Macrium Reflect. There's 3 hours of my life I'll never get back.

Post by Al Drake
This is the exact reason I clone and not image. For the first time I
decided to give it a try. Why not, I think. Can't really hurt. Will be
painless as long as I use protection.
Ok, how long to create and image? How long to verify? How long to
" Macrium Reflect has encountered a serious problem: Dump file
'C:\reflectv5.2-6551-x64-0.dmp was created. Please email this file to
I was prepared for the worst so I made sure I cloned the C: drive just
in case something really went wrong. I attempted to restore the image to
E: drive which was a HDD so it probably took a bit longer but I can't
see that being the problem. The rest is history so I collected my toys
and gave up for now. What option did I have. Maybe the next time I have
a few hours to blow I'll try another application.
Oh well..............

I clone the original o/s and software about once per year. The balance I
image monthly (and prior to update Tuesday).

I use Acronis.
- my Win7 machine with 72GB on the o/s and software drive takes 17
minutes to image and verify the image.
- my Win8.1 laptop with 47 GB on the o/s and software drive partition
takes 9 minutes to image and verify the image.

--
...winston
msft mvp consumer apps

Al Drake

2014-11-22 20:15:40 UTC

Post by ...winstonâ«

I clone the original o/s and software about once per year. The balance I
image monthly (and prior to update Tuesday).
I use Acronis.
- my Win7 machine with 72GB on the o/s and software drive takes 17
minutes to image and verify the image.
- my Win8.1 laptop with 47 GB on the o/s and software drive partition
takes 9 minutes to image and verify the image.

I am using 512GB SSDs which in this case is 3/4 full. The imaging took
30 minutes and another 30 minutes to verify. Then another 30 minutes to
restore. I also took time to copy files from the C: SSD to an external
drive so I guess I can't count that as wasted time so the total time
lost was about 1 1/2 hours due to Macrium error. I think I'll wait until
I hear from Macrium support before I try again.

This system doesn't have SATA 3 so it could have been faster.

Andy Burns

2014-11-22 20:41:48 UTC

Post by Al Drake
This is the exact reason I clone and not image.

What distinction does Macrium make between the two? To my mind they're
different words for the same thing ...

Al Drake

2014-11-22 20:09:02 UTC

Post by Al Drake
This is the exact reason I clone and not image.

What distinction does Macrium make between the two? To my mind they're
different words for the same thing ...

From what I understand the image is compressed and can be stored on an
second dive. The process of restoring the image is offered, usually done
at a later time when needed. I have always cloned and have several SSDs
on a shelf of each system. I prefer that method as it takes less time to
install a cloned drive than it does to restore an image but the cost is
greater as I have so many spare SSDs doing nothing.

Sir_George

2014-11-22 21:35:15 UTC

Post by Al Drake
This is the exact reason I clone and not image.

What distinction does Macrium make between the two? To my mind
they're different words for the same thing ...

Cloning is not the same as imaging.

Disk Cloning:
Disk cloning is the process of copying the entire contents of one hard
drive to another including all the information that enables you to boot
to the operating system from the drive. A cloning program enables you
to make a one-to-one copy of one of your computer's hard drives on
another hard drive. This second copy of the hard drive is fully
operational and can be swapped with the computer's existing hard drive.
If you boot to the cloned drive, its data will be identical to the
source drive at the time it was created. A cloned drive can be used to
replace its source drive in a computer in the event that something bad
happens to the original drive.

Disk Imaging:
Disk imaging is the process of making an archival or backup copy of the
entire contents of a hard drive. A disk image is a storage file that
contains all the data stored on the source hard drive and the necessary
information to boot to the operating system. However, the disk image
needs to be applied to the hard drive to work. You can't restore a hard
drive by placing the disk image files on it; it needs to be opened and
installed on the drive with an imaging program. Unlike cloned drives, a
single hard drive can store several disk images on it. Disk images can
also be stored on optical media and flash drives.

--
Sir_George

Bert

2014-11-22 21:44:19 UTC

Post by Sir_George

Post by Al Drake
This is the exact reason I clone and not image.

What distinction does Macrium make between the two? To my mind
they're different words for the same thing ...

Cloning is not the same as imaging.

By your following descriptions, cloning is imaging without the
intermediate step of saving the contents of the first drive on another
drive.

Once you take the image and install it on a new drive, you've done what
a clone operation would have done, except that you still have the image
file around if you want to do it again, and again, and again ...

Post by Sir_George
Disk cloning is the process of copying the entire contents of one hard
drive to another including all the information that enables you to
boot to the operating system from the drive. A cloning program enables
you to make a one-to-one copy of one of your computer's hard drives on
another hard drive. This second copy of the hard drive is fully
operational and can be swapped with the computer's existing hard
drive. If you boot to the cloned drive, its data will be identical to
the source drive at the time it was created. A cloned drive can be
used to replace its source drive in a computer in the event that
something bad happens to the original drive.
Disk imaging is the process of making an archival or backup copy of
the entire contents of a hard drive. A disk image is a storage file
that contains all the data stored on the source hard drive and the
necessary information to boot to the operating system. However, the
disk image needs to be applied to the hard drive to work. You can't
restore a hard drive by placing the disk image files on it; it needs
to be opened and installed on the drive with an imaging program.
Unlike cloned drives, a single hard drive can store several disk
images on it. Disk images can also be stored on optical media and
flash drives.

--
***@iphouse.com St. Paul, MN

Gene E. Bloch

2014-11-22 22:37:18 UTC

Post by Al Drake
This is the exact reason I clone and not image.

What distinction does Macrium make between the two? To my mind
they're different words for the same thing ...

Cloning is not the same as imaging.

By your following descriptions, cloning is imaging without the
intermediate step of saving the contents of the first drive on another
drive.

Not at all.

A clone is an exact copy, like a Xerox copy, if you can follow the
simile, and it is a hard drive just like the original.

An image file contains the drive's information in the form of a file
which is *not* a hard drive, but a representation (image) of all of the
data and system information, from which a hard drive can be constructed
if needed. That new drive won't be (in the Xerox analogy) identical to
the first, but it will be functionally and logically the same.

Post by Bert
Once you take the image and install it on a new drive, you've done what
a clone operation would have done, except that you still have the image
file around if you want to do it again, and again, and again ...

