workstation disaster recovery - disk imaging?

Hello,

I've been running small networks for enough years to recognize that I spend
too much time wiping hard drives clean and reinstalling their OS. Maybe
it's only every three or four years, but it's an hours long process, what
with all the updates & patches. Now I'm exploring ways to improve this
process. I'm considering disk imaging software (like Acronis True Image and
Norton Ghost), and wondering about XP's System Restore.

Is XP's System Restore reliable, and can I make a restore point after the
initial, clean install, and keep that restore point?

Is that as effective as wiping the hard drive clean, and copying a ghosted
image of that initial clean install?

If I use disk imaging software, do I need to take a complete copy of the
drive, or can I just somehow copy pertinent drivers and operating system
files?

I'm wondering about the space implications, and where this info is stored.
I gather that many new PCs come with a hidden partition which contains some
mysterious recovery utility? But what use is that, if, after a few years,
the hard drive dies? If the hard drive dies, then I suppose an image of
that drive would be useless, unless it's replaced by the exact same model
number?

In a network of 25 workstations, which would be more sensible:

Get enough external harddrive space and disk imaging software, make & store
images of all the workstations, then if something gets
corrupted/infected/otherwise bogged down I can just restore the good image?

Would it be better to use server storage space for this?

Or am I okay relying on XP's System Restore?

So many questions... Thanks in advance for any thoughts you might share!!

Matthew

Pegasus
Fri Mar 14 14:25:10 PDT 2008

See below.

"Matthew" <mappleNOSPAMPLEASE@inch.com> wrote in message
news:u9S9DbhhIHA.4076@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Hello,
>
> I've been running small networks for enough years to recognize that I
> spend too much time wiping hard drives clean and reinstalling their OS.
> Maybe it's only every three or four years, but it's an hours long process,
> what with all the updates & patches. Now I'm exploring ways to improve
> this process. I'm considering disk imaging software (like Acronis True
> Image and Norton Ghost), and wondering about XP's System Restore.
>
> Is XP's System Restore reliable, and can I make a restore point after the
> initial, clean install, and keep that restore point?

SR is fairly reliable. AFAIK, you cannot keep specific restore points.
They get overwritten after a while.

> Is that as effective as wiping the hard drive clean, and copying a ghosted
> image of that initial clean install?

No, it is not. SR will fix minor problems but not major issues, e.g.
serious virus infections.

> If I use disk imaging software, do I need to take a complete copy of the
> drive, or can I just somehow copy pertinent drivers and operating system
> files?

You need to take a snapshot of the whole system drive. This is
why you should keep all your data (including your EMail files!)
on a separate drive.

> I'm wondering about the space implications, and where this info is stored.
> I gather that many new PCs come with a hidden partition which contains
> some mysterious recovery utility? But what use is that, if, after a few
> years, the hard drive dies? If the hard drive dies, then I suppose an
> image of that drive would be useless, unless it's replaced by the exact
> same model number?

Exactly. For the same reason you should store your image on
a removable medium that is normally kept away from your PC.

> In a network of 25 workstations, which would be more sensible:
>
> Get enough external harddrive space and disk imaging software, make &
> store images of all the workstations, then if something gets
> corrupted/infected/otherwise bogged down I can just restore the good
> image?
>
> Would it be better to use server storage space for this?

That's a matter of preference.

> Or am I okay relying on XP's System Restore?

System Restore won't help you if Windows is corrupted or
if the file system has gone bad.

> So many questions... Thanks in advance for any thoughts you might share!!
>
> Matthew

Dave
Fri Mar 14 14:26:33 PDT 2008

I think you'll get a number of different ideas about this. I just deployed
a new Vista machine for my boss (the business owner), and when I came in
this morning, his first comment was how many hours he had in configuring all
his apps and other preferences. He wanted to make sure that if the system
failed, he would not have to redo all that work.

I have been very happily using ShadowProtect to back up servers for about
1.5 years, so we decided to go with ShadowProtect Desktop for his new PC.
He's just going to use a locally attached USB drive, but you could equally
well use a NAS, server share, etc. - anything that can be mapped from the
workstation. If I were going to do this with a number of workstations, I'd
get a NAS for this purpose, but it's up to your own preferences and budget.
In my opinion, assuming that you buy good quality hardware, one option is
not "better" than another.

