On 30 Jun 2023 14:44:22 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> I thought about trying to restore the old Windows 8.1 environment on
> the new laptop, but found it too risky (amongst others for the drivers
> issue you mention) and thought I might lose the on-disk Windows 11
> 'copy' of the new machine (i.e. it's hard - but probably not impossible
> - to image a machine which doesn't yet have a Windows *installation* on
> it,

I bought a Win 10 desktop late in 2021, and a Win 11 laptop this
spring. I would have preferred Windows 10, so the two would have the
same OS, but that wasn't an option. I thought about "downgrading" the
laptop to Win 10, but didn't because I was worried about drivers for
new hardware.

But I wouldn't have worried about losing the installed Windows 11.
Microsoft is so keen to foist Windows 11 on everybody that they let
you install Win 11 over Win 10 and -- if I remember correctly -- use
the same license before and after.

--
Stan Brown, Tehachapi, California, USA https://BrownMath.com/
Shikata ga nai...

On 30 Jun 2023 14:24:13 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> Macrium Reflect image backups are mainly for cases where one cannotget
> the system to boot, for whatever reason, for example a disk failure as
> John mentioned.

I won't quibble about "mainly". But an image backup can be mounted
just like a file backup, and you can extract individual files from
it. (I just tried that, with Macrium Reflect 8.1.)

So, like Char, I'm left wondering why you use two different backup
programs.

--
Stan Brown, Tehachapi, California, USA https://BrownMath.com/
Shikata ga nai...

On 6/30/2023 7:15 AM, Andy Burns wrote:
> J. P. Gilliver wrote:
>
>> My main hate of the registry, I suppose, is the impenetrable strings of hex
>
> What about the ROT13 sections?

Don't even suggest that to them :-) There are monkeys listening, for "good ideas".

Not all the obfuscation you see in there, is intended that way.

The license key in Windows for example, that *is* obfuscated with a custom
method, but that is not "encryption". It's just encoding. The algo is short,
and was documented in microsoft.public.windows.general, around 20 years ago.

Even Firefox, with its .jsonlz4, dabbles in wanton obfuscation
(for the fuck of it, not for any other justifiable reason).

Since there is a lz4.dll in Firefox, you can harvest that puppy
and make your own lz4 unpacker.

*******

File paths stored with 16 bit (wide) characters in the Windows Registry,
look like binary to the uninitiated, but if you get out your hex-to-ASCII table,
you can most always re-assemble that into something humans can use. It's
like doing the Time crossword puzzle.

Google: linux man ascii

for your own ASCII table. That's how I get mine, when I need one.

If you want to try your leet skillz, then decoding some TZ related
stuff would be good fun. TZ is Timezone material. There is an application
for putting a TZ into the registry, a process someone running WinXP or
Win2K might have done. I had to do it a couple of times on my Win2K
(I had CAD software that only ran there).

Paul

On 6/30/2023 9:44 AM, Stan Brown wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Jun 2023 10:25:29 +0100, J. P. Gilliver
> wrote:
>> My main hate of
>> the registry, I suppose, is the impenetrable strings of hex - not just
>> for the parameters, which I suppose I accept as quicker for machine use
>> (such as different bits of a DWORD controlling different things), but
>> the totally incomprehensible names of the keys, like 1234-567.8910,
>> rather than understandable names. I suspect that started as mostly
>> antipiracy
>>
>
> Sounds like you're talking about GUIDs.
> <https://betterexplained.com/articles/the-quick-guide-
> to-guids/>
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universally_unique_ident
> ifier>
>
> I remember 20-30 years ago we learned about them while
> learning COM programming. The idea was to create a
> unique identifier without any kind of central registry
> yet with ultra-low probability of duplicates. Wikipedia
> lists some other uses.
>
> I don't recall ever hearing any connection to
> antipiracy.
>

That could be a reference to CLSID, which is an application indirection.
And yes, that is annoying, having to work backwards with those.

While you can make a "excuse based on theoretical grounds" for
doing that, we all know this is just to flummox the users. It's
to make them see red, and pop an eardrum. That's all it's for.

Paul

Char Jackson <none@none.invalid> wrote:
> On 30 Jun 2023 14:24:13 GMT, Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid>
> wrote:
>
> >Ken Blake <Ken@invalid.news.com> wrote:
> >> Why do you use two? Are they different from each other? Is one better
> >> than the other?
> >
> > Macrium Reflect image backups are mainly for cases where one cannotget
> >the system to boot, for whatever reason, for example a disk failure as
> >John mentioned.
> >
> > The (Cobian Backup) file-oriented backup is for getting files back, in
> >case one has deleted, incorrectly modified, etc. them. For example, my
> >Thunderbird 'profile' is (also) backed up by the file-orieted backup.
> >
> > I would advise doing the same, i.e. an image backup of all your
> >partitions - except a pure 'data' partition if you have one - and a
> >file-oriented backup of stuff you think might be needed to restored
> >without restoring the system itself.
>
> Do you not trust the Macrium images to act as your file backups?
>
> I do, which is why I'm curious.

[Also answering Stan's questions at the same time:]

Yes, I trust the Macrium Reflect images to retrieve files if
neccessary. I have done so (restored a file / some files) at least once
(because the files were not in the 'Files' list of my Cobian Backkup
backup).

I do have the Free version of Macrium Reflect. At some time, I
probably will buy the full version, because the Free version is no
longer updated, but I find the price rather high, especially for our two
computers. (To Stan:) So I can not do file backups with Macrium Reflect
Free (but I can restore files, read on).

(To Stan:) Yes, I know I can mount the images. I do so after a backup
and verify that I can open a file and restore it.

Why do I use both (Macrium Reflect Free) image backup and (Cobian
Backup) backup?

For historical (hysterical? :-)) reasons. I already made file backups
a very, very long time before I got (was aware of?) something like
Macrium Reflect. In the XP days, I had some other disaster-recovery
software (can try to find its name), but it was a pain.

Second reason for having both is that I make file backup much more
frequently (daily) than image backup (monthly). The latter is also
caused by backing up to NAS (i.e. network) via Wi-Fi (i.e. slower than
hardwired) and by Macrium Reflect Free having only Differential backup,
not Incremental.

I hope this answers your questions.

On 6/30/2023 2:25 PM, Stan Brown wrote:
> On 30 Jun 2023 14:24:13 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>> Macrium Reflect image backups are mainly for cases where one cannotget
>> the system to boot, for whatever reason, for example a disk failure as
>> John mentioned.
>>
>> The (Cobian Backup) file-oriented backup is for getting files back, in
>> case one has deleted, incorrectly modified, etc. them. For example, my
>> Thunderbird 'profile' is (also) backed up by the file-orieted backup.
>>
>
> Are you using Macrium Reflect Free or the paid version? Free can't,
> but the paid version can do file backups also.
>

Yes, the paid version has *two* modes, but as freeloaders,
we don't get to see the other one.

