Thank you all for taking the time to read my question, although after all

the time I've spent in this and other NG's I feel I should know the answer.

 

I understand *some* of the basis differences between a disk image, and a

disk clone. Apparantly a clone may be bootable, an ready to run provided in

it installed in the proper BIOs channel along with it's coresponding

settings.

 

My understanding of any ISO image,it is not bootable and it is also a

bit-for-bit reproduction,--albeith in only ONE file?? Apparantly raw ISO

image is *not* bootiful. I don't understand this is that I thought an image

is a bit-by-bit exact copoy of the original.

 

I realize we don't usually use AUTOEXEC.BAT and more, or even ConFig.sys,

but there still must be bootable files on an ISO image, that left by

themselves just can boot. I know I'm missing something in the boot or file

structure anywhere, and would be so appreciative if one could explain it to

me, or know of a good site that, in this case, assumes I know

nothing.(That's getting closer all the time ;-(

 

Why for example can't i make a duplicate XP install disk as a back-up, using

the native "copy" command, and get it to boot?? AArrrrrgggggghhhhh! My

quess this all has to do with different file structures between medium.

 

Some kind of boot files do not allowed themselves to be copied in this

matter, and I want to know why.

 

If I take a simple DOS 6.22 disc, do a copy *.* to a destination drive, (CD)

it works flawlessly. Xp sure doesn't/won't do this As i've said, I'm open

to all ideas, lectures, or re-directs to other web-sites.

 

I' asking all this now becuse I've never been with the abiilty to back up,

and had a CD-rom burner before. It's high time **I**finally started usuing

backups. Yes Rock and others...you finally got through to me)!

 

Thank you for all you time and effort this rather lenght post, (nobody) has

every accussed my of not enough detail <VBG>

 

--

HTH,

Curt

 

Windows Support Center

http://www.aumha.org

Practically Nerded,...

http://dundats.mvps.org/Index.htm

See below.

 

"Curt Christianson" <curtchristnsn@NOSPAM.Yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:OLXi6I1uHHA.4412@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

> Thank you all for taking the time to read my question, although after all

> the time I've spent in this and other NG's I feel I should know the

> answer.

>

> I understand *some* of the basis differences between a disk image, and a

> disk clone. Apparantly a clone may be bootable, an ready to run provided

> in

> it installed in the proper BIOs channel along with it's coresponding

> settings.

 

When people speak about disk images they usually mean an

image file that can be stored on a disk or on a CD/DVD.

> My understanding of any ISO image,it is not bootable and it is also a

> bit-for-bit reproduction,--albeith in only ONE file?? Apparantly raw ISO

> image is *not* bootiful. I don't understand this is that I thought an

> image

> is a bit-by-bit exact copoy of the original.

 

Image files are not normally ISO images. They are written in a proprietary

format known to the supplier (e.g. Acronis, Ghost).

> I realize we don't usually use AUTOEXEC.BAT and more, or even ConFig.sys,

> but there still must be bootable files on an ISO image, that left by

> themselves just can boot.

 

Here are the prerequisites for a WinXP boot:

- A Windows Master Boot Record (MBR)

- ntldr

- ntdetect.com

- boot.ini

All of these are stored in an image file and are put back into

place on a restore.

> I know I'm missing something in the boot or file

> structure anywhere, and would be so appreciative if one could explain it

> to

> me, or know of a good site that, in this case, assumes I know

> nothing.(That's getting closer all the time ;-(

>

> Why for example can't i make a duplicate XP install disk as a back-up,

> using

> the native "copy" command, and get it to boot??

 

If you mean "WinXP CD" when you write "duplicate XP install disk"

then the answer is: You can make a copy. Simply use the "copy"

function of your CD burner.

> AArrrrrgggggghhhhh! My

> quess this all has to do with different file structures between medium.

>

> Some kind of boot files do not allowed themselves to be copied in this

> matter, and I want to know why.

>

> If I take a simple DOS 6.22 disc, do a copy *.* to a destination drive,

> (CD)

> it works flawlessly. Xp sure doesn't/won't do this As i've said, I'm

> open

> to all ideas, lectures, or re-directs to other web-sites.

 

You appear to mix up "installation disk" and "operating disk".

> I' asking all this now becuse I've never been with the abiilty to back up,

> and had a CD-rom burner before. It's high time **I**finally started

> usuing

> backups. Yes Rock and others...you finally got through to me)!