You can directly replace the original drive by the clone and boot, or
you can reclone the clone back to another drive (including the
original), which is similar to what you have just described with an
image. You then still have the original clone as a backup, just as with
an image.

Images can be incrementally or differentially backed up as well; a clone
can't. A new drive can be constructed from the original image or any of
the later backups, producing a new drive corresponding to when the
backup was done. The separate secondary images are incomplete in
themselves.

Post by Bert

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

s|b

2014-11-22 21:38:03 UTC

Post by Al Drake
This is the exact reason I clone and not image.

What distinction does Macrium make between the two? To my mind they're
different words for the same thing ...

AFAIK "clone" is copy all files/folders. "image" is creating 1 file, an
image (*.mrimg), containing one or more partitions. This image can be
"explored", meaning you can open the image a copy files/folders.

--
s|b

Al Drake

2014-11-22 21:06:39 UTC

Post by Al Drake
This is the exact reason I clone and not image.

What distinction does Macrium make between the two? To my mind they're
different words for the same thing ...

Yes, I see an option to clone folders, email and so forth. The image is
also compressed at various selectable levels.

Gene E. Bloch

2014-11-22 22:55:14 UTC

Post by Al Drake
This is the exact reason I clone and not image.

What distinction does Macrium make between the two? To my mind they're
different words for the same thing ...

Yes, I see an option to clone folders, email and so forth. The image is
also compressed at various selectable levels.

If you look more closely, you might see that Macrium offers a *backup*
of files & folders, not a clone.

Yet a third category :-)

BTW, the choice of cloning the drive or partition is kind of half hidden
in Macrium Reflect - it's not in the Backup menu, as you might expect;
it's a button on the pane that shows the drives that you can work
with...Not 100% user friendly, IMO (I like the program anyway).

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

Al Drake

2014-11-23 05:33:53 UTC

Post by Al Drake
This is the exact reason I clone and not image.

What distinction does Macrium make between the two? To my mind they're
different words for the same thing ...

Yes, I see an option to clone folders, email and so forth. The image is
also compressed at various selectable levels.

If you look more closely, you might see that Macrium offers a *backup*
of files & folders, not a clone.
Yet a third category :-)
BTW, the choice of cloning the drive or partition is kind of half hidden
in Macrium Reflect - it's not in the Backup menu, as you might expect;
it's a button on the pane that shows the drives that you can work
with...Not 100% user friendly, IMO (I like the program anyway).

I just received a reply from Macrium asking me to update to the latest
version which I am already using. I'm now wondering how well they
actually know what their doing. I would think they could have at least
gotten that from the dump file I sent them. I just tried Acronis TI 2014
for the first time and upon recovery attempt it seems it wants to
recover from the source to the source with no options to configure
destination, unless I'm missing something. I have only one backup image
which can be seen with the folders present using Windows Explorer while
TI says it can't find the image it just produced. It's when I navigate
to it that it seems to want to do something I no longer have confidence
in having it do.

I must be voilating that rule where it says

"You shall not make for yourself an image in the form of anything in
heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below."
Exodus 20:4

Gene E. Bloch

2014-11-23 22:26:18 UTC

Post by Al Drake
This is the exact reason I clone and not image.

What distinction does Macrium make between the two? To my mind they're
different words for the same thing ...

Yes, I see an option to clone folders, email and so forth. The image is
also compressed at various selectable levels.

If you look more closely, you might see that Macrium offers a *backup*
of files & folders, not a clone.
Yet a third category :-)
BTW, the choice of cloning the drive or partition is kind of half hidden
in Macrium Reflect - it's not in the Backup menu, as you might expect;
it's a button on the pane that shows the drives that you can work
with...Not 100% user friendly, IMO (I like the program anyway).

I just received a reply from Macrium asking me to update to the latest
version which I am already using. I'm now wondering how well they
actually know what their doing. I would think they could have at least
gotten that from the dump file I sent them. I just tried Acronis TI 2014
for the first time and upon recovery attempt it seems it wants to
recover from the source to the source with no options to configure
destination, unless I'm missing something. I have only one backup image
which can be seen with the folders present using Windows Explorer while
TI says it can't find the image it just produced. It's when I navigate
to it that it seems to want to do something I no longer have confidence
in having it do.
I must be voilating that rule where it says
"You shall not make for yourself an image in the form of anything in
heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below."
Exodus 20:4

Thanks for the Authoritative quote :-)

I have no knowledge of Acronis, so I can't address those issues. As for
your experience with Macrium, the main effect is to make me glad I've
never needed tech support from them.

Although looking at a dump is a lot of work, so maybe they didn't want
to bother. I can sympathize with that - at least a little bit...

As an aside: my usual thing with Macrium is to do a clone to a drive
devoted to my entire hard drive, and to do an incremental image to a
folder on another drive (which might even have some other odds and ends
on it). I accumulate a bunch (usually too many[1]) of incrementals
before I do a new full backup to start a new sequence of incrementals.

I tend to do those two backups a day or two apart, because I have so
much crap that they take a long time.

[1] Too many because it's very unlikely I'd ever want to fetch a version
of some file from a couple of months ago, which is pretty easy with
Macrium and a long series of incrementals.

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

Al Drake

2014-11-24 07:24:24 UTC

Post by Al Drake
This is the exact reason I clone and not image.

What distinction does Macrium make between the two? To my mind they're
different words for the same thing ...

Yes, I see an option to clone folders, email and so forth. The image is
also compressed at various selectable levels.

If you look more closely, you might see that Macrium offers a *backup*
of files & folders, not a clone.
Yet a third category :-)
BTW, the choice of cloning the drive or partition is kind of half hidden
in Macrium Reflect - it's not in the Backup menu, as you might expect;
it's a button on the pane that shows the drives that you can work
with...Not 100% user friendly, IMO (I like the program anyway).