There are several advantages to ShadowProtect, one of which you mention. It
has hardware independent restore, which means that not only can you restore
to a different drive, you can restore to entirely different hardware, or
even to a VM. It's also very simple to use, fast, and reliable. I have the
servers e-mail me a report of each backup, which is an option with the
desktop version as well.

I love SP, and I'm trying to kill some time before I can start a project,
but rather than me going on and on, I recommend that you download the free
trial and check it out. Also, you'll note that there is special pricing for
multiple copies, in case you decide to deploy on multiple PCs. And, the
PCMagazine article was interesting and worth reading. And lastly, no I
don't work for them : -)

http://www.storagecraft.com/products/ShadowProtectDesktop/

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2704,2254465,00.asp



"Matthew" <mappleNOSPAMPLEASE@inch.com> wrote in message
news:u9S9DbhhIHA.4076@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Hello,
>
> I've been running small networks for enough years to recognize that I
> spend too much time wiping hard drives clean and reinstalling their OS.
> Maybe it's only every three or four years, but it's an hours long process,
> what with all the updates & patches. Now I'm exploring ways to improve
> this process. I'm considering disk imaging software (like Acronis True
> Image and Norton Ghost), and wondering about XP's System Restore.
>
> Is XP's System Restore reliable, and can I make a restore point after the
> initial, clean install, and keep that restore point?
>
> Is that as effective as wiping the hard drive clean, and copying a ghosted
> image of that initial clean install?
>
> If I use disk imaging software, do I need to take a complete copy of the
> drive, or can I just somehow copy pertinent drivers and operating system
> files?
>
> I'm wondering about the space implications, and where this info is stored.
> I gather that many new PCs come with a hidden partition which contains
> some mysterious recovery utility? But what use is that, if, after a few
> years, the hard drive dies? If the hard drive dies, then I suppose an
> image of that drive would be useless, unless it's replaced by the exact
> same model number?
>
> In a network of 25 workstations, which would be more sensible:
>
> Get enough external harddrive space and disk imaging software, make &
> store images of all the workstations, then if something gets
> corrupted/infected/otherwise bogged down I can just restore the good
> image?
>
> Would it be better to use server storage space for this?
>
> Or am I okay relying on XP's System Restore?
>
> So many questions... Thanks in advance for any thoughts you might share!!
>
> Matthew
>

Larry
Fri Mar 14 15:14:13 PDT 2008

Hi:

I'm wondering about Windows Home Server. You can do ten computers, servers
or workstations on each WHS, and it is under $200 per copy

Anyone know if it would work in VM?