Macrium has always been "file-aware". On its face, when you're
using the Volume Shadow Service (VSS) to snapshot a partition,
it just looks like "record the busy clusters, ignore the rest"
is all that you need to know. But if you watch Macrium,
it also keeps a file manifest.

Now, if, on a restore, you resize-on-the-fly a partition in
Macrium (make it 1GB smaller), the fragmentation on the volume
is significantly reduced. This means it is putting back some
files in file-order and not rigidly in cluster-order. Which means,
even when operating in a non-file mode (freeloader version),
it actually knows where the files are, and it can squeeze them
into a smaller partition, by writing out the files one at a time.

One of the reasons NTFS partitions are never "perfect", is because
the reserved area for $MFT expansion gets in the way. And perfectly
good opportunities to write out a contiguous file, they have to
"leap over" the reserved zone, giving two fragments. In addition,
when directory entries get too big, the directory needs to be enlarged,
so it can fragment too. While Macrium makes a good effort, when
restoring into a shrunken partition, it still has to deal with
these Windows realities. Since "Macrium is not a defragmenter",
it cannot reach in and "give things a shake". That would be forbidden.
It only gets one opportunity to write on restore, and it does not
fiddle with stuff once the file has been laid down.

*******

How I distinguish backup utilities, is by their track record when I
test them. It takes a long time, to build confidence in a product.
It could take me a year, to conclude "product X is safe".

From a speed perspective, AOMEI is in the same class as Macrium.
Then, you have to Google your ass off, for cases where some
backup/restore failed.

One of the places backup applications can fail, is they don't do
enough "CHKDSK-like" activity, and they back up "broken goods".

Then on a restore, some shit hits the fan, and they get a bad name.
If you're a backup writer, that's an area that deserves significant
attention. Anybody can write a backup application (even you could,
using VSS and dd), but it takes a genius to make sure that what
you're backing up, is a flake-free file system.

This is why Macrium puts a red "Error 9" on the screen, when
it takes a sniff, and does not like your metadata.
It won't start a backup, unless the partitions present themselves in
good working order. It can still be flummoxed by a bad (unreadable)
sector later in the backup -- it does not read-verify your 1TB partition,
before doing an additional 1TB of reads for a backup. While it is
annoying to have a backup aborted like that, you would absolutely
hate the application if it checked for bad sectors, first.

Paul

In message <u7n0on.njo.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net> at Fri, 30 Jun
2023 14:44:22, Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> writes
[]
> I thought about trying to restore the old Windows 8.1 environment on
>the new laptop, but found it too risky (amongst others for the drivers
>issue you mention) and thought I might lose the on-disk Windows 11
>'copy' of the new machine (i.e. it's hard - but probably not impossible
>- to image a machine which doesn't yet have a Windows *installation* on
>it,
>
>[...]

I always create my images by booting from cold from the Macrium CD; I've
always assumed that that would backup (image) more or less anything,
including nothing. Yes, I'm aware that it probably wouldn't work if the
unknown had partitions formatted with something Macrium doesn't know
about.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Actors are fairly modest...A lot of us have quite a lot to be modest about. -
Simon Greenall (voice of Aleksandr the "Simples!" Meerkat), RT 11-17 Dec 2010

In message <MPG.3f08c0d7b087362599015e@news.individual.net> at Fri, 30
Jun 2023 11:37:52, Stan Brown <the_stan_brown@fastmail.fm> writes
>On 30 Jun 2023 14:24:13 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>> Macrium Reflect image backups are mainly for cases where one cannotget
>> the system to boot, for whatever reason, for example a disk failure as
>> John mentioned.
>
>I won't quibble about "mainly". But an image backup can be mounted
>just like a file backup, and you can extract individual files from
>it. (I just tried that, with Macrium Reflect 8.1.)
>
>So, like Char, I'm left wondering why you use two different backup
>programs.
>
I accept the need to backup invisible boot partitions, and so on, which
Macrium can do - restore a set of partitions to recreate a system. For
just pure data, I like to be able to access the backups without having
to load the software that knows how to do the "mounting": as far as I'm
concerned, it's just like a fancy version of ZIP - I'd rather not need
the extra layer.

For much the same reason, since I keep my C: (and the other arcanery)
small, I tend not to use any compression when making the image of it.

Plus - though I haven't got round yet to implementing it this time round
- I can do my plain data backups with something like SyncToy, thus
saving time - which might not work through an extra layer.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Actors are fairly modest...A lot of us have quite a lot to be modest about. -
Simon Greenall (voice of Aleksandr the "Simples!" Meerkat), RT 11-17 Dec 2010

On 6/30/2023 4:40 PM, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
> In message <u7n0on.njo.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net> at Fri, 30 Jun 2023 14:44:22, Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> writes
> []
>>  I thought about trying to restore the old Windows 8.1 environment on
>> the new laptop, but found it too risky (amongst others for the drivers
>> issue you mention) and thought I might lose the on-disk Windows 11
>> 'copy' of the new machine (i.e. it's hard - but probably not impossible
>> - to image a machine which doesn't yet have a Windows *installation* on
>> it,
>>
>> [...]
>
> I always create my images by booting from cold from the Macrium CD; I've always assumed that that would backup (image) more or less anything, including nothing. Yes, I'm aware that it probably wouldn't work if the unknown had partitions formatted with something Macrium doesn't know about.

Macrium backs up the 15MB Microsoft Reserved on a UEFI installation.

Linux gparted will not deal with the 15MB partition, because...
it contains no file system. Macrium on the other hand, knows
it has no file system, and uses "dd" to back it up. It uses
a sector-by-sector approach. On the Linux side, that 15MB partition
is "like a turd", it causes so much trouble :-)

Macrium can back up a Linux EXT partition. It uses smart copy
for that (only backs up inodes containing files and so on).
20GB of EXT files, requires about 30GB of backup-drive storage space.
Some disk structure (super-blocks) could be involved, not sure.

But if you were to present a BTRFS, it does not know what
that is, so it could resort to "dd" for that. I have not
tested it for such test cases (used a BTRFS just to try
and break Macrium). The 15MB Microsoft Reserved observation,
is good enough as a start at a characterization.

You could "dd" the original 15MB yourself, checksum it, then
see if the restored Macrium image has the same checksum
for that partition. That would tell you that the restore, worked.

Paul

On 30 Jun 2023 19:42:32 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>
> [Also answering Stan's questions at the same time:]
>
> I hope this answers your questions.

Thanks for replying, Frank. I hope you didn't infer I was finding
fault; I was just genuinely curious.