 

Buy a copy of an imaging program (e.g. Ghost, Acronis), then do this:

1. Create an image file.

2. Store it on a removeable disk.

3. Do a full restoration so that you know that it really works.

> Thank you for all you time and effort this rather lenght post, (nobody)

> has

> every accussed my of not enough detail <VBG>

Curt Christianson wrote:

>

> I understand *some* of the basis differences between a disk image, and a

> disk clone. Apparantly a clone may be bootable, an ready to run provided in

 

http://www.xxclone.com/

 

--

http://www.bootdisk.com/

"Curt Christianson" <curtchristnsn@NOSPAM.Yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:OLXi6I1uHHA.4412@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

> Thank you all for taking the time to read my question, although after all

> the time I've spent in this and other NG's I feel I should know the

> answer.

>

> I understand *some* of the basis differences between a disk image, and a

> disk clone. Apparantly a clone may be bootable, an ready to run provided

> in

> it installed in the proper BIOs channel along with it's coresponding

> settings.

>

> My understanding of any ISO image,it is not bootable and it is also a

> bit-for-bit reproduction,--albeith in only ONE file?? Apparantly raw ISO

> image is *not* bootiful. I don't understand this is that I thought an

> image

> is a bit-by-bit exact copoy of the original.

 

ISO and other image files are usually compressed but in any they aren't an

exact copy (which is what a clone is.) They need to be "extracted" or

"restored" to be usable.

> I realize we don't usually use AUTOEXEC.BAT and more, or even ConFig.sys,

> but there still must be bootable files on an ISO image, that left by

> themselves just can boot. I know I'm missing something in the boot or

> file

> structure anywhere, and would be so appreciative if one could explain it

> to

> me, or know of a good site that, in this case, assumes I know

> nothing.(That's getting closer all the time ;-(

>

> Why for example can't i make a duplicate XP install disk as a back-up,

> using

> the native "copy" command, and get it to boot?? AArrrrrgggggghhhhh!

> My

> quess this all has to do with different file structures between medium.

>

> Some kind of boot files do not allowed themselves to be copied in this

> matter, and I want to know why.

>

> If I take a simple DOS 6.22 disc, do a copy *.* to a destination drive,

> (CD)

> it works flawlessly. Xp sure doesn't/won't do this As i've said, I'm

> open

> to all ideas, lectures, or re-directs to other web-sites.

>

> I' asking all this now becuse I've never been with the abiilty to back up,

> and had a CD-rom burner before. It's high time **I**finally started

> usuing

> backups. Yes Rock and others...you finally got through to me)!

>

> Thank you for all you time and effort this rather lenght post, (nobody)

> has

> every accussed my of not enough detail <VBG>

 

COPY is a limited function utility. Other utilities do a better job, but

only a "clone" will be immediately bootable, since the MBR itself is

involved and no COPY or similar utility goes near the MBR.

 

--

Gary S. Terhune

MS-MVP Shell/User

http://www.grystmill.com

"Curt Christianson" wrote

> Thank you all for taking the time to read my question, although after all

> the time I've spent in this and other NG's I feel I should know the

> answer.

>

> I understand *some* of the basis differences between a disk image, and a

> disk clone. Apparantly a clone may be bootable, an ready to run provided

> in

> it installed in the proper BIOs channel along with it's coresponding

> settings.

 

A disk clone is a simple concept. It's an exact reproduction of the drive

(though some programs like Casper allow for cloning an individual partition

on a drive). Just substitute it for the original drive and use it.

> My understanding of any ISO image,it is not bootable and it is also a

> bit-for-bit reproduction,--albeith in only ONE file?? Apparantly raw ISO

> image is *not* bootiful. I don't understand this is that I thought an

> image

> is a bit-by-bit exact copoy of the original.

 

Images created by disk imaging programs such as Acronis or Ghost are not an

..iso image. .iso is one format, often used to contain a bootable image that

can be burned to a CD by a suitable program. Acronis and Ghost use their

own proprietary formats. But basically it is a single file, normally

compressed, which contains all the data on that partition or drive. To use

that image it has to be restored to the drive using the program that created

it.

> I realize we don't usually use AUTOEXEC.BAT and more, or even ConFig.sys,

> but there still must be bootable files on an ISO image, that left by

> themselves just can boot. I know I'm missing something in the boot or

> file

> structure anywhere, and would be so appreciative if one could explain it

> to

> me, or know of a good site that, in this case, assumes I know

> nothing.(That's getting closer all the time ;-(

>

> Why for example can't i make a duplicate XP install disk as a back-up,

> using

> the native "copy" command, and get it to boot?? AArrrrrgggggghhhhh!