I just received a reply from Macrium asking me to update to the latest
version which I am already using. I'm now wondering how well they
actually know what their doing. I would think they could have at least
gotten that from the dump file I sent them. I just tried Acronis TI 2014
for the first time and upon recovery attempt it seems it wants to
recover from the source to the source with no options to configure
destination, unless I'm missing something. I have only one backup image
which can be seen with the folders present using Windows Explorer while
TI says it can't find the image it just produced. It's when I navigate
to it that it seems to want to do something I no longer have confidence
in having it do.
I must be voilating that rule where it says
"You shall not make for yourself an image in the form of anything in
heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below."
Exodus 20:4

Thanks for the Authoritative quote :-)
I have no knowledge of Acronis, so I can't address those issues. As for
your experience with Macrium, the main effect is to make me glad I've
never needed tech support from them.
Although looking at a dump is a lot of work, so maybe they didn't want
to bother. I can sympathize with that - at least a little bit...
As an aside: my usual thing with Macrium is to do a clone to a drive
devoted to my entire hard drive, and to do an incremental image to a
folder on another drive (which might even have some other odds and ends
on it). I accumulate a bunch (usually too many[1]) of incrementals
before I do a new full backup to start a new sequence of incrementals.
I tend to do those two backups a day or two apart, because I have so
much crap that they take a long time.
[1] Too many because it's very unlikely I'd ever want to fetch a version
of some file from a couple of months ago, which is pretty easy with
Macrium and a long series of incrementals.

Thanks for the reply Gene. I have been using my backup plan successfully
for some time but wanted to try something new for lack of something
better to do. I'll be sticking with my clone procedure as it's quicker
and more convenient. If I have a major failure it takes me short time to
slip in that clone rather then restore an image after creating it and
testing it and restoring it. That's all I need and keep duplicates of
files on external USB3 drives. I haven't lost anything for I don't know
how long. Since I moved to SSDs I haven't lost one out of the dozen or
so I have. I can't say that for the old out of date HDDs.

Gene E. Bloch

2014-11-24 19:36:35 UTC

Post by Al Drake
This is the exact reason I clone and not image.

What distinction does Macrium make between the two? To my mind they're
different words for the same thing ...

Yes, I see an option to clone folders, email and so forth. The image is
also compressed at various selectable levels.

If you look more closely, you might see that Macrium offers a *backup*
of files & folders, not a clone.
Yet a third category :-)
BTW, the choice of cloning the drive or partition is kind of half hidden
in Macrium Reflect - it's not in the Backup menu, as you might expect;
it's a button on the pane that shows the drives that you can work
with...Not 100% user friendly, IMO (I like the program anyway).

I just received a reply from Macrium asking me to update to the latest
version which I am already using. I'm now wondering how well they
actually know what their doing. I would think they could have at least
gotten that from the dump file I sent them. I just tried Acronis TI 2014
for the first time and upon recovery attempt it seems it wants to
recover from the source to the source with no options to configure
destination, unless I'm missing something. I have only one backup image
which can be seen with the folders present using Windows Explorer while
TI says it can't find the image it just produced. It's when I navigate
to it that it seems to want to do something I no longer have confidence
in having it do.
I must be voilating that rule where it says
"You shall not make for yourself an image in the form of anything in
heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below."
Exodus 20:4

Thanks for the Authoritative quote :-)
I have no knowledge of Acronis, so I can't address those issues. As for
your experience with Macrium, the main effect is to make me glad I've
never needed tech support from them.
Although looking at a dump is a lot of work, so maybe they didn't want
to bother. I can sympathize with that - at least a little bit...
As an aside: my usual thing with Macrium is to do a clone to a drive
devoted to my entire hard drive, and to do an incremental image to a
folder on another drive (which might even have some other odds and ends
on it). I accumulate a bunch (usually too many[1]) of incrementals
before I do a new full backup to start a new sequence of incrementals.
I tend to do those two backups a day or two apart, because I have so
much crap that they take a long time.
[1] Too many because it's very unlikely I'd ever want to fetch a version
of some file from a couple of months ago, which is pretty easy with
Macrium and a long series of incrementals.

My only argument for recloning instead of booting the clone is that if
something goes wrong, you still have another clone.

My other argument is that doing what works for you...well, it works for
you, so it's all good :-)

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

Gene E. Bloch

2014-11-22 22:45:44 UTC

Post by Al Drake
This is the exact reason I clone and not image.

What distinction does Macrium make between the two? To my mind they're
different words for the same thing ...

Not really. It's more accurate to say a clone "copies verbatim - bit by
bit - all sectors, including directories, $mft, and boot sectors (and
whatever I omitted by accident), of the whole partition or drive. It is
in the form of a whole partition or drive identical at the bit level to
the original".

The image is a derivative of an entire partition or drive in the form of
one or more files which can be converted back into a partition or drive.
It's not a copy of the sectors bit by bit, but a lossless representation
of the data in all of files and system tracks.

The above intentionally leaves out a detail or two. Or a hundred.

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

Ashton Crusher

2014-11-24 20:15:33 UTC

Post by Al Drake
This is the exact reason I clone and not image.

What distinction does Macrium make between the two? To my mind they're
different words for the same thing ...

I thought the difference was that a cloned drive was a byte by byte
(bit by bit) reproduction so it included all erased files, unused
space, unallocated space, etc, all reproduced bit by bit. It would
also mirror all the existing fragmentation of the source drive as
files would be "cloned" to literally the same "spots" more or less
physically depending on just how smart the cloning software is. It
would make it impossible to clone to a target drive smaller then the
source drive - unlike an image, which can be made on any drive, even a
smaller one, as long as the size of the image file doesn't exceed the
size of the target drive.

Al Drake

2014-11-24 19:53:28 UTC

Post by Al Drake
This is the exact reason I clone and not image.

What distinction does Macrium make between the two? To my mind they're
different words for the same thing ...

Not true. If you have a 500GB drive and only 120GB is used you can clone
to a 128GB drive.

Paul

2014-11-24 21:46:29 UTC

Post by Al Drake
This is the exact reason I clone and not image.

What distinction does Macrium make between the two? To my mind they're
different words for the same thing ...

Not true. If you have a 500GB drive and only 120GB is used you can clone
to a 128GB drive.

It's a "definition problem".

Strictly speaking, Ashton is correct.

But a number of software products, call what they do "cloning", when
in fact the copy is not all that exact. Most people don't care
about this, which is why there isn't more commentary about
the differences.

I do cloning with "dd", and that would be a
way of meeting the definition that Ashton is using.

An example of when this is important, is when some
poorly designed software, hides licensing information
in some unused sectors. And then those sectors don't
get copied. With a real clone, there would never be
a problem.

Paul

Ian Jackson

2014-11-25 16:19:05 UTC

Post by Al Drake
This is the exact reason I clone and not image.