For myself, I tried Macrium Reflect Free, realized that I really
needed file backups, and bought a license. But I had already decided
to do so anyway: it's a good product, and I thought they deserved to
be compensated for the program.

--
Stan Brown, Tehachapi, California, USA https://BrownMath.com/
Shikata ga nai...

On Fri, 30 Jun 2023 20:52:12 -0700, Stan Brown
<the_stan_brown@fastmail.fm> wrote:

>On 30 Jun 2023 19:42:32 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>>
>> [Also answering Stan's questions at the same time:]
>>
>> I hope this answers your questions.
>
>Thanks for replying, Frank. I hope you didn't infer I was finding
>fault; I was just genuinely curious.

Same here. Just curious.

>For myself, I tried Macrium Reflect Free, realized that I really
>needed file backups, and bought a license. But I had already decided
>to do so anyway: it's a good product, and I thought they deserved to
>be compensated for the program.

Again, same here. I bought a 4-license bundle since I had 4 systems that
would benefit from regular backups. Before buying Macrium and setting up
a schedule, I was creating backups about once or twice per decade*,
which probably isn't often enough to be useful.

*that's on my primary laptop. The other 3 PCs were never getting backed
up at all, but all 4 are on a regular schedule now.

In message <ehgv9itu33j66skdl2mudjqdfd5hogq3bd@4ax.com> at Sat, 1 Jul
2023 01:09:20, Char Jackson <none@none.invalid> writes
>On Fri, 30 Jun 2023 20:52:12 -0700, Stan Brown
><the_stan_brown@fastmail.fm> wrote:
[]
>>For myself, I tried Macrium Reflect Free, realized that I really
>>needed file backups, and bought a license. But I had already decided
>>to do so anyway: it's a good product, and I thought they deserved to
>>be compensated for the program.
>
>Again, same here. I bought a 4-license bundle since I had 4 systems that
>would benefit from regular backups. Before buying Macrium and setting up
>a schedule, I was creating backups about once or twice per decade*,
>which probably isn't often enough to be useful.

No - in the event of hardware failure, image unlikely to be of use as
unlikely to be able to find hardware to which the OS (and all software)
can be restored - and data certainly needs more often than that.
>
>*that's on my primary laptop. The other 3 PCs were never getting backed
>up at all, but all 4 are on a regular schedule now.
>
I was on about once a quarter, but have now set a reminder (I use System
Scheduler - I started using it under XP, and although 7 has a built-in
one, still prefer it - it's a lot simpler) and do an image of C: and a
backup of D: once a month. With the amount of work I've been putting
into my genealogy lately, I've been thinking of setting a _weekly_
reminder for that (and maybe my email/news files and financial file). I
might even automate those (with a reminder a few minutes beforehand to
[a] get out of the prog.s [b] connect the external drive).
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

I'd rather trust the guys in the lab coats who aren't demanding that I get up
early on Sundays to apologize for being human.
-- Captain Splendid (quoted by "The Real Bev" in mozilla.general, 2014-11-16)

Stan Brown <the_stan_brown@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> On 30 Jun 2023 19:42:32 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> >
> > [Also answering Stan's questions at the same time:]
> >
> > I hope this answers your questions.
>
> Thanks for replying, Frank. I hope you didn't infer I was finding
> fault; I was just genuinely curious.

No worries. Your (and Char's) interest was perfectly clear and
perfectly fine.

And it gave me another opportunity to blabber to my heart's content,
so win-win! :-)

[...]

J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
> In message <u7n0on.njo.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net> at Fri, 30 Jun
> 2023 14:44:22, Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> writes
> []
> > I thought about trying to restore the old Windows 8.1 environment on
> >the new laptop, but found it too risky (amongst others for the drivers
> >issue you mention) and thought I might lose the on-disk Windows 11
> >'copy' of the new machine (i.e. it's hard - but probably not impossible
> >- to image a machine which doesn't yet have a Windows *installation* on
> >it,
> >
> >[...]
>
> I always create my images by booting from cold from the Macrium CD; I've
> always assumed that that would backup (image) more or less anything,
> including nothing. Yes, I'm aware that it probably wouldn't work if the
> unknown had partitions formatted with something Macrium doesn't know
> about.

I was mostly worried about whether it would work at all, mostly
driver-wise. Would a 'Rescue media' USB memory-stick, made for the old
system, work on the new system?

In hindsight, I could of course just have tried. If it wouldn't work,
it would be unlikely that Macrium Reflect would have done any damage to
the contents of the new 'disk' (SSD). (Now I'm writing this, I realize
that the (driver for) SSD might have been a problem, as the old system
had a HDD. OTOH I probably could have added a SSD driver to the old
Rescue media.)

Anyway, I'm glad I took the route I took (Windows 11 on the new
laptop). It took a lot of work, but now I'm on an OS which will be
supported for quite some years, (sofar) runs all the old software I need
and - contrary to popular belief - is actually somewhat bearable! :-)

On 7/1/2023 7:32 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
>> In message <u7n0on.njo.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net> at Fri, 30 Jun
>> 2023 14:44:22, Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> writes
>> []
>>> I thought about trying to restore the old Windows 8.1 environment on
>>> the new laptop, but found it too risky (amongst others for the drivers
>>> issue you mention) and thought I might lose the on-disk Windows 11
>>> 'copy' of the new machine (i.e. it's hard - but probably not impossible
>>> - to image a machine which doesn't yet have a Windows *installation* on
>>> it,
>>>
>>> [...]
>>
>> I always create my images by booting from cold from the Macrium CD; I've
>> always assumed that that would backup (image) more or less anything,
>> including nothing. Yes, I'm aware that it probably wouldn't work if the
>> unknown had partitions formatted with something Macrium doesn't know
>> about.
>
> I was mostly worried about whether it would work at all, mostly
> driver-wise. Would a 'Rescue media' USB memory-stick, made for the old
> system, work on the new system?
>
> In hindsight, I could of course just have tried. If it wouldn't work,
> it would be unlikely that Macrium Reflect would have done any damage to
> the contents of the new 'disk' (SSD). (Now I'm writing this, I realize
> that the (driver for) SSD might have been a problem, as the old system
> had a HDD. OTOH I probably could have added a SSD driver to the old
> Rescue media.)
>
> Anyway, I'm glad I took the route I took (Windows 11 on the new
> laptop). It took a lot of work, but now I'm on an OS which will be
> supported for quite some years, (sofar) runs all the old software I need
> and - contrary to popular belief - is actually somewhat bearable! :-)
>

SATA SSD and SATA HDD should be similar enough to use the same driver.
They different in SMART definition, which is not critical to the main function.
They support read/write the same way.