> My

> quess this all has to do with different file structures between medium.

>

> Some kind of boot files do not allowed themselves to be copied in this

> matter, and I want to know why.

>

> If I take a simple DOS 6.22 disc, do a copy *.* to a destination drive,

> (CD)

> it works flawlessly. Xp sure doesn't/won't do this As i've said, I'm

> open

> to all ideas, lectures, or re-directs to other web-sites.

>

> I' asking all this now becuse I've never been with the abiilty to back up,

> and had a CD-rom burner before. It's high time **I**finally started

> usuing

> backups. Yes Rock and others...you finally got through to me)!

 

Go all the way. Get an external hard drive and Acronis True Image Home

version 10. Update it to the latest build from the Acronis site if needed.

Image the sytem regularly to the external drive. You can also use ATI to do

file backup. Use that for redundancy to backup individual important files

to a different medium such as CD or DVD.

> Thank you for all you time and effort this rather lenght post, (nobody)

> has

> every accussed my of not enough detail <VBG>

 

--

Rock [MS-MVP User/Shell]

Apples and oranges you mix in your runon.

 

The way a CD boots, and a hard disk partition boots are completely

different.

 

An ISO image of a bootable CD does contain the boot portion of that CD.

 

A CD or DVD media is a D I S C, not a D I S K.

 

If used in the proper selection within the appropriate CD burning software,

like Nero, one can make an identical CD that the iso image was created from.

If the software is very old or very limited, it probably has no contengency

for making such.

 

You can start by providing specifics such as the make and version of the Cd

burning software you are using.

 

Dave

 

"Curt Christianson" <curtchristnsn@NOSPAM.Yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:OLXi6I1uHHA.4412@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

> Thank you all for taking the time to read my question, although after all

> the time I've spent in this and other NG's I feel I should know the

> answer.

>

> I understand *some* of the basis differences between a disk image, and a

> disk clone. Apparantly a clone may be bootable, an ready to run provided

> in

> it installed in the proper BIOs channel along with it's coresponding

> settings.

>

> My understanding of any ISO image,it is not bootable and it is also a

> bit-for-bit reproduction,--albeith in only ONE file?? Apparantly raw ISO

> image is *not* bootiful. I don't understand this is that I thought an

> image

> is a bit-by-bit exact copoy of the original.

>

> I realize we don't usually use AUTOEXEC.BAT and more, or even ConFig.sys,

> but there still must be bootable files on an ISO image, that left by

> themselves just can boot. I know I'm missing something in the boot or

> file

> structure anywhere, and would be so appreciative if one could explain it

> to

> me, or know of a good site that, in this case, assumes I know

> nothing.(That's getting closer all the time ;-(

>

> Why for example can't i make a duplicate XP install disk as a back-up,

> using

> the native "copy" command, and get it to boot?? AArrrrrgggggghhhhh!

> My

> quess this all has to do with different file structures between medium.

>

> Some kind of boot files do not allowed themselves to be copied in this

> matter, and I want to know why.

>

> If I take a simple DOS 6.22 disc, do a copy *.* to a destination drive,

> (CD)

> it works flawlessly. Xp sure doesn't/won't do this As i've said, I'm

> open

> to all ideas, lectures, or re-directs to other web-sites.

>

> I' asking all this now becuse I've never been with the abiilty to back up,

> and had a CD-rom burner before. It's high time **I**finally started

> usuing

> backups. Yes Rock and others...you finally got through to me)!

>

> Thank you for all you time and effort this rather lenght post, (nobody)

> has

> every accussed my of not enough detail <VBG>

>

> --

> HTH,

> Curt

>

> Windows Support Center

> http://www.aumha.org

> Practically Nerded,...

> http://dundats.mvps.org/Index.htm

>

>

Rock wrote:

> A disk clone is a simple concept. It's an exact reproduction of the

> drive (though some programs like Casper allow for cloning an

> individual partition on a drive). Just substitute it for the

> original drive and use it.

 

When I think of clone (which I've never done), I think of something that

is identical. Does the best way to make a clone involve using the same

make and model of the hard drive? What happens if the size of the drive

is different?

"Daave" <dcwashNOSPAM@myrealboxXYZ.invalid> wrote:

>When I think of clone (which I've never done), I think of something that

>is identical. Does the best way to make a clone involve using the same

>make and model of the hard drive? What happens if the size of the drive

>is different?

 

As long as it's large enough to hold the original drive's contents, no

problem.

