Just a FYI, but my next drive will almost certainly be a Seagate.
Five-year warranty, baby.
Seagate and WD all the way. I just backed up everything I have on a 320GB(actually 298) and made a recovery disc using the software Dantz retoexpress that came with it. Then made the recovery disc.
Now I have the peace of mind that if something horrible happens to both of my drives (WD(c:11.2GB E:25.9)
Seagate d:149
Backed all of them up on the new WD external 320gb drive and now I fell better about the future.
Since my Maxtor is out of warranty, I think I'll keep it until it dies. It no longer shows signs of dying, so I'm not so worried about it anymore. Maybe it'll last a really long time!
You'd be well-advised to do those backups on a regular basis, though. That's a good idea in the best of situations and a must for someone in your position.
Windows Backup is actually a pretty handy tool. Pick out the files and folders you want to backup (don't forget your saved games - that seems to be a common thing people miss), then run the program. You can set it to do incremental backups, too, meaning it will only add new files and those which have changed since the last backup - greatly speeding up the process.
WinXP Pro installs Windows Backup automatically. For WinXP Home you'll need to hunt around on the CD to find the program. Let me know if you need help.
I tried that windows backup as a test between reformats and It didn't work the way I expected it to.
I backed everything up with it then I reformated the drive then I tried to put the get the backup data to work on the new xp and well it didn't work.
most of the programs had to be reinstalled and some files where lost but it was alright.
Same here, it was really quite ****, heh. Best to make a compressed image of the drive or something.
I've had Seagates, WDs, Hitachis, Maxtors and ever other kind die on me, infact I've had to replace like 3 this year, which sucks. They really don't seem to last long which is bad considering their primary use.
It won't do diddly as far as backing up programs, it's strictly data only.
Programs depend on registry entries to function properly, which is why you still had to reinstall them. It's a good idea to backup any configuration files for programs you customize a lot. It save having to mess with numerous "preferences" settings over and over again.
I regularly back up my documents, music, saved games, etc. I also like to save my (Outlook) email archives, mail settings, rules, and so on. Once you go through and select everything you want to keep, the backup program remembers everything. From that point on it's just a matter or re-running the program to update things.
My advice don't use it. It is not as good as it could be use a retail backup program or a free one that has good ratings/comments.
My retrospect backed up everything, registry, custom files, hidden files, and the really really really hidden files that windows hides deep within MS-DOS on XP, they you can't see
...My retrospect backed up everything, registry, custom files, hidden files, and the really really really hidden files that windows hides deep within MS-DOS on XP, they you can't see
Like Enverex said, an image of the entire drive is best.
The only hitch is, you need a lot of space to store that, not to mention the fact that it's often flat-out impossible to do on a failing drive. I like to keep a Partition Magic backup of my C: partition. It will choke and not run if it finds problems with the drive.
Overall, I'm a belt and suspenders kind of guy when it comes to backups; the more the better. I've also never had a customer complain because they had "too many" backups - but lots of them cry like babies when they realize they don't have any. :bawling:
haha I ran into that problem and decided that was enough now I have my backup god station 320GB of fun backup space.(and for other files but I'll use that when I run out of space on my other drives.)
When I was formatting the WD external harddrive it asked me if I wanted to enable compression. does this really save space or does it just turn the file names blue to make you fell better.
0
LeonardoWake up and smell the glaciersEagle River, AlaskaIcrontian
edited September 2005
I don't think compression is of any utility unless you are running out of space on a hard drive. Remember, the compression option was built into XP back when 80GB drives were considered large capacity - or maybe it was even 40GB.
Overall, I'm a belt and suspenders kind of guy when it comes to backups; the more the better.
While we're on the topic of large capacity drives - $39.99 for 160GB and $100 for 300GB (sales, rebates) is not unusual at all. It only makes sense to 'back up' your whole system with a complete image at least every two weeks. I have lost zero data in five years doing this, except for an occasion when I lost a drive and hadn't imaged recently. I cannot overstress the fantastic, cheap insurance an external, large capacity drive is coupled with imaging software. Personally, I use Norton Ghost, but recognize there are superior programs out there. Don't buy one of those silly, way-overpriced, pre-made external drives. Save big money and buy an external drive box and hard drive seperately. This will also enable you to upgrade the external drive whenever you want, and to swap out drives whenever you choose.
mmm so what is the point of having windows compression on, and why don't external cases come with an enclosure with a auto backup, and usb hub/firewire/etc.
mmm so what is the point of having windows compression on...
Back when a 3.2GB HD cost $300 it seemed like an attractive idea. On the other hand, I always considered using compression to be like playing Russian Roulette - sooner or later you were going to get burned. Data recovery on a compressed drive is a real circus, too.
...why don't external cases come with an enclosure with a auto backup, and usb hub/firewire/etc.
There are some out there with a one-button backup capability. The question is, do you want to pay a lot extra for that one-button business when it's simple to do it yourself using PQMagic, Ghost, etc.
mmm so what happens to the drive over time and what happens when you try to restore from a backup does it get really nasty.
A little background on HD properties may be in order, so here goes.
With NTFS the default cluster size is 4K. If you have a file that's only 1K in size it doesn't matter - it will still use up 4K, meaning 3K is wasted. A file that's 13K in size will take up four clusters; three full ones and a fourth which wastes another 3K. With all of the many dinky little files on your computer this eventually adds up to a lot of wasted space.
If you think that's bad, keep in mind that back in the Win95/98 days under a FAT32 file system, clusters were often 32K - possibly more - in size. Under those conditions that puny little 1K file is wasting 31K of your valuable HD space.
