Get our Latest Finds
Subscribe to our RSS feed or enter your email address below to get the feed delivered to you by email:
Follow Gizmo
Using this Site
Top Rated
Gizmo's Freeware is Recruiting
We are currently looking for people with skills and/or interest in the following areas:
- Rootkit Scanner and Remover
- Web Browser for Android
If this sounds like you then click here for more details
Reliable Drive Imaging Software
Finding reliable freeware to perform Disk Imaging under Windows can be a real challenge. So Jim Campbell has turned to the commercial world. After trying a few alternatives he has have found a commercial product he considers to be an absolute gem.
Finding decent, reliable imaging software has been a bit of a problem for me. That is until now. I have tried most of the well known ones – including Ghost, Acronis True Image, Paragon and quite a few others (both free and paid). All of them have give problems (usually validation) of some sort or other.
I know many people have relied on many of them with no problems at all but I’ve tried them on XP, XP Pro, Vista Home Premium, and Vista Ultimate etc. on various machines and have always had validation problems at some stage or other. I am sure the glowing comments by other folk are true but that doesn’t help me if I want to image and/or restore my system at some stage.
But finally I've found a product that image Windows totally reliably. It's called Image for Windows version 2.2c from TerabyteUnlimited
Yes, OK, I haven’t actually done a full system restore so far but, using TBIView (the supplied viewer), I have viewed the saved files individually and restored them to anywhere I wanted with no errors. The clincher for me (as promised by TeraByte) is that, should I have to buy a new hard disk, I can just boot up and restore from the backup image disk to the new hard drive and my system will be fully restored and ready for use. Exactly what I want!
So, how does it work? The full program containing all three elements (Image for Windows (IFW) , DOS (IFD) or Linux (IFL) can be currently bought for $38.94 but the individual IFD or IFL can cost $29.95. My system is Windows Home Premium 64 bit, and the drive to which I save my images/backups is an external USB connected Seagate 500gig.
When using Windows it is changing all the time, which is why many experts say that you cannot image Windows while it is running. Terabyte says that Windows is “frozen in a moment of time” when you image, so this restriction does not apply. Nevertheless, I prefer to use a system which images while Windows is not running, so I chose IFD.
Sometimes IFD will not recognise a USB drive. There are several suggestions on their website to get round this but the easiest is to run IFL instead. This is the system which I used with perfect results and the one I shall describe here.
On running the program you are asked to make a recovery disk. This is easily done and you can burn direct to CD or make an ISO image for burning later. You are taken through this process by a very good step-by-step wizard.
When you are ready to make an image, you first reboot your machine with the recovery disk you just created in the drive. After a lot of DOS type info (which you can ignore), in about 30 seconds or so you are presented with the opening screen:
Use the space bar to check the option you want (or use the highlighted letter). The default is usually acceptable. After, click Next:
You will also be presented with the option for backup to a USB drive and then will have all such drives listed and the option for where to save on the drive and what name to give the file.
The final screen for backup will look like this:
For backup you can select many options (by using the space bar). I usually select Validate Byte-for-Byte as well as the default ones shown here. This checks for validity as it is imaging (rather than you checking for validity later) and, should you being waiting for it to finish whilst imaging, you can then at least abort the backup and save time. This, however, has NEVER happened to me.
Another option, which I always use (not shown here) is Shut down on Finish. This is useful in that you can then just turn off the monitor and leave it to its own devices rather than waiting around. You can also set the compression level, a password, maximum file size, and a description to help identify it. I usually then turn the monitor off and go to bed as, on my system, it takes about three hours for a full image. (Update Oct 2011. I now use Windows 7 Home Premium 32 bit and my son the same but 64 bit and it works perfectly on both. Imaging on my system takes only 90 minutes).
IFD gives more or less the same screens and IFW very similar ones.
There are many other options and add-ons available and all can be seen on the website http://www.terabyteunlimited.com/image-for-windows.htm
TerabyteUnlimited seems offer very effective and rapid support. When I emailed support, on EVERY occasion a reply came within the hour – including at weekends.
Jim Campbell.
The views expressed in this user submitted article are those of the author and not necessarily those of Gizmo's Freeware.
- Article type:
Printer-friendly version
Comments
One would expect commercial software to do a slightly better job or have better customer service than most freeware products. Recommended freeware on TSA would suit a lot of peeps, but not everyone and some would find their needs better suited to commercial software.