 

"Identical" means that all of the CONTENTS of the cloned drive are

identical to those on the original drive.

 

This ain't brain surgery.

"Daave" <dcwashNOSPAM@myrealboxXYZ.invalid> wrote in message

news:u3fWVc%23uHHA.4764@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

> Rock wrote:

>> A disk clone is a simple concept. It's an exact reproduction of the

>> drive (though some programs like Casper allow for cloning an

>> individual partition on a drive). Just substitute it for the

>> original drive and use it.

>

> When I think of clone (which I've never done), I think of something that

> is identical. Does the best way to make a clone involve using the same

> make and model of the hard drive? What happens if the size of the drive

> is different?

>

>

 

There is no such thing as an identical hard drive. All hard drives have

minute unusable areas on their platters. These are mapped out in low level

formatting at the factory. As a consequence, the actual usable area on a

hard drive will be different, byte for byte, than another of same make and

model. Cloning software makes allowances for that on a minute scale.

 

Generally, cloning software will clone a small hard drive to a large hard

drive. May have the option of making use of the larger storage area in a

target drive by making all the partitions larger before the cloning begins

the procedure. Can't clone the contents of a larger hard drive a smaller

one if the larger hard drive is used to capacity with partition(s). This is

one button operation.

 

Partition copying software can copy a partition or partitions from one hard

drive to the other. If enough empty space is within that partition, it can

be shrunk to allow for a smaller capacity hard drive. This takes more user

interaction, and may take more time as well.

 

Generally, cloning software is a one time operation for cloning the contents

of one hard drive to the other. Most people don't do that very often.

 

Partitioning software is similar. But, may be used more often as it has

assets of shrinking and expanding individual partitions as well. As well as

creating, deleting, and moving partitions. Some offer a hide capability

(hide the file system contents from the OS) of partitions. More flexible.

 

Dave

> Rock wrote:

>> A disk clone is a simple concept. It's an exact reproduction of the

>> drive (though some programs like Casper allow for cloning an

>> individual partition on a drive). Just substitute it for the

>> original drive and use it.

 

 

"Daave" <dcwashNOSPAM@myrealboxXYZ.invalid> wrote in message

news:u3fWVc%23uHHA.4764@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

> When I think of clone (which I've never done), I think of something that

> is identical. Does the best way to make a clone involve using the same

> make and model of the hard drive? What happens if the size of the drive

> is different?

 

 

Daave:

For all practical purposes, a disk clone is a clone is a clone is a clone.

While it is true that the cloned contents of the source HDD residing on the

destination HDD will not be an *exact* bit-for-bit copy of the source drive,

it is a true copy in every practical sense of the word, i.e., it will be

bootable and function precisely the same way as the source from which it was

cloned.

 

So you (and Rock) are right to think of a disk clone that, again, for all

practical purposes, is "identical" or an "exact reproduction".

 

With modern disk cloning/disk imaging programs such as Symantec's Norton

Ghost, Acronis True Image, Casper, etc., there is no need for the

destination HDD to be the same make and/or model of the source disk. All

that is necessary is that the destination drive contain sufficient disk

space to hold the cloned contents of the source drive. So, for example, if

your source HDD was 250 GB but contained only 110 GB of data, there would be

no problem cloning the contents of source drive to a 160 GB HDD.

 

Many users, we among them, use the disk cloning capability of a disk imaging

program for routine backup purposes. While it is true that (generally)

creating a disk-to-disk clone takes longer than creating a disk image, there

are certain advantages to the disk clone - one of which is that all the data

is immediately available on the recipient (destination) HDD. No recovery

process is necessary as one needs to undertake re the restoration process

involving one or more disk images.

 

The disk cloning program we are currently using and which we've been very

impressed with it the Casper 4.0 program (http://www.fssdev.com) . Perhaps

you've come across my recent detailed account of this program that I believe

I posted to this newsgroup. It's one you should look into if you're

interested in a disk cloning program.

Anna

"Daave" wrote

> Rock wrote:

>> A disk clone is a simple concept. It's an exact reproduction of the

>> drive (though some programs like Casper allow for cloning an

>> individual partition on a drive). Just substitute it for the

>> original drive and use it.

>

> When I think of clone (which I've never done), I think of something that

> is identical. Does the best way to make a clone involve using the same

> make and model of the hard drive? What happens if the size of the drive

> is different?

 

No it doesn't have to be the same make/model/size of drive, it just has to

be large enough to hold the clone.

 

--

Rock [MS-MVP User/Shell]