What distinction does Macrium make between the two? To my mind they're
different words for the same thing ...

Not true. If you have a 500GB drive and only 120GB is used you can
clone to a 128GB drive.

Don't you first need to re-size the stuff on the 500GB drive down to a
partition of 128GB or less? I'm pretty sure that's what you have do with
EaseUS (and then choose to clone the partition rather than the whole
disk). Of course, maybe Macrium is cleverer, knows what you want to do,
and automatically does it all for you in one go. [Note that when going
from small to large (say 128 to 500GB), EaseUS does make a 128GB
partition, and leaves the rest unallocated. If you want, you can then
re-size the 128GB to something larger.]

--
Ian

Al Drake

2014-11-25 20:23:44 UTC

Post by Al Drake
This is the exact reason I clone and not image.

What distinction does Macrium make between the two? To my mind they're
different words for the same thing ...

Not true. If you have a 500GB drive and only 120GB is used you can
clone to a 128GB drive.

I am most familiar with EZ Gig which I've been using for some years now.
http://www.apricorn.com/products/software/ezgig.html

"Creates Exact Bootable Clone of your Hard Drive

Use Data Select feature to deselect data folders from the copying
process - perfect for cloning to a smaller HDD or SSD"

"Dynamic resizing to match new Hard Disk"

Good Guy

2014-11-25 21:52:51 UTC

This post might be inappropriate. Click to display it.

Al Drake

2014-11-25 21:21:55 UTC

Post by Good Guy

Another way to get 3 hours of your life is to make sure the OS is in a
different partition (say C:\) and all other data in D:\ or in the
cloud. this way you only need to clone/image the C: drive.
However, I have come to the conclusion that it is a complete waste of
time backing up and cloning things when you could apply safe hex and not
installing any rubbish - even some Microsoft updates. I have not seen
anything good about these updates and I have not had any viruses or
hacking incidents yet. I just rely on hidden partition on my machine as
my backup. How many times have you crashed your machine? I have never
crashed my machine since 2001 (since XP days).
When I first got XP many years ago, I was very keen to apply updates and
install almost anything I could lay my hands on. this was a learning
process for me and I was still at University. Now time is very precious
to me.
You really need to learn to make use of free software from Microsoft and
Google and stop wasting time installing something that can easily be
used online in the cloud. Now before telling me about privacy and all
that nonsense, let me tell you one thing - there is no such thing as
privacy even if you are storing everything on your machine or using your
own drives.

I couldn't agree with you more on everything. For a long time I've
posted against updates and got nothing but push back yet not one person
could supply me with any proof that anyone had any trouble with their
system that could be traced to the lack of an update. Other than some
software refusing to play without NET Framework.

I can't remember the last time I had a system crash but have
experienced an occasional BSOD but I can't remember what the
circumstances were.

There is such a thing as privacy to a great degree but you have to be
willing to twist a regulation or 2. One can sneak on to a neighbor's
wifi connection and post using a proxy server for example. Something
like Hidemyass

https://www.hidemyass.com/

There are proxy servers that don't keep logs and outside the US that can
offer a pretty good level of security.

You can spoof your location making it seem like you are posting from a
multitude of select counties anywhere in the world.

As far as using free stuff I am one of those that will donate to the
developers and pay where I don't really have to.

I might add that I do not make use of any extreme privacy measures as
I simply don't care.

Ian Jackson

2014-11-25 22:59:31 UTC

Post by Al Drake
This is the exact reason I clone and not image.

What distinction does Macrium make between the two? To my mind they're
different words for the same thing ...

Not true. If you have a 500GB drive and only 120GB is used you can
clone to a 128GB drive.

I am most familiar with EZ Gig which I've been using for some years now.
http://www.apricorn.com/products/software/ezgig.html
"Creates Exact Bootable Clone of your Hard Drive
Use Data Select feature to deselect data folders from the copying
process - perfect for cloning to a smaller HDD or SSD"
"Dynamic resizing to match new Hard Disk"

Interesting. However, I presume it isn't freeware?

--
Ian

Al Drake

2014-11-26 07:12:22 UTC

Post by Al Drake
This is the exact reason I clone and not image.

What distinction does Macrium make between the two? To my mind they're
different words for the same thing ...

Not true. If you have a 500GB drive and only 120GB is used you can
clone to a 128GB drive.

I am most familiar with EZ Gig which I've been using for some years now.
http://www.apricorn.com/products/software/ezgig.html
"Creates Exact Bootable Clone of your Hard Drive
Use Data Select feature to deselect data folders from the copying
process - perfect for cloning to a smaller HDD or SSD"
"Dynamic resizing to match new Hard Disk"

Interesting. However, I presume it isn't freeware?

Sometimes it is. It came with an SSD I purchased so it was free while
you have to pay for it otherwise. There have been many free upgrades
over the years. It also aligns the partition automatically. LIke I
mentioned in another post it's hardware specific so the software is not
a stand alone application.

Here are some variations.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/like/121479320216?lpid=82

I've still then this kit free at times with a purchase but I already
have one so I can't give you any references on a freebee.

I only recently started playing with Macruim and other free choices
but they don't seem to be any better at cloning. All the other drive
manipulation can be done with Windows in disk management of at the CMD
prompt.

http://www.7tutorials.com/command-prompt-advanced-disk-management-commands

Gene E. Bloch

2014-11-24 22:40:41 UTC

Post by Al Drake
This is the exact reason I clone and not image.

What distinction does Macrium make between the two? To my mind they're
different words for the same thing ...

As Paul said, you are correct in the original sense of cloning, but many
current products do so-called smart cloning, with meaning dependent on
the product.

1. Allow cloning to different sized drives

2. Don't bother to write unused sectors

3. Only write sectors that have changed since the last clone was made

Different products mix and match from that list (and there are no doubt
other things I'm unaware of).

The above items could all affect some of things Paul warns about.

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

s|b

2014-11-22 21:35:02 UTC

Post by Al Drake
Ok, how long to create and image?

Around 6 minutes.

Post by Al Drake
How long to verify?

A minute?

Post by Al Drake
How long to restore?

Maybe 10 minutes.
Success!

--
s|b

Al Drake

2014-11-22 21:04:24 UTC

Post by Al Drake
Ok, how long to create and image?

Around 6 minutes.