Compression works by rolling all the files on your HD into one big gigantic file, meaning that all the wasted space each individual file was using is now available for you to use. The hitch is that you are putting all of your data "eggs" into one big "basket". If you've ever had to replace one corrupt file on your HD causing a no-boot situation you probably remember what a hassle it was. Now imagine that every last bit of your data (documents, mp3's, etc), plus all of your critical system files are now contained in one big giant file due to using compression. How would you rate your chances of getting your stuff back if something goes wrong?
Back around 1996 I bought my GF a new 3.2GB drive since her existing drive was already jam-packed. That drive cost me $329.00. When it started getting full compression seemed like a cost-effective solution. My experience with data recovery nightmares on compressed drives led me to bite the bullet and upgrade her to a brand new 8.4GB drive. With todays HD's being dirt cheap it makes more sense to cough up a hundred bucks and add more space that way. About the only thing I'd consider using compression for is the aforementioned compressed image of an entire drive. Since it's there solely as a backup (meaning it's not being altered every time you use the computer) the chances of data corruption are greatly reduced. I still burn uncompressed backups of my data to DVD on a regular basis. I can always reinstall Windows; replacing my mp3 collection, documents, and digital pictures would be difficult, if not completely impossible.
Comments
Seagate and WD all the way. I just backed up everything I have on a 320GB(actually 298) and made a recovery disc using the software Dantz retoexpress that came with it. Then made the recovery disc.
Now I have the peace of mind that if something horrible happens to both of my drives (WD(c:11.2GB E:25.9)
Seagate d:149
Backed all of them up on the new WD external 320gb drive and now I fell better about the future.
You'd be well-advised to do those backups on a regular basis, though. That's a good idea in the best of situations and a must for someone in your position.
WinXP Pro installs Windows Backup automatically. For WinXP Home you'll need to hunt around on the CD to find the program. Let me know if you need help.
I backed everything up with it then I reformated the drive then I tried to put the get the backup data to work on the new xp and well it didn't work.
most of the programs had to be reinstalled and some files where lost but it was alright.
Same here, it was really quite ****, heh. Best to make a compressed image of the drive or something.
I've had Seagates, WDs, Hitachis, Maxtors and ever other kind die on me, infact I've had to replace like 3 this year, which sucks. They really don't seem to last long which is bad considering their primary use.
Programs depend on registry entries to function properly, which is why you still had to reinstall them. It's a good idea to backup any configuration files for programs you customize a lot. It save having to mess with numerous "preferences" settings over and over again.
I regularly back up my documents, music, saved games, etc. I also like to save my (Outlook) email archives, mail settings, rules, and so on. Once you go through and select everything you want to keep, the backup program remembers everything. From that point on it's just a matter or re-running the program to update things.
Double-click the Ntbackup.msi file to start the wizard that installs Backup. Nuffin' to it.
My retrospect backed up everything, registry, custom files, hidden files, and the really really really hidden files that windows hides deep within MS-DOS on XP, they you can't see
The only hitch is, you need a lot of space to store that, not to mention the fact that it's often flat-out impossible to do on a failing drive. I like to keep a Partition Magic backup of my C: partition. It will choke and not run if it finds problems with the drive.
Overall, I'm a belt and suspenders kind of guy when it comes to backups; the more the better. I've also never had a customer complain because they had "too many" backups - but lots of them cry like babies when they realize they don't have any. :bawling:
When I was formatting the WD external harddrive it asked me if I wanted to enable compression. does this really save space or does it just turn the file names blue to make you fell better.
There are some out there with a one-button backup capability. The question is, do you want to pay a lot extra for that one-button business when it's simple to do it yourself using PQMagic, Ghost, etc.
With NTFS the default cluster size is 4K. If you have a file that's only 1K in size it doesn't matter - it will still use up 4K, meaning 3K is wasted. A file that's 13K in size will take up four clusters; three full ones and a fourth which wastes another 3K. With all of the many dinky little files on your computer this eventually adds up to a lot of wasted space.
If you think that's bad, keep in mind that back in the Win95/98 days under a FAT32 file system, clusters were often 32K - possibly more - in size. Under those conditions that puny little 1K file is wasting 31K of your valuable HD space.
Compression works by rolling all the files on your HD into one big gigantic file, meaning that all the wasted space each individual file was using is now available for you to use. The hitch is that you are putting all of your data "eggs" into one big "basket". If you've ever had to replace one corrupt file on your HD causing a no-boot situation you probably remember what a hassle it was. Now imagine that every last bit of your data (documents, mp3's, etc), plus all of your critical system files are now contained in one big giant file due to using compression. How would you rate your chances of getting your stuff back if something goes wrong?
Back around 1996 I bought my GF a new 3.2GB drive since her existing drive was already jam-packed. That drive cost me $329.00. When it started getting full compression seemed like a cost-effective solution. My experience with data recovery nightmares on compressed drives led me to bite the bullet and upgrade her to a brand new 8.4GB drive. With todays HD's being dirt cheap it makes more sense to cough up a hundred bucks and add more space that way. About the only thing I'd consider using compression for is the aforementioned compressed image of an entire drive. Since it's there solely as a backup (meaning it's not being altered every time you use the computer) the chances of data corruption are greatly reduced. I still burn uncompressed backups of my data to DVD on a regular basis. I can always reinstall Windows; replacing my mp3 collection, documents, and digital pictures would be difficult, if not completely impossible.