[<<]Message[>>]    [<<]Author[>>]    [<<]Subject            Thread    

Number   :  1113
Date     :  2001-12-03
Author   :  Gabe Fineman
Subject  :  Re: XXCOPY backups to CDR, w/restore
Size(KB) :  12


------_=_NextPart_001_01C17C51.A42AFB40
Content-Type: text/plain

Our experience in the corporate world is that Ghost is useful to distribute
static copies of the same disk drive to many machines. Xxcopy is useful to
gather files from many machines to a removable master storage drive. Ghost
deals with static images of a single disk while Xxcopy deals with ever
changing files on many disks.

We use Ghost to set up our training rooms. We have 25 identical computers
with one as the master. We set up the master just the way we want it and
then make a Ghost dump (snapshot) that we can restore onto the other
machines before a class. We have a different image for each class and Ghost
can broadcast the image to all of the machines at once. This makes it
efficient to wipe the student disks and give each student a clean copy of
the same image that the instructor has. 

We use Xxcopy to not only back up our servers, but also the individual
workstations. Unlike ArcServe and BackupExec, it does not need an agent on
each machine. We gather Outlook pst files, local settings, applications
data, desktops and My Documents from each machine so that if the disk
crashes, we can get the person back working quickly with what they are used
to having. The beauty of Xxcopy is that it only has to copy what has changed
and not everything at the workstation.

Can Ghost be used as a backup program? Yes, it can if you have only one disk
you need backed up. Can Xxcopy be used as a way to clone a master disk to
many other machines? Yes, if you want to write the batch files and do some
cleanup at each machine. However, that is like saying can Word do spread
sheets or can Excel do letters. Yes, each can be forced to do almost
anything, but why take that much trouble to warp programs to do what they
were not designed to do? 

I know nothing about doslfnbk.

-Gabe Fineman 

-----Original Message-----
From: Kan Yabumoto [mailto:tech@x...]
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 2:08 AM
To: xxcopy@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [xxcopy] XXCOPY backups to CDR, w/restore



Dan, let me give you my honest answer to your question.

At 2001-12-02 10:38, Dan wrote:
>XXCOPY Backups to CDR, with Restore
>
>Hi Kan ... in this yahoo group I have seen several people mention that
>shareware utilities such as doslfnbk apparently DO make it possible to
>preserve the SFN when using xxcopy to clone-copy between a hard drive and a
>CD. I myself have no connection to doslfnbk, but I wonder why you never
>seem to mention doslfnbk when this limitation of xxcopy becomes a
>consideration??

I just don't have time to study the details of the DOSLFNBK package.
So, I leave any question with regard to such products to more
knowledgeable guys like you. That is, whenever I give an answer,
I try to explain with in-depth knowledge. At this moment, I don't
want to spend lots of time learning about DOSLFNBK except I just
know what it does from other's messages. As long as all my knowledge
on the package come from messages on this board, there is little
reason for me to start parroting those messages.

Please note that I'm XXCOPY's author. I spend day and night thinking
about it. Even though it's not always deliberate, it is inevitable
that my comments and opinions have a certain degree of natural bias.
And, I rather spend more time improving XXCOPY --- I have to cut down
my time consumed here. I hope that's a legitimate excuse why I
don't advocate other peoples work as much in here. So, please
feel free to advocate alternate (non-XXCOPY) solutions on this board
(to balance my bias).

> Why suggest to the users that their only option it to
>choose /NX0 and accept that there is a risk (a risk which, in many cases
>involving the operating system and installed programs, can be a certainty)
>that their backups will fail when the time comes to restore? Why not
>mention doslfnbk, or something comparable? (with Ghost etc as the only
>other reliable alternative)

In various newsgroups, XXCOPY has been mentioned alongside
Norton Ghost and PowerQuest DriveImage. I have seldom talked about
these products except I had lots of things to say about it. Now,
I decided to write an article comparing XXCOPY to Ghost and DriveImage.
My first step was to acquire these products. Now, I'm reading the
manual cover-to-cover. I will run these products on our system
many times ----- sufficiently knowledgeable on the subject to write
a reasonably accurate technical bulletin on the subject (my goal
is simply to attract more traffic to our web site by mentioning
those well-known products. One of the most visited pages in our
web site is the article which compares XXCOPY and Robocopy. I try
to do the same with an article which mentions both XXCOPY and Ghost.)
I will try to be objective (less hype on XXCOPY's strengths and
some description of positive aspects of non-XXCOPY solutions), but
my motive is less than pure.

As to Ghost, my view has bee that Ghost and DriveImage are very
poor solutions for daily backup. They are primarily useful for
system integrators who create a master copy of the base disk image
for a given OS and duplicate the disk image many times to save time.

>As a second question, you'd mentioned that some consideration has been
given
>to resolve this limitation in xxcopy (since the capability to backup to
CDRs
>or CDRWs is very useful). Any specific plans? (I'm putting aside for
now
>the consideration that when xxcopy was first developed its ability to
>restore operating systems and installed programs was not part of the
>anticipated benefits, but a fortunate result of building a solid product.)

Yes, we have to do more work on CD-RW related work.

------_=_NextPart_001_01C17C51.A42AFB40
Content-Type: text/html
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable






RE: [xxcopy] XXCOPY backups to CDR, w/restore



Our experience in the corporate world is that Ghost is us=
eful to distribute static copies of the same disk drive to many machines. X=
xcopy is useful to gather files from many machines to a removable master st=
orage drive. Ghost deals with static images of a single disk while Xxcopy d=
eals with ever changing files on many disks.