Post by Al Drake
How long to verify?

A minute?

Post by Al Drake
How long to restore?

Maybe 10 minutes.
Success!

Wow. I'm now trying again and it is taking 39 minutes to create an image
of this SSD. As I posted this system is only capable of SATA 2. I have
other SATA 3 systems but I have never kept track as I never imaged
before, only cloned.

s|b

2014-11-23 17:06:15 UTC

Post by Al Drake
Wow. I'm now trying again and it is taking 39 minutes to create an image
of this SSD. As I posted this system is only capable of SATA 2. I have
other SATA 3 systems but I have never kept track as I never imaged
before, only cloned.

My Intel SSD (C:) is 120 GB (42,5 GiB used, 8 GiB Page File included)
and it copies the image to a 500GB Western Digital internal hdd (D:).
Both are connected to SATA 6. The image created is around 17 GiB which
probably explains the time difference...

--
s|b

Al Drake

2014-11-24 07:29:54 UTC

Ok, so that's your secret. Like I mentioned in another post I was
playing with HDDS on older SATA which is why it takes so long. I think
the next thing I'll try is the newer Crucial MX100 and M550 in one of my
newer builds. They're 500GB so that still might not be as fast as your
smaller ones.

Paul

2014-11-23 03:40:35 UTC

I hope your file path above was edited or something.

It shouldn't attempt to write into the root of C: like that.
There is some other folder for minidump files.

C:\reflectv5.2-6551-x64-0.dmp

You should be using dumpchk or BlueScreenView, or any application
that can parse a .dmp, and see what it is complaining about.

I've *never* had one of those. Macrium has worked every
time for me, imaging or cloning.

Has your hardware ever been stability tested ? Does it
pass Prime95 stability test ? I'd want to get to
the bottom of that issue, before it shows up as
a destructive issue of some sort.

If the problem is with VSS (making a shadow copy), an
intelligent error message should be presented. Crashing,
is not an option. The quality of Macrium software
is good, which is why I suspect you should be
hardware testing right now.

I image my C: partition with Macrium in ten minutes, and
it's a hard drive and not an SSD. That's 27.5GB in somewhere
around ten minutes or so. I turn the default compression
off, as if a .mrimg file size needs to be reduced, it's better
to reduce the size with a *separate* compression step.
Attempting to compress an already compressed file,
just does not work as well. In order to leave
my options open, I turn off Macrium compression.

Paul

Al Drake

2014-11-23 05:46:45 UTC

Post by Paul

Post by Al Drake
This is the exact reason I clone and not image. For the first time I
decided to give it a try. Why not, I think. Can't really hurt. Will be
painless as long as I use protection.
Ok, how long to create and image? How long to verify? How long to
" Macrium Reflect has encountered a serious problem: Dump file
'C:\reflectv5.2-6551-x64-0.dmp was created. Please email this file to
I was prepared for the worst so I made sure I cloned the C: drive
just in case something really went wrong. I attempted to restore the
image to E: drive which was a HDD so it probably took a bit longer but
I can't see that being the problem. The rest is history so I collected
my toys and gave up for now. What option did I have. Maybe the next
time I have a few hours to blow I'll try another application.
Oh well..............

I hope your file path above was edited or something.
It shouldn't attempt to write into the root of C: like that.
There is some other folder for minidump files.
C:\reflectv5.2-6551-x64-0.dmp
You should be using dumpchk or BlueScreenView, or any application
that can parse a .dmp, and see what it is complaining about.
I've *never* had one of those. Macrium has worked every
time for me, imaging or cloning.
Has your hardware ever been stability tested ? Does it
pass Prime95 stability test ? I'd want to get to
the bottom of that issue, before it shows up as
a destructive issue of some sort.
If the problem is with VSS (making a shadow copy), an
intelligent error message should be presented. Crashing,
is not an option. The quality of Macrium software
is good, which is why I suspect you should be
hardware testing right now.
I image my C: partition with Macrium in ten minutes, and
it's a hard drive and not an SSD. That's 27.5GB in somewhere
around ten minutes or so. I turn the default compression
off, as if a .mrimg file size needs to be reduced, it's better
to reduce the size with a *separate* compression step.
Attempting to compress an already compressed file,
just does not work as well. In order to leave
my options open, I turn off Macrium compression.
Paul

Thanks for that Paul.

After the failure I then decided I didn't feel like spending any more
of my time with this so I left it where it was and did like the report
suggested and sent them the dump file. The file path is correct as I had
to go there to find that file. It's still there. I was trying to restore
that image to a different drive other than "C:" For that very reason I
made a clone of C: and tested it before I started. I lost my cherry long
ago so this time I not only kept kept my fingers crossed but my legs also.

Now I've temporarily move on to Acronis IT 2014. I'm not having any luck
there either. Maybe I should just give up blind dating altogether and
stick to manipulating my clone.

:)

Paul

2014-11-23 07:53:22 UTC

Post by Al Drake
Thanks for that Paul.
After the failure I then decided I didn't feel like spending any more
of my time with this so I left it where it was and did like the report
suggested and sent them the dump file. The file path is correct as I had
to go there to find that file. It's still there. I was trying to restore
that image to a different drive other than "C:" For that very reason I
made a clone of C: and tested it before I started. I lost my cherry long
ago so this time I not only kept kept my fingers crossed but my legs also.
Now I've temporarily move on to Acronis IT 2014. I'm not having any luck
there either. Maybe I should just give up blind dating altogether and
stick to manipulating my clone.
:)

If you want to try dumpchk, it's mentioned here. When I got my copy,
it starts with a stub installer for an SDK. You tick just the box
for Debug Tools, and you get a relatively small download. It's about
as close as the folks at Microsoft get, to the notion of "convenient".
I've had to download entire DVDs before, just to get one stinking program.

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/hardware/ff542776(v=vs.85).aspx

*******

The BlueScreenView would be easier, but the last time I used it,
it couldn't handle the .dmp I gave it. It also likes to
look in C:\Windows\minidump or similar, which is where I was expecting your
.dmp file to go. So this one is good when it works, and less
useful when it doesn't. I think so far, dumpchk has eaten
every meal I fed it.

http://www.nirsoft.net/utils/blue_screen_view.html

What you're looking for, is the names of routines. Once you have
some concrete details to look at, you can determine if something
important is busted on the machine.