--
Larry


"Dave Nickason [SBS MVP]" <gwdibble@NOSPAM.frontiernet.net> wrote in message
news:%23fEDVohhIHA.536@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>I think you'll get a number of different ideas about this. I just deployed
>a new Vista machine for my boss (the business owner), and when I came in
>this morning, his first comment was how many hours he had in configuring
>all his apps and other preferences. He wanted to make sure that if the
>system failed, he would not have to redo all that work.
>
> I have been very happily using ShadowProtect to back up servers for about
> 1.5 years, so we decided to go with ShadowProtect Desktop for his new PC.
> He's just going to use a locally attached USB drive, but you could equally
> well use a NAS, server share, etc. - anything that can be mapped from the
> workstation. If I were going to do this with a number of workstations,
> I'd get a NAS for this purpose, but it's up to your own preferences and
> budget. In my opinion, assuming that you buy good quality hardware, one
> option is not "better" than another.
>
> There are several advantages to ShadowProtect, one of which you mention.
> It has hardware independent restore, which means that not only can you
> restore to a different drive, you can restore to entirely different
> hardware, or even to a VM. It's also very simple to use, fast, and
> reliable. I have the servers e-mail me a report of each backup, which is
> an option with the desktop version as well.
>
> I love SP, and I'm trying to kill some time before I can start a project,
> but rather than me going on and on, I recommend that you download the free
> trial and check it out. Also, you'll note that there is special pricing
> for multiple copies, in case you decide to deploy on multiple PCs. And,
> the PCMagazine article was interesting and worth reading. And lastly, no
> I don't work for them : -)
>
> http://www.storagecraft.com/products/ShadowProtectDesktop/
>
> http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2704,2254465,00.asp
>
>
>
> "Matthew" <mappleNOSPAMPLEASE@inch.com> wrote in message
> news:u9S9DbhhIHA.4076@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> Hello,
>>
>> I've been running small networks for enough years to recognize that I
>> spend too much time wiping hard drives clean and reinstalling their OS.
>> Maybe it's only every three or four years, but it's an hours long
>> process, what with all the updates & patches. Now I'm exploring ways to
>> improve this process. I'm considering disk imaging software (like
>> Acronis True Image and Norton Ghost), and wondering about XP's System
>> Restore.
>>
>> Is XP's System Restore reliable, and can I make a restore point after the
>> initial, clean install, and keep that restore point?
>>
>> Is that as effective as wiping the hard drive clean, and copying a
>> ghosted image of that initial clean install?
>>
>> If I use disk imaging software, do I need to take a complete copy of the
>> drive, or can I just somehow copy pertinent drivers and operating system
>> files?
>>
>> I'm wondering about the space implications, and where this info is
>> stored. I gather that many new PCs come with a hidden partition which
>> contains some mysterious recovery utility? But what use is that, if,
>> after a few years, the hard drive dies? If the hard drive dies, then I
>> suppose an image of that drive would be useless, unless it's replaced by
>> the exact same model number?
>>
>> In a network of 25 workstations, which would be more sensible:
>>
>> Get enough external harddrive space and disk imaging software, make &
>> store images of all the workstations, then if something gets
>> corrupted/infected/otherwise bogged down I can just restore the good
>> image?
>>
>> Would it be better to use server storage space for this?
>>
>> Or am I okay relying on XP's System Restore?
>>
>> So many questions... Thanks in advance for any thoughts you might share!!
>>
>> Matthew
>>
>

Charlie
Fri Mar 14 15:45:58 PDT 2008

You probably wouldn't want to run it _in_ a VM, since then you'd have all
your backups inside the VM HDs. But you certainly _can_ do it.

I'm currently using WHS to backup all the key workstations. I'm very
impressed with it, and with the space saving I've realized. (and, FWIW, you
can run multiple WHS boxes on your network if the limit of 10 is too few...)

--
Charlie.
http://msmvps.com/xperts64
http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/profile/charlie.russel


