having some TV time.
It depends on your needs.
1) If your HDD dies and can wait until you get to the store to buy a new one all you need is a recent image.
2) If you can't afford that delay then keep a spare HDD and be up and running with a recent image in say 1 hour. A little risk it will all go smoothly.
3) Keep an operational spare HDD even if 6 months old to get you up and running in minutes. 5 years is stretching it.
Option 2 is probably good enough for me. But then you would surely try option 3 anyway if you have never done this before.
John, I am not quite sure what you are trying to say. The imaging can run in the background and should not stall your normal activities. Just 'hide' Macrium.At the moment it i s difficult for me to do an image at boot every three or four days because of work and the limited time I have before having to leave but I suppose I could leave it for an evening time slot when I am having some TV time.
My total 40GB+ image takes only 5 minutes anyhow. But I image from the 60GB SSD to either an internal disk or an eSata disk. That is about as fast as it gets. And the other day a total restore took only 16 minutes. That was the fastest I have seen.