IFL image vs. Win 7 System Image-SOLVED

User discussion and information resource forum for Image products.

IFL image vs. Win 7 System Image-SOLVED

Postby ronk » Fri Mar 02, 2012 9:43 pm

Had an unusual situation today on a laptop of a friend who also uses IFL 2.69. It is Win 7 SP1, on an HP with 640gb internal drive. Had done several IFL backups (default parameters) successfully to an external USB drive early on with this new laptop. But during the last backup of the 'C' drive with IFL, 1/2 way through, got an 'LBA error' ignore or continue message. Tried again, got the same result. Tried the ignore, then IFL indicated Device Read error. (My friend is some distance from me, so don't have exact error message). But, had to shutdown and reboot into Win 7. Next, went to cmd window, did chkdsk on C with no errors or bad sectors. So, used Win 7 to create a 'system image' and it completed successfully.

Two questions:
First, shouldn't I expect an error running chkdsk, or, running Win 7's 'create system image' when IFL was failing?
Second, (less important, but surprising to me). Win 7 creates the backup much faster than IFL over USB. About 30 min vs. 45 min for 64gb. Is this normal? I realize Win 7's image is all or nothing, you cannot restore individual files unless you run their other Windows backup program.

Granted, I have yet had to restore the 'system image' with Win 7's Repair CD, but, from reading blogs, it supposedly is pretty solid. I have restored many XP systems with IFL and has never failed. But this is the first system that where IFL full backup fails, and Win 7 is successful. Are there other parameters I need to set to make IFL more forgiving? I like Terabyte's backup, but this has me stumped.

Any ideas? :?
Last edited by ronk on Sun Mar 04, 2012 5:37 pm, edited 2 times in total.
ronk
 
Posts: 67
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2011 5:40 am

Re: IFL image vs. Win 7 System Image

Postby Brian K » Fri Mar 02, 2012 10:12 pm

Win 7 creates the backup much faster than IFL

Ronk,

That's only because Win7 doesn't compress the image. Image size is double IFL image size.There are other negatives with the Win7 imaging app.

Image creation can't be scheduled
There is no option for resizing the restored partition
You can't restore into a smaller partition
It doesn't image FAT/FAT32/Linux partitions
Images can't be verified
Brian K
 
Posts: 1175
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 6:11 pm

Re: IFL image vs. Win 7 System Image

Postby ronk » Fri Mar 02, 2012 10:23 pm

Brian K wrote:
Win 7 creates the backup much faster than IFL

Ronk,

That's only because Win7 doesn't compress the image. Image size is double IFL image size.There are other negatives with the Win7 imaging app.

Image creation can't be scheduled
There is no option for resizing the restored partition
You can't restore into a smaller partition
It doesn't image FAT/FAT32/Linux partitions
Images can't be verified


Thanks for the quick response on IFL capabilities. It is truly a wonderful product. I understand and agree as the the greater worth of IFL/IFD/IFW . I didn't know about lack of compression, knew some of the other things.

However, my more important question on this new laptop is:
with the LBA errors, is this 1 week old harddrive in danger of premature death?? And why does Win7 not see these bad spots when it creates the system image? The HP disk health check app did show 'red' rather than green indicating some issue errors but wasn't at all specific.

Very concerned, do I tell my friend to return or exchange this laptop within 14 day window(got it at BestBuy)? There have been zero issues while in Windows; no freezes, error messages, nothing.

:(
ronk
 
Posts: 67
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2011 5:40 am

Re: IFL image vs. Win 7 System Image

Postby Brian K » Fri Mar 02, 2012 10:44 pm

I'd run the HD manufacturer's diagnostic CD. I'd be concerned.
Brian K
 
Posts: 1175
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 6:11 pm

Re: IFL image vs. Win 7 System Image

Postby a1pcfixer » Sat Mar 03, 2012 1:05 am

Ronk,

> Very concerned, do I tell my friend to return or exchange this laptop within 14 day window(got it at BestBuy)? There have been zero issues while in Windows; no freezes, error messages, nothing.

Yes, but FIRST remove any personal info, or at least encrypt such.
--

Jim L.
Using - Virtual Access(OLR)
http://www.virtual-access.org
6.3.0.5 Windows Vista Service Pack 2 build 6002

a1pcfixer
 
Posts: 183
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2011 11:13 pm

Re: IFL image vs. Win 7 System Image-RESOLVED

Postby ronk » Sun Mar 04, 2012 5:37 pm

Thanks to responders. You were right. I did an HP harddrive test and it indicated SMART errors, even though Win 7 was running fine. I then downloaded SEATOOLS since a Seagate drive, and it failed on the 'short DST' test, though passed some other quick ones. So...returned and exchanged for another at BestBuy. Noticed the bad drive was different than the BestBuy box indicated as well, and that the packing was not neat like the new one I got with the exchanged. So much for the reliability of Win 7 System Image vs. Terabyte. KUDOS to terabyte's IFL for being the first software to alert me to the issue, or my sister might still be using the box. :D Check out your BestBuy purchases carefully in those 1st 14 days, but they did handle the return/exchange well.
ronk
 
Posts: 67
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2011 5:40 am


Return to Image for DOS/Linux/Windows