Paul

Al Drake

2014-11-23 08:15:24 UTC

Post by Paul

Post by Al Drake
Thanks for that Paul.
After the failure I then decided I didn't feel like spending any more
of my time with this so I left it where it was and did like the report
suggested and sent them the dump file. The file path is correct as I
had to go there to find that file. It's still there. I was trying to
restore that image to a different drive other than "C:" For that very
reason I made a clone of C: and tested it before I started. I lost my
cherry long ago so this time I not only kept kept my fingers crossed
but my legs also.
Now I've temporarily move on to Acronis IT 2014. I'm not having any
luck there either. Maybe I should just give up blind dating altogether
and stick to manipulating my clone.
:)

If you want to try dumpchk, it's mentioned here. When I got my copy,
it starts with a stub installer for an SDK. You tick just the box
for Debug Tools, and you get a relatively small download. It's about
as close as the folks at Microsoft get, to the notion of "convenient".
I've had to download entire DVDs before, just to get one stinking program.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/hardware/ff542776(v=vs.85).aspx
*******
The BlueScreenView would be easier, but the last time I used it,
it couldn't handle the .dmp I gave it. It also likes to
look in C:\Windows\minidump or similar, which is where I was expecting your
.dmp file to go. So this one is good when it works, and less
useful when it doesn't. I think so far, dumpchk has eaten
every meal I fed it.
http://www.nirsoft.net/utils/blue_screen_view.html
What you're looking for, is the names of routines. Once you have
some concrete details to look at, you can determine if something
important is busted on the machine.
Paul

Thanks again Paul. I think I'll eventually get around to trying your
offerings. I'm not as enthusiastic about dealing with computers these
days for some reason. I really should dump this system once and for all.
It's so old but I keep it around. It has a whole family of younger more
powerful relatives living on the bench next to it starving for attention.
I sort of enjoy the time it takes to boot up the first thing in the
morning when I'm not quite awake myself trying to maneuver that coffee
cup. I remember when "system back up" was not something good.

Char Jackson

2014-11-23 18:13:08 UTC

Post by Al Drake
After the failure I then decided I didn't feel like spending any more
of my time with this so I left it where it was and did like the report
suggested and sent them the dump file. The file path is correct as I had
to go there to find that file. It's still there. I was trying to restore
that image to a different drive other than "C:" For that very reason I
made a clone of C: and tested it before I started. I lost my cherry long
ago so this time I not only kept kept my fingers crossed but my legs also.
Now I've temporarily move on to Acronis IT 2014. I'm not having any luck
there either. Maybe I should just give up blind dating altogether and
stick to manipulating my clone.
:)

Just a general observation, not applicable to any specific person in
particular, but when a person has issues with procedures that seem to work
fine for the majority of others, it just might be the individual. ;-)

The best approach might be to have a family member or friend come over, or
perhaps use a screen sharing application such as TeamViewer or WebEx, and
let someone watch what you're doing. With luck, the step where you're taking
a left turn instead of going straight will be noticeable.

--
Char Jackson

Al Drake

2014-11-23 21:02:13 UTC

Just a general observation, not applicable to any specific person in
particular, but when a person has issues with procedures that seem to work
fine for the majority of others, it just might be the individual. ;-)
The best approach might be to have a family member or friend come over, or
perhaps use a screen sharing application such as TeamViewer or WebEx, and
let someone watch what you're doing. With luck, the step where you're taking
a left turn instead of going straight will be noticeable.

Oh I agree that it's not you it's me. This is the first time I've tried
creating an image. I've had some major differences from what's happening
here and what I get from others is happening there. For one it's taking
far to long to create the restore that image. I've been trying to create
an image of drive C: (SSD)and restore it to Drive D: (HDD)which I have
since done successfully. Sometimes I'm just a bit slow catching on and
have learned quite a bit from those that have done this so many times.
That and a few drive failures due to questionable hardware can add up to
a steep learning curve which in my case I like to call it a learning
circle. The only people I know that have any mIQ what-so-ever are
totally online.

Sorry for wasting so much of your time.

Gene E. Bloch

2014-11-23 22:57:54 UTC

Just a general observation, not applicable to any specific person in
particular, but when a person has issues with procedures that seem to work
fine for the majority of others, it just might be the individual. ;-)
The best approach might be to have a family member or friend come over, or
perhaps use a screen sharing application such as TeamViewer or WebEx, and
let someone watch what you're doing. With luck, the step where you're taking
a left turn instead of going straight will be noticeable.

Nah, you should be glad to waste our time. *Not kidding*.

Not only are the people helping you (and, kind of, holding your hand),
there might be others reading this thread who are also learning stuff
they wouldn't be learning if you hadn't started the thread.

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

Al Drake

2014-11-24 07:32:32 UTC

Just a general observation, not applicable to any specific person in
particular, but when a person has issues with procedures that seem to work
fine for the majority of others, it just might be the individual. ;-)
The best approach might be to have a family member or friend come over, or
perhaps use a screen sharing application such as TeamViewer or WebEx, and
let someone watch what you're doing. With luck, the step where you're taking
a left turn instead of going straight will be noticeable.

Nah, you should be glad to waste our time. *Not kidding*.
Not only are the people helping you (and, kind of, holding your hand),
there might be others reading this thread who are also learning stuff
they wouldn't be learning if you hadn't started the thread.

Thanks. At my age I don't have any surviving family members or friends
so I reply much on the groups where I do more reading than posting.

Char Jackson

2014-11-24 08:24:43 UTC

Post by Al Drake
Oh I agree that it's not you it's me. This is the first time I've tried
creating an image. I've had some major differences from what's happening
here and what I get from others is happening there. For one it's taking
far to long to create the restore that image. I've been trying to create
an image of drive C: (SSD)and restore it to Drive D: (HDD)which I have
since done successfully. Sometimes I'm just a bit slow catching on and
have learned quite a bit from those that have done this so many times.
That and a few drive failures due to questionable hardware can add up to
a steep learning curve which in my case I like to call it a learning
circle. The only people I know that have any mIQ what-so-ever are
totally online.
Sorry for wasting so much of your time.

No worries. You didn't waste any of my time. I'm here because I want to be.

--
Char Jackson

Al Drake

2014-11-24 07:33:46 UTC

No worries. You didn't waste any of my time. I'm here because I want to be.