"Larry Struckmeyer" <lstruckmeyer(at)mis-wizards(dot)com> wrote in message
news:%23dvI%23CihIHA.3352@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Hi:
>
> I'm wondering about Windows Home Server. You can do ten computers,
> servers or workstations on each WHS, and it is under $200 per copy
>
> Anyone know if it would work in VM?
>
> --
> Larry
>
>
> "Dave Nickason [SBS MVP]" <gwdibble@NOSPAM.frontiernet.net> wrote in
> message news:%23fEDVohhIHA.536@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>I think you'll get a number of different ideas about this. I just
>>deployed a new Vista machine for my boss (the business owner), and when I
>>came in this morning, his first comment was how many hours he had in
>>configuring all his apps and other preferences. He wanted to make sure
>>that if the system failed, he would not have to redo all that work.
>>
>> I have been very happily using ShadowProtect to back up servers for about
>> 1.5 years, so we decided to go with ShadowProtect Desktop for his new PC.
>> He's just going to use a locally attached USB drive, but you could
>> equally well use a NAS, server share, etc. - anything that can be mapped
>> from the workstation. If I were going to do this with a number of
>> workstations, I'd get a NAS for this purpose, but it's up to your own
>> preferences and budget. In my opinion, assuming that you buy good quality
>> hardware, one option is not "better" than another.
>>
>> There are several advantages to ShadowProtect, one of which you mention.
>> It has hardware independent restore, which means that not only can you
>> restore to a different drive, you can restore to entirely different
>> hardware, or even to a VM. It's also very simple to use, fast, and
>> reliable. I have the servers e-mail me a report of each backup, which is
>> an option with the desktop version as well.
>>
>> I love SP, and I'm trying to kill some time before I can start a project,
>> but rather than me going on and on, I recommend that you download the
>> free trial and check it out. Also, you'll note that there is special
>> pricing for multiple copies, in case you decide to deploy on multiple
>> PCs. And, the PCMagazine article was interesting and worth reading. And
>> lastly, no I don't work for them : -)
>>
>> http://www.storagecraft.com/products/ShadowProtectDesktop/
>>
>> http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2704,2254465,00.asp
>>
>>
>>
>> "Matthew" <mappleNOSPAMPLEASE@inch.com> wrote in message
>> news:u9S9DbhhIHA.4076@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> I've been running small networks for enough years to recognize that I
>>> spend too much time wiping hard drives clean and reinstalling their OS.
>>> Maybe it's only every three or four years, but it's an hours long
>>> process, what with all the updates & patches. Now I'm exploring ways to
>>> improve this process. I'm considering disk imaging software (like
>>> Acronis True Image and Norton Ghost), and wondering about XP's System
>>> Restore.
>>>
>>> Is XP's System Restore reliable, and can I make a restore point after
>>> the initial, clean install, and keep that restore point?
>>>
>>> Is that as effective as wiping the hard drive clean, and copying a
>>> ghosted image of that initial clean install?
>>>
>>> If I use disk imaging software, do I need to take a complete copy of the
>>> drive, or can I just somehow copy pertinent drivers and operating system
>>> files?
>>>
>>> I'm wondering about the space implications, and where this info is
>>> stored. I gather that many new PCs come with a hidden partition which
>>> contains some mysterious recovery utility? But what use is that, if,
>>> after a few years, the hard drive dies? If the hard drive dies, then I
>>> suppose an image of that drive would be useless, unless it's replaced by
>>> the exact same model number?
>>>
>>> In a network of 25 workstations, which would be more sensible:
>>>
>>> Get enough external harddrive space and disk imaging software, make &
>>> store images of all the workstations, then if something gets
>>> corrupted/infected/otherwise bogged down I can just restore the good
>>> image?
>>>
>>> Would it be better to use server storage space for this?
>>>
>>> Or am I okay relying on XP's System Restore?
>>>
>>> So many questions... Thanks in advance for any thoughts you might
>>> share!!
>>>
>>> Matthew
>>>
>>
>
>

Matthew
Fri Mar 14 16:44:34 PDT 2008

Thanks everyone for your input. I'm going to try ShadowProtect next week.

This is such a helpful newsgroup!

Matthew


"Matthew" <mappleNOSPAMPLEASE@inch.com> wrote in message
news:u9S9DbhhIHA.4076@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Hello,
>
> I've been running small networks for enough years to recognize that I
> spend too much time wiping hard drives clean and reinstalling their OS.
> Maybe it's only every three or four years, but it's an hours long process,
> what with all the updates & patches. Now I'm exploring ways to improve
> this process. I'm considering disk imaging software (like Acronis True
> Image and Norton Ghost), and wondering about XP's System Restore.
>
> Is XP's System Restore reliable, and can I make a restore point after the
> initial, clean install, and keep that restore point?
>
> Is that as effective as wiping the hard drive clean, and copying a ghosted
> image of that initial clean install?
>
> If I use disk imaging software, do I need to take a complete copy of the
> drive, or can I just somehow copy pertinent drivers and operating system
> files?
>
> I'm wondering about the space implications, and where this info is stored.
> I gather that many new PCs come with a hidden partition which contains
> some mysterious recovery utility? But what use is that, if, after a few
> years, the hard drive dies? If the hard drive dies, then I suppose an
> image of that drive would be useless, unless it's replaced by the exact
> same model number?
>
> In a network of 25 workstations, which would be more sensible:
>
> Get enough external harddrive space and disk imaging software, make &
> store images of all the workstations, then if something gets
> corrupted/infected/otherwise bogged down I can just restore the good
> image?
>
> Would it be better to use server storage space for this?
>
> Or am I okay relying on XP's System Restore?
>
> So many questions... Thanks in advance for any thoughts you might share!!
>
> Matthew
>

Russ
Fri Mar 14 21:44:38 PDT 2008

I use the desktop version and so have my clients

A+

Used it both for Server Move and PC move.