We use Ghost to set up our training rooms. We have 25 ide=
ntical computers with one as the master. We set up the master just the way =
we want it and then make a Ghost dump (snapshot) that we can restore onto t=
he other machines before a class. We have a different image for each class =
and Ghost can broadcast the image to all of the machines at once. This make=
s it efficient to wipe the student disks and give each student a clean copy=
of the same image that the instructor has. 

We use Xxcopy to not only back up our servers, but also t=
he individual workstations. Unlike ArcServe and BackupExec, it does not nee=
d an agent on each machine. We gather Outlook pst files, local settings, ap=
plications data, desktops and My Documents from each machine so that if the=
disk crashes, we can get the person back working quickly with what they ar=
e used to having. The beauty of Xxcopy is that it only has to copy what has=
changed and not everything at the workstation.

Can Ghost be used as a backup program? Yes, it can if you=
have only one disk you need backed up. Can Xxcopy be used as a way to clon=
e a master disk to many other machines? Yes, if you want to write the batch=
files and do some cleanup at each machine. However, that is like saying ca=
n Word do spread sheets or can Excel do letters. Yes, each can be forced to=
do almost anything, but why take that much trouble to warp programs to do =
what they were not designed to do? 

I know nothing about doslfnbk.


-Gabe Fineman 


-----Original Message-----
From: Kan Yabumoto [m=
ailto:tech@x...]
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 2:08 AM
To: xxcopy@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [xxcopy] XXCOPY backups to CDR, w/restore




Dan, let me give you my honest answer to your question.


At 2001-12-02 10:38, Dan wrote:
>XXCOPY Backups to CDR,  with Restore
>
>Hi Kan ... in this yahoo group I have seen several p=
eople mention that
>shareware utilities such as doslfnbk apparently DO m=
ake it possible to
>preserve the SFN when using xxcopy to clone-copy bet=
ween a hard drive and a
>CD.  I myself have no connection to doslfnbk, b=
ut I wonder why you never
>seem to mention doslfnbk when this limitation of xxc=
opy becomes a
>consideration??


I just don't have time to study the details of the DOSLFN=
BK package.
So, I leave any question with regard to such products to=
more
knowledgeable guys like you.  That is, whenever I g=
ive an answer,
I try to explain with in-depth knowledge.  At this =
moment, I don't
want to spend lots of time learning about DOSLFNBK excep=
t I just
know what it does from other's messages.  As long a=
s all my knowledge
on the package come from messages on this board, there i=
s little
reason for me to start parroting those messages.


Please note that I'm XXCOPY's author.  I spend day a=
nd night thinking
about it.  Even though it's not always deliberate, =
it is inevitable
that my comments and opinions have a certain degree of n=
atural bias.
And, I rather spend more time improving XXCOPY --- I hav=
e to cut down
my time consumed here.   I hope that's a legit=
imate excuse why I
don't advocate other peoples work as much in here. =
  So, please
feel free to advocate alternate (non-XXCOPY) solutions o=
n this board
(to balance my bias).


>    Why suggest to the users that thei=
r only option it to
>choose /NX0 and accept that there is a risk (a risk =
which, in many cases
>involving the operating system and installed program=
s, can be a certainty)
>that their backups will fail when the time comes to =
restore?  Why not
>mention doslfnbk, or something comparable? &nbs=
p; (with Ghost etc as the only
>other reliable alternative)


In various newsgroups, XXCOPY has been mentioned alongsid=
e
Norton Ghost and PowerQuest DriveImage.  I have sel=
dom talked about
these products except I had lots of things to say about =
it.  Now,
I decided to write an article comparing XXCOPY to Ghost =
and DriveImage.
My first step was to acquire these products.  Now, =
I'm reading the
manual cover-to-cover.  I will run these products o=
n our system
many times ----- sufficiently knowledgeable on the subje=
ct to write
a reasonably accurate technical bulletin on the subject =
(my goal
is simply to attract more traffic to our web site by men=
tioning
those well-known products.  One of the most visited=
pages in our
web site is the article which compares XXCOPY and Roboco=
py.  I try
to do the same with an article which mentions both XXCOP=
Y and Ghost.)
I will try to be objective (less hype on XXCOPY's streng=
ths and
some description of positive aspects of non-XXCOPY solut=
ions), but
my motive is less than pure.


As to Ghost, my view has bee that Ghost and DriveImage ar=
e very
poor solutions for daily backup.  They are primaril=
y useful for
system integrators who create a master copy of the base =
disk image
for a given OS and duplicate the disk image many times t=
o save time.


>As a second question, you'd mentioned that some consi=
deration has been given
>to resolve this limitation in xxcopy (since the capa=
bility to backup to CDRs
>or CDRWs is very useful).  Any specific plans?&=
nbsp;   (I'm putting aside for now
>the consideration that when xxcopy was first develop=
ed its ability to
>restore operating systems and installed programs was=
not part of the
>anticipated benefits, but a fortunate result of buil=
ding a solid product.)


Yes, we have to do more work on CD-RW related work.




------_=_NextPart_001_01C17C51.A42AFB40--



This message if part of XXCOPY's message Archive.
The archive contains all the messages posted at Yahoo!Groups: XXCOPY.