Thanks. Some days I'm really on top of things, others I'm a crash test
dummy.

Gene E. Bloch

2014-11-24 19:39:10 UTC

No worries. You didn't waste any of my time. I'm here because I want to be.

Thanks. Some days I'm really on top of things, others I'm a crash test
dummy.

Sounds good - could you post a selfie? I rather like the looks of those
circles on your head with alternating black & white quadrants.

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

Al Drake

2014-11-24 19:55:18 UTC

No worries. You didn't waste any of my time. I'm here because I want to be.

Thanks. Some days I'm really on top of things, others I'm a crash test
dummy.

Sounds good - could you post a selfie? I rather like the looks of those
circles on your head with alternating black & white quadrants.

What's a selfie? I looked everywhere. I don't seem to have one.

Gene E. Bloch

2014-11-24 22:54:12 UTC

No worries. You didn't waste any of my time. I'm here because I want to be.

Thanks. Some days I'm really on top of things, others I'm a crash test
dummy.

Sounds good - could you post a selfie? I rather like the looks of those
circles on your head with alternating black & white quadrants.

What's a selfie? I looked everywhere. I don't seem to have one.

Well, it's not a selkie.

1. Selfie usually means a self-portrait taken with the front camera on a
cell-phone. Or that's my interpretation, at least. I use one to show the
barber what I mean; it works a little better than my attempts at verbal
descriptions. I'm not sure whether you were teasing me, though :-)

2. A selkie is a sort of were-seal (as in pinniped or otary) found in
science fiction and fantasy fiction, as well as in Celtic folklore.

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

Al Drake

2014-11-25 07:10:46 UTC

No worries. You didn't waste any of my time. I'm here because I want to be.

Thanks. Some days I'm really on top of things, others I'm a crash test
dummy.

Sounds good - could you post a selfie? I rather like the looks of those
circles on your head with alternating black & white quadrants.

What's a selfie? I looked everywhere. I don't seem to have one.

Well, it's not a selkie.
1. Selfie usually means a self-portrait taken with the front camera on a
cell-phone. Or that's my interpretation, at least. I use one to show the
barber what I mean; it works a little better than my attempts at verbal
descriptions. I'm not sure whether you were teasing me, though :-)
2. A selkie is a sort of were-seal (as in pinniped or otary) found in
science fiction and fantasy fiction, as well as in Celtic folklore.

So then this "selfie" is nothing new. Actually I might have one I took
at a very old family event where I put the camera on timer to give me
time to get in the way. So NOW they decide to socialize that very old
practice and probably put the word in a dictionary somewhere.

Words and phrases I don't care if I ever hear again.

Tweat or tweek.
Slefie.
Hashtag.
Facebook.
"At the end of the day"
"Having said that" and all it's variations.
"A work in progress"
"Vortex"
And all the others I have managed to forget, that goodness.

Gene E. Bloch

2014-11-23 22:30:38 UTC

Just a general observation, not applicable to any specific person in
particular, but when a person has issues with procedures that seem to work
fine for the majority of others, it just might be the individual. ;-)
The best approach might be to have a family member or friend come over, or
perhaps use a screen sharing application such as TeamViewer or WebEx, and
let someone watch what you're doing. With luck, the step where you're taking
a left turn instead of going straight will be noticeable.

But also there's the other possibility, mentioned by Paul, that there's
a nascent hardware problem lurking in the system...

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

Char Jackson

2014-11-24 08:27:30 UTC

Post by Char Jackson
Just a general observation, not applicable to any specific person in
particular, but when a person has issues with procedures that seem to work
fine for the majority of others, it just might be the individual. ;-)
The best approach might be to have a family member or friend come over, or
perhaps use a screen sharing application such as TeamViewer or WebEx, and
let someone watch what you're doing. With luck, the step where you're taking
a left turn instead of going straight will be noticeable.

But also there's the other possibility, mentioned by Paul, that there's
a nascent hardware problem lurking in the system...

Of course, but even if so, I was thinking that someone who's been down the
road before would be able to say "that thing that's happenin' there, that
ain't right", or similar.

--
Char Jackson

Mayayana

2014-11-24 23:05:23 UTC

I've done imaging since the 90s, first with Partition
Magic and now with BootIt. If you used Macrium because
it was free then I would question that. Disk imaging is
not something to do with freebies.

Also, if you're going to save disk images as backup
you really should organize things first. C drive shouldn't
be 512 GB. If you're not going to partition then there's
no sense imaging. In that case you can just buy an
extra disk for backup.

I put an XP image, with software installed, on a CD.
Win7 goes onto 2 DVDs. I also store those image files
on data partitions. It takes me about 10 minutes to
restore an image and maybe another hour or two to
tweak all the little settings preferences that I've changed
since the image was made. (I don't image periodically.
I store fresh images that have been configured as
much as possible right after install.)

Gene E. Bloch

2014-11-24 23:21:44 UTC

The free version is a somewhat feature-limited version of a well-known
payware program. Seems robust enough to me (I have the paid version).

Post by Mayayana
Also, if you're going to save disk images as backup
you really should organize things first. C drive shouldn't
be 512 GB. If you're not going to partition then there's
no sense imaging. In that case you can just buy an
extra disk for backup.

That makes no particular sense to me. Can you clarify what's wrong with
imaging a large partition?

I hate to think I've so wrong all these years.

Post by Mayayana
I put an XP image, with software installed, on a CD.
Win7 goes onto 2 DVDs. I also store those image files
on data partitions. It takes me about 10 minutes to
restore an image and maybe another hour or two to
tweak all the little settings preferences that I've changed
since the image was made. (I don't image periodically.
I store fresh images that have been configured as
much as possible right after install.)

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

Gene E. Bloch

2014-11-24 23:27:43 UTC

<SNIP>

Post by Gene E. Bloch
I hate to think I've so wrong all these years.

^
I hate to think I've *been* so wrong all these years.

However, I have no trouble thinking I've been a lousy typist all these
years :-)

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

Al Drake

2014-11-25 07:23:27 UTC

Post by Gene E. Bloch
<SNIP>

Post by Gene E. Bloch
I hate to think I've so wrong all these years.