NVMe SSD would be a different driver, if not present.

When you make Macrium boot media, that's a WinPE made from a WADK kit
or similar. One of the Macrium options is to use a WinRE and not bother
with downloading a WADK kit. The other options use the WADK kit and
build a boot OS from that.

If you had a really old WADK, like something WinXP era, that would be
unlikely to have an NVMe driver.

It's similar to potential issues with USB3 and XHCI drivers. If a WADK
was Win7 or older, there wouldn't be USB class style support for USB3.
Some Win10 WADK would have it. If you wanted to do backups to a USB3
external drive, you'd want to use a new enough WADK (or use the default
WinRE).

The eMMC in a laptop/tablet, I have no idea what standard that is :-)
It's supposed to be "SD-like" but the circuit here shows an eight bit bus.
There might be other modes of operation, using one data line or four data
lines, versus all eight. To get a copy of the spec, costs $327. I'm
really surprised Wiki does not have a better writeup.

https://community.nxp.com/t5/i-MX-Processors/imx8mp-eMMC-interface-pull-ups/m-p/1361415

*******

If you build 32-bit media when making your Macrium CD or Macrium stick,
it will run a select few win32 applications. There may be occasions
where some technical problem arises, and a certain tool is only available
for windows, and you need it to run in the WinPE environment. The 32 bit media
stands the best odds of running win32 applications. A 64-bit Macrium media,
is unlikely to help at a time like that (WOW might be missing on it, dunno).

There are a number of software subsystems missing in a WinPE, so not just anything
will work in there. VSS is missing, and Macrium does not mind, since the
partitions are all at rest and no files would be locked anyway. when Macrium boots,
the OS is ramdrive letter X: and all the other drive letters are at-rest (like C: ).
It is possible, if something uses X: , it could run out of space.

I'm kinda shocked, that the Macrium media is as functional as it is :-)

The old versions of Macrium media, did not have a Shutdown option, only a Reboot.
The newer ones, you can select shutdown. Since the OS is ramdrive based, you
can pull out the media (open CD tray and remove CD, close tray), before clicking shutdown.

Paul

On 30 Jun 2023 14:24:13 GMT, Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid>
wrote:

>Ken Blake <Ken@invalid.news.com> wrote:
>> On 29 Jun 2023 17:39:35 GMT, Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
>> >> In message <0ecm9iplsers0rei4tkr760ik97l4it8nm@4ax.com> at Tue, 27 Jun
>> >> 2023 12:02:59, Ken Blake <Ken@invalid.news.com> writes
>> >> >On Tue, 27 Jun 2023 11:42:24 -0500, Char Jackson <none@none.invalid>
>> >> >wrote:
>> >> []
>> >> >>Agreed. If I were to work in a Command Prompt window on a strange PC,
>> >> >>I'd make sure QuickEdit Mode is enabled. On my own PCs, it's enabled,
>> >> >
>> >> >Same here.
>> >> >
>> >> >>but I don't remember if I had to do that or if it was a default.
>> >> >
>> >> >Same here. That's true of 90% of the setting here. Not only do I not
>> >> >remember whether I changed the settings, but if I did, I don't
>> >> >remember how I did it. Once something works the way I want it to, I
>> >> >almost always quickly put it out of my mind.
>> >>
>> >> That's why I hate changing machines, and also am not keen on the
>> >> smart-alecks who say they can get an out-of-the-box machine to how they
>> >> want it very quickly: I presume they just work mostly with the defaults.
>> >> In my case, some of the "settings" actually involve third-party utils,
>> >> which I will have forgotten not only how to set them up and where I got
>> >> them (even assuming they're still available!), but even that they _are_
>> >> such and not part of the OS. I image (using Macrium - other similar are
>> >> available) my C: partition (which contains just the OS and software;
>> >> nearly all data is on D: [which is backed up by a simpler process]; C:
>> >> is 50G, and at present less than half full) from time to time - I can be
>> >> back up after a disc failure, to how I want everything to be, a lot
>> >> faster than finding all those settings (and utils) and tweaking them.
>> >>
>> >> Others can do what _they_ want, of course.
>> >
>> > You seem to address two scenarios: (in reverse order) 1) getting back
>> >up after some major event like a disk failure and 2) changing from one
>> >machine to another.
>> >
>> > For 1), I use Macrium Reflect image backup and (Cobian Backup) file
>> >backup,
>>
>> Why do you use two? Are they different from each other? Is one better
>> than the other?
>
> Macrium Reflect image backups are mainly for cases where one cannotget
>the system to boot, for whatever reason, for example a disk failure as
>John mentioned.
>
> The (Cobian Backup) file-oriented backup is for getting files back, in
>case one has deleted, incorrectly modified, etc. them. For example, my
>Thunderbird 'profile' is (also) backed up by the file-orieted backup.
>
> I would advise doing the same, i.e. an image backup of all your
>partitions - except a pure 'data' partition if you have one - and a
>file-oriented backup of stuff you think might be needed to restored
>without restoring the system itself.
>
>> I use AOMEI? Do you recommend that I switch to one of the two you use?
>> Both of them? Why?
>
> Use whatever suits you best.

Sure, but especially when it comes to backup programs, it's hard to
know what suits me best without spending a lot of time and effort
trying everything out. That's why I asked you, someone whose opinions
I respect.

On Fri, 30 Jun 2023 20:52:12 -0700, Stan Brown
<the_stan_brown@fastmail.fm> wrote:

>On 30 Jun 2023 19:42:32 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>>
>> [Also answering Stan's questions at the same time:]
>>
>> I hope this answers your questions.
>
>Thanks for replying, Frank. I hope you didn't infer I was finding
>fault; I was just genuinely curious.
>
>For myself, I tried Macrium Reflect Free, realized that I really
>needed file backups, and bought a license. But I had already decided
>to do so anyway: it's a good product, and I thought they deserved to
>be compensated for the program.

I keep all of my data file backed up on a separate partition from C:
(D:) I use Bart regularly to back up D: to three places: an external
drive and two internal drives. The backups to internal drives are
perhaps overkill, but I do it because Bart is very fast and I had the
two extra drives lying around without any other use for them,

What's on those three drives are simply copies of the files, so
restoring a file is simply a matter of copying it from one of the
backup drives.

