Anyone Use Active @ Disk Image?

Typically when "cloning" you are simply hooking up a new drive to a SATA port on the computer or you are using a SATA to USB 3.0 adapter with the new drive attached to it and you are copying the old drive straight over to the new drive. It's usually a fast process and after it's done you remove the old drive and install the new drive.

A "backup image" is when you might be hooking up a USB 3.0 External Hard Drive and running a "Backup" from the existing drive to the attached external media. After it is done you have a "backup" of that original hard drive on external media. You then install the new drive (SSD) into the computer and run your imaging software at boot to restore the "Backup image" you just created from the External Drive and restore it to the new drive. This of course takes longer than a clone because it's a two step process of backup and restore.
 
I think one possible reason the clone fails is due to the cloning app trying to map/convert sector counts between devices. I think this quirk also explains why a clone can complete but be unbootable, where the program has completely messed up what partitions are marked as what or what flags they have.

I've always found backing up to an image then restoring that image is 99% success rate. The applications must have something they do different between those two functions.
 
Typically when "cloning"
If this is in response to me, of course I know all that. I was simply asking were you talking about doing these things with Acronis or other software tools?

I never do system image backups in place of cloning. I use Paragon for cloning, which while slow, has a high success-rate in comparison to Macrium and Samsung tools. If Crystal Disk Info is reporting CAUTION, Paragon usually succeeds.

For problem drives (e.g. freezing up the PC when connected) I use linux-based HDD Super Clone which I find excellent. I don't believe image backups can be done sector-by-sector but I might be wrong.
 
I image (Macrium) then use that image to clone. Have found it more successful that direct drive to drive cloning. If the drive fails to image it goes to a Linux machine and ddrescue. The result will always image successfully.
 
Late to the discussion, but, would toss in "RescueZilla" into the mix..(much more intuitive GUI-based version for doing images, similar to CLonezilla but images only last time I checked)

 
Late to the discussion, but, would toss in "RescueZilla" into the mix..(much more intuitive GUI-based version for doing images, similar to CLonezilla but images only last time I checked)

I'd never heard of this until now. Piqued my interest as I'm a fan of both Clonezilla and the old ReDo.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GTP
I have gotten so frustrated with Acronis in the past I stopped using it. Imaging, use Macrium. Cloning, especially if there is any sort of resize, I use MiniTool Partition Wizard. I find a lot of these tools don't even seem to have a firm grasp on all the scenarios an end user could run into. I find MiniTool handles a LOT of scenarios, and its clone speed is decent too. Never had to redo a clone, fix boot records or anything with it. It just... Just works.

Even if I do use Macrium to make an image, I will usually just put it back in place exactly as is on a bigger drive and clone out to the final drive. I have had Macrium (And so many other apps) not figure out a resize and a good amount of time, it just bricks the boot causing a bunch more work.

I have tested a LOT too.
 
Late to the discussion, but, would toss in "RescueZilla" into the mix..(much more intuitive GUI-based version for doing images, similar to CLonezilla but images only last time I checked)

Oooh I too haven't seen this. I loved Ghost (Tells you how old I am) and CloneZilla during their peaks too and ReDo was cool, just never used it. Downloading.
 
Back
Top