^
I hate to think I've *been* so wrong all these years.
However, I have no trouble thinking I've been a lousy typist all these
years :-)

"Typist" seems so girlie. I like "typer"

Mayayana

2014-11-25 02:28:19 UTC

| > Also, if you're going to save disk images as backup
| > you really should organize things first. C drive shouldn't
| > be 512 GB. If you're not going to partition then there's
| > no sense imaging. In that case you can just buy an
| > extra disk for backup.
|
| That makes no particular sense to me. Can you clarify what's wrong with
| imaging a large partition?
|

It's a disk image of the OS and software. There's
no reason for data to be in there. With a small,
compact image it's easy to copy, store and restore
to disk. If C drive is the whole disk then it's disk
cloning, not imaging.

This is a topic that's sometimes controversial,
though I don't really see why it should be. I think
of it like an 18-wheeler truck. The OS, drivers and
software are the engine. The data might be any
size, from a few MB to multiple hard disks filled
with photos. But that's the trailer. One gets a
good, clean engine and then the trailer contents
are backed up separately because that's just
raw data.

Some of the disk imaging programs these days
seem to do more hand-holding and support
incremental backup, similar to having restore points.
That's OK if one doesn't mind spending the resources
and storage space on it, but it's not disk image
backup. It's system backup.

I don't enable anything
like system restore. I just have good, solid disk images
that can be installed on any machine for which I
can get drivers. Then I frequently back up work
receipts, webpages, programming code, email,
bookmarks and anything else that I might miss if
I lost my computer. That's backed up as data, on
disk and on CDs/DVDs. I have 3 primary partitions
for OSs and one extended partition for multiple data
partitions on each disk. XP doesn't need more than
5-10 GB and Win7 doesn't need more than about
40-50 GB. Perhaps similar for Linux. To my mind,
keeping data on the OS partition is simply poor
design and unsafe. It's viewing the computer as
a single machine, which it isn't.

Gene E. Bloch

2014-11-25 23:06:20 UTC

OK, so that's your opinion.

If C drive is the whole disk then it's disk
cloning, not imaging.

None of the backup software I have used agrees that imaging the whole
drive makes it cloning. This includes Macrium, Acronis, and EaseUS. I
don't recall having used any others.

Cloning is still copying the drive byte by byte to another drive, and
imaging is still creating an image file from the contents of the source
item, be it a drive or a partition.

At the moment I have an image of this drive, including the boot and
system partitions, as a single image on an external drive. The drive
also contains some other stuff I put there. This is hardly unusual for
me. I also have a clone of the same information on anther external
drive. This too is hardly unusual for me.

This is a topic that's sometimes controversial,
though I don't really see why it should be.

Nor do I, even though I don't agree with you.

I think
of it like an 18-wheeler truck. The OS, drivers and
software are the engine. The data might be any
size, from a few MB to multiple hard disks filled
with photos. But that's the trailer. One gets a
good, clean engine and then the trailer contents
are backed up separately because that's just
raw data.
Some of the disk imaging programs these days
seem to do more hand-holding and support
incremental backup, similar to having restore points.

Maybe not. If you restore from an incremental backup you lose everything
done after that backup. This is not true of System Restore (which,
however, offers its own surprises).

That's OK if one doesn't mind spending the resources
and storage space on it, but it's not disk image
backup. It's system backup.

So you say. I disagree.

I don't enable anything
like system restore. I just have good, solid disk images
that can be installed on any machine for which I
can get drivers. Then I frequently back up work
receipts, webpages, programming code, email,
bookmarks and anything else that I might miss if
I lost my computer. That's backed up as data, on
disk and on CDs/DVDs. I have 3 primary partitions
for OSs and one extended partition for multiple data
partitions on each disk. XP doesn't need more than
5-10 GB and Win7 doesn't need more than about
40-50 GB. Perhaps similar for Linux. To my mind,
keeping data on the OS partition is simply poor
design and unsafe. It's viewing the computer as
a single machine, which it isn't.

Or which it is.

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

Char Jackson

2014-11-25 06:41:39 UTC

You don't give any indication of who you're talking to, but surely you are
aware that Macrium Reflect has a very good reputation among the regulars
here, including its free version, or I should say especially its free
version.

I see no reason to pay for software when equivalent software is available at
no charge, but I guess some people just feel better when they've paid for
something.

--
Char Jackson

Gene E. Bloch

2014-11-25 23:08:50 UTC

You don't give any indication of who you're talking to, but surely you are
aware that Macrium Reflect has a very good reputation among the regulars
here, including its free version, or I should say especially its free
version.
I see no reason to pay for software when equivalent software is available at
no charge, but I guess some people just feel better when they've paid for
something.

I bought it before it had a free version, IIRC, but to tell the truth,
I'd pay to get the incremental backup facility that's missing from the
free version. So I do indeed feel better :-)

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

Char Jackson

2014-11-26 06:54:42 UTC

You don't give any indication of who you're talking to, but surely you are
aware that Macrium Reflect has a very good reputation among the regulars
here, including its free version, or I should say especially its free
version.
I see no reason to pay for software when equivalent software is available at
no charge, but I guess some people just feel better when they've paid for
something.

I bought it before it had a free version, IIRC, but to tell the truth,
I'd pay to get the incremental backup facility that's missing from the
free version. So I do indeed feel better :-)

I think it's completely legitimate to pay for extra features, especially if
you use or plan to use them, but I wouldn't pay for extra features if I knew
I'd never use them. Something like that. :)

--
Char Jackson

Gene E. Bloch

2014-11-26 19:44:23 UTC

You don't give any indication of who you're talking to, but surely you are
aware that Macrium Reflect has a very good reputation among the regulars
here, including its free version, or I should say especially its free
version.
I see no reason to pay for software when equivalent software is available at
no charge, but I guess some people just feel better when they've paid for
something.

I bought it before it had a free version, IIRC, but to tell the truth,
I'd pay to get the incremental backup facility that's missing from the
free version. So I do indeed feel better :-)

I think it's completely legitimate to pay for extra features, especially if
you use or plan to use them, but I wouldn't pay for extra features if I knew
I'd never use them. Something like that. :)

You have this tendency to be rational. Stop it!

Yes, I do the same[1], of course. Macrium is just one of the few
exceptions :-)

[1] I mean about paying or not paying. As for my being rational, let
that be an exercise for the reader.

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

Al Drake

2014-11-25 07:21:09 UTC