Mathew if you are in the Business you may be able to get a 1 free copy for
your company.
(I can't remember the requirements, but I think being a MS partner helps.)

There's someone that wants you to be SBS Certified for a copy, I think
that's Trend however????

Sorry I'm a partner of so many things I forget the requirements LOL

Russ

--

SBITS.Biz
Microsoft Gold Certified Partner
Microsoft Certified Small Business Specialist.
MCP, MCPS, MCNPS, (MCP-SBS)
North America Remote SBS2003 Support - http://www.SBITS.Biz
Information on Small Business Server 2008 - http://www.sbs2008.com
Information on Essentials Business Server - http://www.ebs2008.com



-

"Dave Nickason [SBS MVP]" <gwdibble@NOSPAM.frontiernet.net> wrote in message
news:%23fEDVohhIHA.536@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>I think you'll get a number of different ideas about this. I just deployed
>a new Vista machine for my boss (the business owner), and when I came in
>this morning, his first comment was how many hours he had in configuring
>all his apps and other preferences. He wanted to make sure that if the
>system failed, he would not have to redo all that work.
>
> I have been very happily using ShadowProtect to back up servers for about
> 1.5 years, so we decided to go with ShadowProtect Desktop for his new PC.
> He's just going to use a locally attached USB drive, but you could equally
> well use a NAS, server share, etc. - anything that can be mapped from the
> workstation. If I were going to do this with a number of workstations,
> I'd get a NAS for this purpose, but it's up to your own preferences and
> budget. In my opinion, assuming that you buy good quality hardware, one
> option is not "better" than another.
>
> There are several advantages to ShadowProtect, one of which you mention.
> It has hardware independent restore, which means that not only can you
> restore to a different drive, you can restore to entirely different
> hardware, or even to a VM. It's also very simple to use, fast, and
> reliable. I have the servers e-mail me a report of each backup, which is
> an option with the desktop version as well.
>
> I love SP, and I'm trying to kill some time before I can start a project,
> but rather than me going on and on, I recommend that you download the free
> trial and check it out. Also, you'll note that there is special pricing
> for multiple copies, in case you decide to deploy on multiple PCs. And,
> the PCMagazine article was interesting and worth reading. And lastly, no
> I don't work for them : -)
>
> http://www.storagecraft.com/products/ShadowProtectDesktop/
>
> http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2704,2254465,00.asp
>
>
>
> "Matthew" <mappleNOSPAMPLEASE@inch.com> wrote in message
> news:u9S9DbhhIHA.4076@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> Hello,
>>
>> I've been running small networks for enough years to recognize that I
>> spend too much time wiping hard drives clean and reinstalling their OS.
>> Maybe it's only every three or four years, but it's an hours long
>> process, what with all the updates & patches. Now I'm exploring ways to
>> improve this process. I'm considering disk imaging software (like
>> Acronis True Image and Norton Ghost), and wondering about XP's System
>> Restore.
>>
>> Is XP's System Restore reliable, and can I make a restore point after the
>> initial, clean install, and keep that restore point?
>>
>> Is that as effective as wiping the hard drive clean, and copying a
>> ghosted image of that initial clean install?
>>
>> If I use disk imaging software, do I need to take a complete copy of the
>> drive, or can I just somehow copy pertinent drivers and operating system
>> files?
>>
>> I'm wondering about the space implications, and where this info is
>> stored. I gather that many new PCs come with a hidden partition which
>> contains some mysterious recovery utility? But what use is that, if,
>> after a few years, the hard drive dies? If the hard drive dies, then I
>> suppose an image of that drive would be useless, unless it's replaced by
>> the exact same model number?
>>
>> In a network of 25 workstations, which would be more sensible:
>>
>> Get enough external harddrive space and disk imaging software, make &
>> store images of all the workstations, then if something gets
>> corrupted/infected/otherwise bogged down I can just restore the good
>> image?
>>
>> Would it be better to use server storage space for this?
>>
>> Or am I okay relying on XP's System Restore?
>>
>> So many questions... Thanks in advance for any thoughts you might share!!
>>
>> Matthew
>>
>