On Sat, 01 Jul 2023 01:09:20 -0500, Char Jackson <none@none.invalid>
wrote:

>On Fri, 30 Jun 2023 20:52:12 -0700, Stan Brown
><the_stan_brown@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>
>>On 30 Jun 2023 19:42:32 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>>>
>>> [Also answering Stan's questions at the same time:]
>>>
>>> I hope this answers your questions.
>>
>>Thanks for replying, Frank. I hope you didn't infer I was finding
>>fault; I was just genuinely curious.
>
>Same here. Just curious.
>
>>For myself, I tried Macrium Reflect Free, realized that I really
>>needed file backups, and bought a license. But I had already decided
>>to do so anyway: it's a good product, and I thought they deserved to
>>be compensated for the program.
>
>Again, same here. I bought a 4-license bundle since I had 4 systems that
>would benefit from regular backups. Before buying Macrium and setting up
>a schedule, I was creating backups about once or twice per decade*,
>which probably isn't often enough to be useful.

I used Macrium Reflect a while back. I don't remember why I stopped,
but since you and others here like it, I just put trying it again (to
backup C:) on my calendar. I'll probably try tomorrow or the next day.

>
>*that's on my primary laptop. The other 3 PCs were never getting backed
>up at all, but all 4 are on a regular schedule now.

On Sat, 1 Jul 2023 11:52:39 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk>
wrote:

>In message <ehgv9itu33j66skdl2mudjqdfd5hogq3bd@4ax.com> at Sat, 1 Jul
>2023 01:09:20, Char Jackson <none@none.invalid> writes
>>On Fri, 30 Jun 2023 20:52:12 -0700, Stan Brown
>><the_stan_brown@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>[]
>>>For myself, I tried Macrium Reflect Free, realized that I really
>>>needed file backups, and bought a license. But I had already decided
>>>to do so anyway: it's a good product, and I thought they deserved to
>>>be compensated for the program.
>>
>>Again, same here. I bought a 4-license bundle since I had 4 systems that
>>would benefit from regular backups. Before buying Macrium and setting up
>>a schedule, I was creating backups about once or twice per decade*,
>>which probably isn't often enough to be useful.
>
>No - in the event of hardware failure, image unlikely to be of use as
>unlikely to be able to find hardware to which the OS (and all software)

That depends on what hardware has failed. If the whole computer is
replaced, I agree, but if it's just a single component, that may or
may not be the case.

>can be restored - and data certainly needs more often than that.

Yes. I regularly backup data in three ways.

1. Backup to the cloud, using a paid-for service that backs up daily

2. Backup to my three backup drives (one external, two internal)
weekly.

3.Back of my most critical data (Quicken), alternating between using
one of two thumb drives, whenever there are significant changes
(every day or two).

That means I always have at least six copies of my Quicken data (and
my financial advisor has a seventh copy of most of it). Am I being
paranoid? Yes. But I can survive the loss of anything else. I'm not so
sure I could readily survive the loss of my Quicken data.

And are all those levels of backup of the rest of the data necessary.?
Almost certainly not. But I'd rather be safe than sorry.

>>*that's on my primary laptop. The other 3 PCs were never getting backed
>>up at all, but all 4 are on a regular schedule now.
>>
>I was on about once a quarter, but have now set a reminder (I use System
>Scheduler - I started using it under XP, and although 7 has a built-in
>one, still prefer it - it's a lot simpler) and do an image of C: and a

To me, an image of C: isn't as critical as backup of the data files on
D:, so I do it when I get around to it--probably also around once a
quarter. I know--I should do it more often.

Can I do it with a built-in Windows 11 tool? What's the name of the
tool? Is that a good choice? If I can do it, I know next to nothing
about it. Should I look into that before I look into Macrium reflect.?

What I've been thinking about doing is using one of my two internal
backup drives that are being backed up by Bart and instead use it to
backup an image (or clone? Is one a better choice than the other?) of
C: Can I do that with a Windows 11 tool, or would Macrium reflect be a
better choice? The advantage of using an internal drive to do that is
that I could have it scheduled to automatically run at a reasonable
frequency, and don't have to remember to do it.

Yes, an internal drive for backup isn't as safe as an eternal drive,
but as far as I'm concerned, that's much more important for data files
than for C: If I lost all my data files on D, that would be a
catastrophe, but if I lost everything on C: without a backup, it would
be a pain in the ass (arse), but I'd survive.

All thoughts about what I currently do and my plans for what I'll do
in the future, and any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

>backup of D: once a month. With the amount of work I've been putting
>into my genealogy lately,

I have no genealogical records. I have four living relatives, as far
as I know (one son, one grandson, one first cousin, one second cousin)
and I remember only seven dead relatives--mother, father, two aunts,
one first cousin once removed, one maternal grandmother, and maternal
grandfather--so I have no interest in knowing more about people who I
met at most only a handful of times, and don't remember at all.

> I've been thinking of setting a _weekly_
>reminder for that (and maybe my email/news files and financial file). I
>might even automate those (with a reminder a few minutes beforehand to
>[a] get out of the prog.s [b] connect the external drive).

On Fri, 30 Jun 2023 21:47:50 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver"
<G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:

>In message <MPG.3f08c0d7b087362599015e@news.individual.net> at Fri, 30
>Jun 2023 11:37:52, Stan Brown <the_stan_brown@fastmail.fm> writes
>>On 30 Jun 2023 14:24:13 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>>> Macrium Reflect image backups are mainly for cases where one cannotget
>>> the system to boot, for whatever reason, for example a disk failure as
>>> John mentioned.
>>
>>I won't quibble about "mainly". But an image backup can be mounted
>>just like a file backup, and you can extract individual files from
>>it. (I just tried that, with Macrium Reflect 8.1.)
>>
>>So, like Char, I'm left wondering why you use two different backup
>>programs.
>>
>I accept the need to backup invisible boot partitions, and so on, which
>Macrium can do - restore a set of partitions to recreate a system. For
>just pure data, I like to be able to access the backups without having
>to load the software that knows how to do the "mounting": as far as I'm
>concerned, it's just like a fancy version of ZIP - I'd rather not need
>the extra layer.
>
>For much the same reason, since I keep my C: (and the other arcanery)
>small, I tend not to use any compression when making the image of it.
>
>Plus - though I haven't got round yet to implementing it this time round
>- I can do my plain data backups with something like SyncToy, thus
>saving time - which might not work through an extra layer.

You might want to look into the free Bart. It's very fast and very
easy to use.

