We have a micro-sized client/server network of 2 servers with Windows Server
2003 - Service Pack 2, 3 clients with Windows XP Pro - Service Pack 2 and 2
clients with Windows 2000 Pro.

I want to add a backup/restore program that will include a Disk Image
feature. I would appreciate any assistance in reaching a decision about which
product to acquire.

Thank you for your help.

First question is where are you going to store the backups/disk images?

Regards,
Hank Arnold

WPD wrote:

I'm a fan of Ghost, but really I think you should just NTbackup things and
rebuild to a core OS and restore if you suffer a complete failure.

"WPD" wrote:

Hi

Both the backed-up data and the disk image will be placed on hard drives.
The disk image will go on a hard drive that will be removed from the
computer, and it will be stored at a separate location. The data will be
backed up to a removable USB hard drive that is connected to the "file
server".

I expect that the disk image will also be transferred to either dvd or cd as
a further precaution.

**************************
"Hank Arnold" wrote:

Hi

If, for example the hard drive crashes, burns and is consumed by the fires
of hell, I want to be able to slide in a new hard drive with everything
already installed. Well, not quite everything. Of course, there will be data
that has been backed-up that will need to be added. But the idea is to be
back up and running within the hour, and preferably, within the 1/2-hour.

Your mentioned "Ghost". Isn't that a Symantec product? If so, I eliminated
Symantec from my life several years ago because I found that they were, all
too frequently, a problem-creator rather than a problem-solver.

***************************
"Steve Goddard" wrote:

You need to rethink your prejudice against Symantec, at least w.r.t.
Ghost. I can understand it when talking about NAV/SAV. I got a copy of
NAV 2006 (free after rebates). I removed it within a couple of weeks and
reverted to NAV 2005.

However, Ghost is a completely different story. It's exactly what you
need. You can clone drives, create drive images and even backups. I've
found the corporate and personal versions to be robust and extremely
useful with no problems.

If you can afford it, the corporate version will allow you to do some
pretty amazing things.

If you are running an AD domain, be very careful about trying to restore
a DC with a cloned drive (or backup). It's not nearly as straight
forward as restoring a non-DC server....

Regards,
Hank Arnold

WPD wrote:

To restore a system to within a half an hour of the working state would
require much more than ghost or any backup system I know of. At this level of
continuity of service you need failover clusters and lots of standby
workstations.

But if the disaster was total such as a building fire you need a secondary
site permanently on standby. Most backup solutions such as Ghost depends on
the hardware still being available, is that feasible to matain a secondary
copy of all your hardware offsite?

Maybe you should take a look at duplicating hardware and porting the key
service providers or the whole thing into a hosted enviroment such as VMWare.
It would be much easier to failover and recover that in event of a small or
large scale disaster.

"Hank Arnold" wrote:

Hi.

I would take Acronis products http://www.acronis.com in your case True Image
Server. You can make runtime images of servers, you can schedule them and
you can make incremental images.
The plugin feature is nice too. You can mount a image and access it in
Windows Explorer.
In your worstcase-scenario get your new drives, boot from True Image bootcd
and recover your image from the usb-drive.

Greetings

Blackula
"WPD" <county(please-delete-this)pyrenees@yahoo.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:FE2B5E0A-90AF-463B-BA89-CABE42D992DE@microsoft.com...

Hi

My responses are posted after each question/statement.

"Hank Arnold" wrote:

I can appreciate that you are able to compartmentalize your relationship
with Symantec, and if it works for you, then by all means, do it. In my case,
I used to compartmentalize, however, now I do not. I suspect that there are
other products and companies that have a Ghost equivalent. One that I can
think of is Acronis' True Image which, I believe, is both a backup and disk
image program.

I am running an AD domain. Does the fact that it is only a single domain as
described in my initial post eliminate the problem(s) of which you are
thinking?
********************

Hi

Thanks for the advice. After reading your post, I have downloaded the True
Image manual. I shall read it and then decide if it is what I need.

Have you every had to use the program, for real?

"Count Blackula" wrote:

Hi

Steve, you could you please elaborate on the specific problems that a disk
image would NOT solve? Please note that I describe our network in my initial
post. It is a single domain with 1 computer as the domain master and another
computer as a member server.
***************************

"Steve Goddard" wrote:

Regards,
Hank Arnold

WPD wrote:
Not sure what "compartmentalize" means.... All Im' saying is that Ghost
is an awesome program that, IMNSHO, does not suffer from the issues that
other Symantec programs have.
I have no problems with Acronis. It's an awesome program, also, and very
well thought of...

Single/multiple domains is not the issue. Active Directory and Domain
Controllers are the issue. Trying to restore a DC from an image can be
problematic, at the least, disastrous, at the worst.

All I'm saying is that you need to research this thoroughly before you
proceed.

Yes. One of my main jobs is migrating systems to other hardware and/or OS.
I used to work with Symantec Part. Magic (which works fine with NT servers
but is total crap for OSes above). After discovering Acronis i never touched
something else. I use Disk Director for copying and True Image for Backup of
crutial data. I had to use my last defense line (the image) a few times and
i was never disappointed. If your HW works fine and your Partitions are
alright everything will work fine.
Best results with chkdsk /f of partitions before "juggling" them and use of
the boot-cds for recovering.
I did W2000, W2003, DCs, Exchange-Servers, no problem. Only small problem is
drive letters other than c: d:. For example Citrix Metaframe servers often
use m: , n: and so on as driveletters. These will fall back to c: and d:
after working with boot-cd and recovery. But this is common, PM did the
same.


Greetings

Blackula

"WPD" <county(please-delete-this)pyrenees@yahoo.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:63E42025-4026-44ED-B348-C7271D2D03DB@microsoft.com...