There will be many situations where freeware can not readily do something that can easily be achieved with a commercial product. Will this be mentioned from now on?
No it won't, unless none of the freeware alternatives available can perform suitably for average users. The whole point of most freeware is to lead users to an "upgraded" product containing additional features, but for the majority these will be either unwanted or unnecessary. Folks are quite able to see the comparison for themselves on the vendors site if they so wish, and then make a decision accordingly.
In all my years of PC use, I've only ever purchased one program so I don't agree there are "many instances" when this becomes necessary.
References to commercial products will continue to be removed in the comments unless the posts containing them are constructive to the topic/review and not merely a product promotion. This includes the adulation of obscure features only likely to be relevant to a small minority of users.
If folks believe they have a good argument regarding a specific product, they should post it in the forum. The moderators will then decide on the value of this and whether it be allowed to stay. I should add that there is no one individual making these decisions except in the case of spam and fanboy rants. The posts are first put into moderation and then discussed as a team before any further action is taken. Members are of course always welcome to approach myself if they feel they have a grievance and mostly I will then consult with Gizmo before taking action myself.
Rule 17
17. References to commercial software : Members/visitors may refer to commercial products in either forum posts, or main site comments, but may not include links** to them. The content in such posts must be relevant to the topic being discussed, and not posted as an endorsement for promotional purposes. Links to sites containing freeware and commercial content may be acceptable, providing that the pages linked to, do not open with words such as “trial” or “buy now”, prominently featured. Anything deemed not to comply will be removed, and the decision of moderators will be final. No correspondence will be entered into, about the removal of commercially related content.
Quote from MC's post
No it won't, unless none of the freeware alternatives available can perform suitably for average users. The whole point of most freeware is to lead users to an "upgraded" product containing additional features, but for the majority these will be either unwanted or unnecessary. Folks are quite able to see the comparison for themselves on the vendors site if they so wish, and then make a decision accordingly.
MidnightCowboy's understanding of rule 17 IMO doesn't accurately reflect the actual rule.
Here again the average user is used as the standard. User of what? XP, Vista, Win7 I'm afraid the cork has been popped off the bottle. The genie is going to be hard to put back in.
Quote by syntax_error
"There will be many situations where freeware can not readily do something that can easily be achieved with a commercial product. Will this be mentioned from now on?"
Exactly
I can recall a number of times where the mention of commercial products were responded to by the immediate locking of the thread. I guess the poster may gotten the nuances wrong on how to discuss the commercial software.
I feel this discussion is worth having if nothing more than to makes things a bit clearer on how to handle the discussion of commercial software. Regardless its going to be a delicate process.
I'm a little disappointed to see commercial software being offered on this site. To me I feel objectivity can be compromised by doing so. I think posting a review on best free imaging software and then mentioning a commercial counterpart only if there is hard evidence it is superior to the free software. The same could also apply to the forum in which commercial software is prohibited from being discussed unless its a "Hot Find"
MC has explained below the site policy very well. In the case of my article here, (and as it explains), I had tried just about every free alternative and even many of the paid ones. On finding a comparatively inexpensive alternative which worked without errors EVERY TIME I thought I would like to share my experiences with others. As a moderator here myself I was aware of the possible problems and took the step of consulting with Gizmo himself directly. He in turn consulted with the senior team and decided that an article published independently from the freeware section would fall within the site's rules. As I said, I am merely sharing my experiences and if that saves someone who has had similar disappointments from spending a LOT of money trying to find a workable alternative (as did I) then I think the article is justified.
Jim.
Quote by Jim
"As I said, I am merely sharing my experiences and if that saves someone who has had similar disappointments from spending a LOT of money trying to find a workable alternative (as did I) then I think the article is justified."
Its worth noting that Acronis True Image has never failed me. It also has an option to load at bootup allowing it to run outside Windows.
I'm not trying to rock the boat. Heck there has been many times I slipped up and referred to commercial software on the forum. Its hard not to mention pay-ware when trying to compare the effectiveness between it and its freeware counterpart.