In message <ug81aid5gs5tp08sfit9l94m678l0ba1fe@4ax.com> at Sat, 1 Jul
2023 15:39:51, Ken Blake <Ken@invalid.news.com> writes
>On Sat, 1 Jul 2023 11:52:39 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk>
>wrote:
>
>>In message <ehgv9itu33j66skdl2mudjqdfd5hogq3bd@4ax.com> at Sat, 1 Jul
>>2023 01:09:20, Char Jackson <none@none.invalid> writes
[]
>>>a schedule, I was creating backups about once or twice per decade*,
>>>which probably isn't often enough to be useful.
>>
>>No - in the event of hardware failure, image unlikely to be of use as
>>unlikely to be able to find hardware to which the OS (and all software)
>
>That depends on what hardware has failed. If the whole computer is
>replaced, I agree, but if it's just a single component, that may or
>may not be the case.
>
Very true.
[]
>What I've been thinking about doing is using one of my two internal
>backup drives that are being backed up by Bart and instead use it to
>backup an image (or clone? Is one a better choice than the other?) of

Each has its advantages. If it's a clone, assuming it's been made
correctly and whatever takes out your C: drive doesn't also take out the
drive you're cloning to (that of course is a concern for imaging too!),
then in the event, you can just switch the drivers over and be back up
in minutes - the mechanical work of opening the case and fiddling with
the connectors and screws probably taking longer than anything else. If
imaging, you need to have/obtain the replacement drive, _and_ have
something to boot from (CD or USB) that has the necessary software on it
(Macrium, Bart?, the Windows one) to restore from the image. Conversely,
you can probably have a lot more images on most drives these days,
especially if you keep your C: partition small - you could even have
images for the C: partition of several different machines on it; whereas
if cloning, it's obviously just one drive.

>C: Can I do that with a Windows 11 tool, or would Macrium reflect be a
>better choice? The advantage of using an internal drive to do that is
>that I could have it scheduled to automatically run at a reasonable
>frequency, and don't have to remember to do it.

I don't know what Windows 11 comes with - there probably _is_ some such
utility, since I think there was/is even with 7. I just find Macrium
easier - plus, I feel a slight greater ease in having something other
than the OS do it. Although I always do my imaging (I image rather than
clone) by booting from the Macrium CD, Macrium _can_ run (at least the
imaging/cloning part; obviously not the restoring!) from within Windows.
(I don't, as I feel uneasy backing up a running system.) I'm pretty sure
the part-of-the-OS utility can be run from within Windows too.
>
>Yes, an internal drive for backup isn't as safe as an eternal drive,
>but as far as I'm concerned, that's much more important for data files
>than for C: If I lost all my data files on D, that would be a
>catastrophe, but if I lost everything on C: without a backup, it would
>be a pain in the ass (arse), but I'd survive.

I often hear US folk talking about their tax affairs in this respect,
and I understand. (The _majority_ of UK folk - certainly those employed
by an employer - don't _do_ tax returns most years.)
>
>All thoughts about what I currently do and my plans for what I'll do
>in the future, and any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
>
>>backup of D: once a month. With the amount of work I've been putting
>>into my genealogy lately,
>
>I have no genealogical records. I have four living relatives, as far
>as I know (one son, one grandson, one first cousin, one second cousin)
>and I remember only seven dead relatives--mother, father, two aunts,
>one first cousin once removed, one maternal grandmother, and maternal
>grandfather--so I have no interest in knowing more about people who I
>met at most only a handful of times, and don't remember at all.

Well, it's a hobby - I'm sure many of us have a similar hobby that
involves a lot of data we'd hate to lose a few months/weeks/days (select
as appropriate) ' work from. (I like finding new cousins, and telling
them how they're related to me - sometimes they're interesting people
anyway. Same as in any hobby, I suppose.)
>
>> I've been thinking of setting a _weekly_
>>reminder for that (and maybe my email/news files and financial file). I
>>might even automate those (with a reminder a few minutes beforehand to
>>[a] get out of the prog.s [b] connect the external drive).
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Someone once said that scientists and prostitutes get paid for doing what they
enjoy. - Prof Stepehen Hawking in RT 2013/12/7-13

From: Ken Blake <Ken@invalid.news.com>
Subject: Re: YouTube downloads fail all the time
Newsgroups:
alt.comp.software.firefox,alt.windows7.general;alt.comp.os.Windows-11
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 6.00/32.1186

>I've added alt.comp.os.Windows-11 to the newsgroups cross-posted to.

I screwed up doing that, so I'm reposting

On Sun, 2 Jul 2023 00:57:49 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk>
wrote:

>In message <ug81aid5gs5tp08sfit9l94m678l0ba1fe@4ax.com> at Sat, 1 Jul
>2023 15:39:51, Ken Blake <Ken@invalid.news.com> writes
>>On Sat, 1 Jul 2023 11:52:39 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>In message <ehgv9itu33j66skdl2mudjqdfd5hogq3bd@4ax.com> at Sat, 1 Jul
>>>2023 01:09:20, Char Jackson <none@none.invalid> writes
>[]
>>>>a schedule, I was creating backups about once or twice per decade*,
>>>>which probably isn't often enough to be useful.
>>>
>>>No - in the event of hardware failure, image unlikely to be of use as
>>>unlikely to be able to find hardware to which the OS (and all software)
>>
>>That depends on what hardware has failed. If the whole computer is
>>replaced, I agree, but if it's just a single component, that may or
>>may not be the case.
>>
>Very true.
>[]
>>What I've been thinking about doing is using one of my two internal
>>backup drives that are being backed up by Bart and instead use it to
>>backup an image (or clone? Is one a better choice than the other?) of
>
>Each has its advantages. If it's a clone, assuming it's been made
>correctly and whatever takes out your C: drive doesn't also take out the
>drive you're cloning to (that of course is a concern for imaging too!),
>then in the event, you can just switch the drivers over and be back up
>in minutes

Yes, but only if you've cloned to an internal drive.

However that wouldn't be the case for me, since my drive is an M2 SSD
and I would clone it to a spinner. I'd want to keep C: on the M2. The
M2 and spinners are also two different sizes.

So if I cloned it and C: died, I would need/want to copy the clone
back to the M2. How would I do that? Does the free Macrium come with a
bootable utility that can do that? How about the part-of-the-OS
utility? Can it do that?

> - the mechanical work of opening the case and fiddling with
>the connectors and screws probably taking longer than anything else. If
>imaging, you need to have/obtain the replacement drive, _and_ have
>something to boot from (CD or USB) that has the necessary software on it
>(Macrium, Bart?,

No, Bart doesn't do that. It does nothing but just copy files; that's
fine for D:'s data files, but not for C:. I like Bart because it
starts with the previous backup, adds any new files, replaces any
changed files, and deletes any files no longer on the drive being
backed up. The result is that it's very fast.

>the Windows one) to restore from the image. Conversely,
>you can probably have a lot more images on most drives these days,

But not clones, since they would be the full size of the drive, not
the size of just the used space?

>especially if you keep your C: partition small

It's a 1TB partition with about 100GB used.

I've never imaged or cloned before, so I'm a beginner when it comes to
this. Am I right that an image would take up 100GB, but a clone would
take up 1TB? If so, I think, an image would be the better choice for
me (see below where I talk about keeping multiple generations).

I would image it to a 2TB spinner.

>you could even have
>images for the C: partition of several different machines on it; whereas
>if cloning, it's obviously just one drive.

There's just one machine I'd want to image or clone--my desktop. My
wife is no longer able to use her desktop, and I have no laptop.

I'd want to have it done with a batch file that would delete the
current image or clone, and make a new one. Or better, maybe delete
the one that's two generations old, rename the one that's one
generation old, and create a new one.

Or considering that the spinner is so much larger than the 100GB used
for C:, perhaps I could have the batch file keep the three or four
most recent backups.

And I'd like to have that bat file scheduled to run automatically at
night once every week or so.

So given my situation, what do you (or anyone else here) think would
be the better choice for me--image or clone?

>>C: Can I do that with a Windows 11 tool, or would Macrium reflect be a
>>better choice? The advantage of using an internal drive to do that is
>>that I could have it scheduled to automatically run at a reasonable
>>frequency, and don't have to remember to do it.
>
>I don't know what Windows 11 comes with - there probably _is_ some such
>utility, since I think there was/is even with 7. I just find Macrium
>easier - plus, I feel a slight greater ease in having something other
>than the OS do it.

Just curious, why?

> Although I always do my imaging (I image rather than
>clone)

Just curious, why?

>by booting from the Macrium CD, Macrium _can_ run (at least the
>imaging/cloning part; obviously not the restoring!) from within Windows.
>(I don't, as I feel uneasy backing up a running system.)

Just curious, why? Is there a risk in doing that that I'm not aware
of?

> I'm pretty sure
>the part-of-the-OS utility can be run from within Windows too.

Can some who knows "the part-of-the-OS utility" for Windows 11 jump in
here and provide some more information? What's its name? Can it be run
from within Windows? How does it compare to Macrium Reflect? Can it do
either an image or a clone? Given my situation described about, which
would be a better choice for me--Macrium Reflect or the part-of-the-OS
utility.

Again, I'm a newbie when it comes to imaging and cloning, so I would
greatly appreciate any additional help from you, John, or anyone else
here who knows more about this than I do,

>>
>>Yes, an internal drive for backup isn't as safe as an eternal drive,
>>but as far as I'm concerned, that's much more important for data files
>>than for C: If I lost all my data files on D, that would be a
>>catastrophe, but if I lost everything on C: without a backup, it would
>>be a pain in the ass (arse), but I'd survive.
>
>I often hear US folk talking about their tax affairs in this respect,
>and I understand. (The _majority_ of UK folk - certainly those employed
>by an employer - don't _do_ tax returns most years.)

My taxes have become much more complicated in recent years. I used to
do it myself with TurboTax, but I now have an accountant do it for me.
But I do need my Quicken files to supply data for the accountant,

>>All thoughts about what I currently do and my plans for what I'll do
>>in the future, and any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
>>
>>>backup of D: once a month. With the amount of work I've been putting
>>>into my genealogy lately,
>>
>>I have no genealogical records. I have four living relatives, as far
>>as I know (one son, one grandson, one first cousin, one second cousin)
>>and I remember only seven dead relatives--mother, father, two aunts,
>>one first cousin once removed, one maternal grandmother, and maternal
>>grandfather--so I have no interest in knowing more about people who I
>>met at most only a handful of times, and don't remember at all.
>
>Well, it's a hobby

Yes, of course. I understand that. I was simply pointing out why I
wouldn't find it a hobby of any interest. I don't want to start
finding third cousins and introducing myself to them.

My paternal grandparents must have seen me when I was an infant, but I
have no memory of ever meeting them; my parents were divorced when I
was two. I didn't even know their names until a friend who was an
expert in genealogy found them for me .I didn't even know how to spell
"genealogy" before then.

>- I'm sure many of us have a similar hobby that
>involves a lot of data we'd hate to lose a few months/weeks/days (select
>as appropriate) ' work from. (I like finding new cousins, and telling
>them how they're related to me - sometimes they're interesting people
>anyway. Same as in any hobby, I suppose.)
>>
>>> I've been thinking of setting a _weekly_
>>>reminder for that (and maybe my email/news files and financial file). I
>>>might even automate those (with a reminder a few minutes beforehand to
>>>[a] get out of the prog.s [b] connect the external drive).

On Sat, 1 Jul 2023 11:52:39 +0100, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
> No - in the event of hardware failure, image unlikely to be of use as
> unlikely to be able to find hardware to which the OS (and all software)
> can be restored - and data certainly needs more often than that.

Are you sure about that? I was under the impression that an image
could e restored to pretty much any disk, assuming of course that the
disk is big enough.

--
Stan Brown, Tehachapi, California, USA https://BrownMath.com/
Shikata ga nai...

On Sun, 02 Jul 2023 08:01:15 -0700, Ken Blake <Ken@invalid.news.com>
wrote:

>From: Ken Blake <Ken@invalid.news.com>
>Subject: Re: YouTube downloads fail all the time
>Newsgroups:
>alt.comp.software.firefox,alt.windows7.general;alt.comp.os.Windows-11
>X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 6.00/32.1186
>
>>I've added alt.comp.os.Windows-11 to the newsgroups cross-posted to.
>
>I screwed up doing that, so I'm reposting
>
>
>
>On Sun, 2 Jul 2023 00:57:49 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk>
>wrote:
>
>>In message <ug81aid5gs5tp08sfit9l94m678l0ba1fe@4ax.com> at Sat, 1 Jul
>>2023 15:39:51, Ken Blake <Ken@invalid.news.com> writes
>>>On Sat, 1 Jul 2023 11:52:39 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>In message <ehgv9itu33j66skdl2mudjqdfd5hogq3bd@4ax.com> at Sat, 1 Jul
>>>>2023 01:09:20, Char Jackson <none@none.invalid> writes
>>[]
>>>>>a schedule, I was creating backups about once or twice per decade*,
>>>>>which probably isn't often enough to be useful.
>>>>
>>>>No - in the event of hardware failure, image unlikely to be of use as
>>>>unlikely to be able to find hardware to which the OS (and all software)
>>>
>>>That depends on what hardware has failed. If the whole computer is
>>>replaced, I agree, but if it's just a single component, that may or
>>>may not be the case.
>>>
>>Very true.
>>[]
>>>What I've been thinking about doing is using one of my two internal
>>>backup drives that are being backed up by Bart and instead use it to
>>>backup an image (or clone? Is one a better choice than the other?) of
>>
>>Each has its advantages. If it's a clone, assuming it's been made
>>correctly and whatever takes out your C: drive doesn't also take out the
>>drive you're cloning to (that of course is a concern for imaging too!),
>>then in the event, you can just switch the drivers over and be back up
>>in minutes
>
>Yes, but only if you've cloned to an internal drive.
>
>However that wouldn't be the case for me, since my drive is an M2 SSD
>and I would clone it to a spinner. I'd want to keep C: on the M2. The
>M2 and spinners are also two different sizes.
>
>So if I cloned it and C: died, I would need/want to copy the clone
>back to the M2. How would I do that? Does the free Macrium come with a
>bootable utility that can do that? How about the part-of-the-OS
>utility? Can it do that?
>
>
>
>
>> - the mechanical work of opening the case and fiddling with
>>the connectors and screws probably taking longer than anything else. If
>>imaging, you need to have/obtain the replacement drive, _and_ have
>>something to boot from (CD or USB) that has the necessary software on it
>>(Macrium, Bart?,
>
>No, Bart doesn't do that. It does nothing but just copy files; that's
>fine for D:'s data files, but not for C:. I like Bart because it
>starts with the previous backup, adds any new files, replaces any
>changed files, and deletes any files no longer on the drive being
>backed up. The result is that it's very fast.
>
>>the Windows one) to restore from the image. Conversely,
>>you can probably have a lot more images on most drives these days,
>
>
>But not clones, since they would be the full size of the drive, not
>the size of just the used space?
>
>
>>especially if you keep your C: partition small
>
>It's a 1TB partition with about 100GB used.
>
>I've never imaged or cloned before, so I'm a beginner when it comes to
>this. Am I right that an image would take up 100GB, but a clone would
>take up 1TB? If so, I think, an image would be the better choice for
>me (see below where I talk about keeping multiple generations).
>
>I would image it to a 2TB spinner.
>
>
>>you could even have
>>images for the C: partition of several different machines on it; whereas
>>if cloning, it's obviously just one drive.
>
>
>There's just one machine I'd want to image or clone--my desktop. My
>wife is no longer able to use her desktop, and I have no laptop.
>
>I'd want to have it done with a batch file that would delete the
>current image or clone, and make a new one. Or better, maybe delete
>the one that's two generations old, rename the one that's one
>generation old, and create a new one.
>
>Or considering that the spinner is so much larger than the 100GB used
>for C:, perhaps I could have the batch file keep the three or four
>most recent backups.
>
>And I'd like to have that bat file scheduled to run automatically at
>night once every week or so.
>
>So given my situation, what do you (or anyone else here) think would
>be the better choice for me--image or clone?
>
>
>>>C: Can I do that with a Windows 11 tool, or would Macrium reflect be a
>>>better choice? The advantage of using an internal drive to do that is
>>>that I could have it scheduled to automatically run at a reasonable
>>>frequency, and don't have to remember to do it.
>>
>>I don't know what Windows 11 comes with - there probably _is_ some such
>>utility, since I think there was/is even with 7. I just find Macrium
>>easier - plus, I feel a slight greater ease in having something other
>>than the OS do it.
>
>Just curious, why?
>
>> Although I always do my imaging (I image rather than
>>clone)
>
>Just curious, why?
>
>
>>by booting from the Macrium CD, Macrium _can_ run (at least the
>>imaging/cloning part; obviously not the restoring!) from within Windows.
>>(I don't, as I feel uneasy backing up a running system.)
>
>Just curious, why? Is there a risk in doing that that I'm not aware
>of?
>
>> I'm pretty sure
>>the part-of-the-OS utility can be run from within Windows too.
>
>Can some who knows "the part-of-the-OS utility" for Windows 11 jump in
>here and provide some more information? What's its name? Can it be run
>from within Windows? How does it compare to Macrium Reflect? Can it do
>either an image or a clone? Given my situation described about, which
>would be a better choice for me--Macrium Reflect or the part-of-the-OS
>utility.
>
>Again, I'm a newbie when it comes to imaging and cloning, so I would
>greatly appreciate any additional help from you, John, or anyone else
>here who knows more about this than I do,
>
>>>
>>>Yes, an internal drive for backup isn't as safe as an eternal drive,
>>>but as far as I'm concerned, that's much more important for data files
>>>than for C: If I lost all my data files on D, that would be a
>>>catastrophe, but if I lost everything on C: without a backup, it would
>>>be a pain in the ass (arse), but I'd survive.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if I've correctly read what a web search
found, Windows Backup can not back up to an internal drive. So I'll
rule that out as a possibility and look into the free Macrium Reflect.

>>I often hear US folk talking about their tax affairs in this respect,
>>and I understand. (The _majority_ of UK folk - certainly those employed
>>by an employer - don't _do_ tax returns most years.)
>
>My taxes have become much more complicated in recent years. I used to
>do it myself with TurboTax, but I now have an accountant do it for me.
>But I do need my Quicken files to supply data for the accountant,
>
>
>>>All thoughts about what I currently do and my plans for what I'll do
>>>in the future, and any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
>>>
>>>>backup of D: once a month. With the amount of work I've been putting
>>>>into my genealogy lately,
>>>
>>>I have no genealogical records. I have four living relatives, as far
>>>as I know (one son, one grandson, one first cousin, one second cousin)
>>>and I remember only seven dead relatives--mother, father, two aunts,
>>>one first cousin once removed, one maternal grandmother, and maternal
>>>grandfather--so I have no interest in knowing more about people who I
>>>met at most only a handful of times, and don't remember at all.
>>
>>Well, it's a hobby
>
>Yes, of course. I understand that. I was simply pointing out why I
>wouldn't find it a hobby of any interest. I don't want to start
>finding third cousins and introducing myself to them.
>
>My paternal grandparents must have seen me when I was an infant, but I
>have no memory of ever meeting them; my parents were divorced when I
>was two. I didn't even know their names until a friend who was an
>expert in genealogy found them for me .I didn't even know how to spell
>"genealogy" before then.
>
>>- I'm sure many of us have a similar hobby that
>>involves a lot of data we'd hate to lose a few months/weeks/days (select
>>as appropriate) ' work from. (I like finding new cousins, and telling
>>them how they're related to me - sometimes they're interesting people
>>anyway. Same as in any hobby, I suppose.)
>>>
>>>> I've been thinking of setting a _weekly_
>>>>reminder for that (and maybe my email/news files and financial file). I
>>>>might even automate those (with a reminder a few minutes beforehand to
>>>>[a] get out of the prog.s [b] connect the external drive).

On Sat, 01 Jul 2023 15:39:51 -0700, Ken Blake wrote:
> 2. Backup to my three backup drives (one external, two internal)
> weekly.
>

For my weekly backups I also have three, but all external. One lives
in my desk drawer, one lives in the safe, and one lives in the car.
(In this rural area, if I'm not home then I'll be in my car, so
that's effectively an offsite backup.)

--
Stan Brown, Tehachapi, California, USA https://BrownMath.com/
Shikata ga nai...