I also linked to this page from my "FaceBook" page which could have something to do with things. In the past I have noticed Gizmo features various postings on commercial software being offered at a discount I have even commented on a few of them :)
I truly enjoy visiting Gizmo's, Its one of the few websites I checkout on a nearly daily basis. I do not mean to disparage the sites need to obtain funds to keep it operational. On the other hand I believe what makes Gizmo's a truly unique website is it strict adherence to is freeware principals and by doing so has made itself very popular.
Thank you for your responses and clarifications
You know the drive imaging category has been maintained over several years by several reviewers over pretty much the same products. Never to my knowledge have the top picks been rated by a reviewer as unreliable. Presently the top 3 have 8 and 9 star ratings.
If one is going to maintain an XP computer then up to a point they should stick to XP software. If software written for W7 works, then fine, but it should not be expected to be trouble free, especially software that gets in to the "bowels" of the O/S such as drive imaging.
If there is commercial software that does this then fine, but does it warrant this article? Which whilst obviously not Jim's intentions, is an insult to crank, who has done a great job as reviewer of Best Free Drive Imaging Program.
I also hope that these comments will be seen as constructive feed back. (The article was always going to open a can of worms!)
I'm sure crank doesn't feel insulted because no such thing was ever intended. Most folks viewing here will appreciate Jim's article for what it is and the manner in which it was produced, hence the reason why there haven't been dozen's of negative comments about it.
Fact is that since time began, imaging products (free or paid) work well on some systems and not on others. This could be hardware related and/or relevant to the overall state of the OS at the point the image was made. My own tech no longer provides support packages for Windows users because he lost money doing it. Now, if you want support you get Ubuntu or nothing :) When he did though, part of the package included a quarterly image but he was always having issues with restoring these. His advice to me was to use an external drive for duplicate storage, keep important things in the cloud as well, and in the event of an insurmountable problem make a clean install of Windows and put up with the few hours it takes to re-install the programs and configure them. Now I fully appreciate this alternative solution won't appeal to everyone which is why in their own way, Jim and crank are seeking to cater for mainstream requirements.
When I wrote the article (a couple of years ago) my son (who lives in a different country to me) and I were both having trouble with our systems: losing files/crashes, the usual (at that time) Windows problems. Backups and system restore were not resolving these problems satisfactorily. At that time there were many posts/articles in various blogs/magazines about the virtues of imaging so we both decided to go down that route. As I said earlier, we tried many free and/or paid for programs and got many failures (validation errors in particular). As imaging was "the flavour of the month" at that time there were also many reviews of these programs detailing similar problems - although many found them favourable. In my searches for a suitable program I found the one I reviewed here which gave perfect results for both of us. So, I wrote this article for those who had similar experiences. Then, Windows 7 came along which almost never gives the problems associated with XP and Vista. We both still image because it is an extra safeguard and we paid for the program after all. Why stop using it if it is doing its job? I didn't expect this review to still be here - but it is, and my feelings and experiece of the software remain the same. As already stated it is MY review of MY experiences and is not intended to belittle anyone else's point of view or disparage the efforts of many of the fine editors here. If anyone can find a freeware program which is pretty well GUARANTEED to do the same job then great. But at the time of writing the review this was the only one which worked for us EVERY TIME.
We have always operated a policy which allows reference to commercial products, see rule #17. The moderators however decide which of these are genuine and which are attempts to spam. 99.99% are spam but anyone so affected is always welcome to contact the moderating team or myself directly for clarification. To relax this further would open up our posts to the spam bots and attract more than we are able to cope with as a volunteer group. Some sites and forums have been brought down by this so we are well aware of the potential affect this could have on us too. This is why we have automated processes in place that deal with this without the need for human involvement. As an example, a visitor might post along the lines of "freeware is great but I still like my N*D32", this being an innocent and genuine comment from their perspective. If left in place however, within a day we will be inundated with spam comments in the same thread simply because the commercial name exists there. This is why we have to be strict with what is allowed to stay.
I've been using this program for years to image my hard drives. Its worked perfectly every time. I use Image for Windows to create a disk image while Windows is running and haven't had a hiccup. I've restored images from external hard drives and USB sticks. External hard drive restoration goes quickly, from a USB drive it takes quite a bit longer.
Glad someone agrees with me, although just to be safe I never image while Windows is running. Glad to hear it works well like that too. Thanks rhiannon.
Jim.
Ive just just Clonezilla and seemed to work OK. Itg handled both disk and partition imaging
Post new comment