A couple of months back I did some pretty major cloning on both mine and my dad's PCs, cloning partitions/drives that contained the OS (as well as cloning partitions that didn't).

I used a combination of Acronis True Image (the free trial version) and XXCOPY.

The reason why I used Acronis True Image was I was having a lot of trouble hot-cloning (I think that's the term), where you clone a drive whilst it's still being used.
Acronis True Image, like Norton Ghost (though I've not used Norton Ghost, or did and had problems with it- I can't remember) require you to reboot your PC, then run before it fully loads the operating system to clone the drive when it's not in use.

In the end though, I got XXCOPY working and was able to hotclone my harddrive totally fine. It's a really great little program.

(Also: good luck! Cloning a drive, especially one containing your OS has a lot of baby sitting, waiting around and plenty of "will it/won't it totally break and not work at all" moments. And sorry if you're pretty experienced with this kind of thing and I'm being very patronising. :p

Also*2: Nice specs!)

Most of these problems would be moot if you used a Free Linux operating system. The command to clone a hard drive on most Linux machines is:
<code>dd if=/dev/sda1 of=clone.bin bs=5MB</code>

In addition, there would be little risk of the system experiencing any difficulties because you changed your hardware, and there is no chance that reactivation would be required. Rather than relying on drivers that are owned by manufacturers and sometimes only available via laborious hunt-and-search operations, you would find the drivers for your new system are available by default in the Linux kernel. It would be better if you used software that serves you rather than the profits of mega-corporations.

I feel comfortable posting this, because someone else has already given a solid answer to the question at hand (XXCopy and a ghosting program), that I can definately chip in and support. Acronis is awesome, a free alternative is CloneZilla and another pay-to-use solid program is Norton Ghost (although I prefer Acronis). Norton Ghost is very user-friendly by now, and almost all actions are performed in a wizard-style progressive interface that make it pretty hard to screw up.

PirateHead wrote:

In addition, there would be little risk of the system experiencing any difficulties because you changed your hardware, and there is no chance that reactivation would be required. Rather than relying on drivers that are owned by manufacturers and sometimes only available via laborious hunt-and-search operations, you would find the drivers for your new system are available by default in the Linux kernel.

It would be better if you used software that serves you rather than the profits of mega-corporations.

You know, its funny. I've had to do just as much hunt-and-search for Linux-based systems, as I have for Windows-based. Relying on drivers owned by manufacturers tends to have the happy side-effect of the drivers working a whole lot better. Especially with older/rarer/very new hardware.

I think there are valid times to suggest alternate operating systems. And I'm big on Linux myself, being an avid OSX user (as well as Ubuntu user). But what you're providing here is called bad advice: Its a huge, sweeping change for the user to create an easier way to back up his system that has a gigantic impact on everything he does with his computer. As a person who works as an IT consultant both for private clients and businesses, I'd never, ever suggest an operating system change just to accomodate a backup solution. Not even for really important data (such as financial files). You're essentially hi-jacking his question to create a salespitch for Linux.

If your aim is to advertise Linux-based systems as a solid alternative to Windows, there are better and more appropriate areas/times for that (such as your blog). If your aim is to provide meaningful help to somebody, then you're not really hitting the mark here. Your post is roughly equivelant to spam in this context.

Stephen001 wrote:

My main concern with cloning like that sits with drivers. A full clone will pull everything across, Operating System, drivers, settings and documents. Obviously you want the documents and preferences to be pulled across, that is the point of the exercise. However you might not want the drivers and their settings pulled across, because the hardware is different on the new PC.

This is true (thats what I get for reading something at 4 in the morning). As a general case, I'd really suggest re-installing an operating system if you're moving from one set of hardware to another. Specifically, since you're changing motherboard there will be a lot of drivers that are superficial and some missing ones. You'll lose registry data and there isn't a very happy way around that.

Primarily, applications that depend on registry data might bail out and ask you to re-install them (or fail to start, or work badly). Bigger more commercial programs such as the Office suite have methods of transferring them - Smaller, indie-programs or games most likely do not.

In the end, upgrading your computer and being forced to re-install usually ends up giving you a cleaner computer altogether. Your visual preferences can usually be transferred via the Files & Settings Transfer Wizard. or set up rather quickly again.

Alathon wrote:

I feel comfortable posting this, because someone else has already given a solid answer to the question at hand (XXCopy and a ghosting program), that I can definately chip in and support . . .

I felt this way as well. It would be crass to suggest switching to Linux just to clone your hard drive, or anything like that. However, given that the post which I replied to made very valid points about moving data from and old hard drive to a new one under Windows, I thought I could chip in by providing a wider context.

You know, its funny. I've had to do just as much hunt-and-search for Linux-based systems, as I have for Windows-based. Relying on drivers owned by manufacturers tends to have the happy side-effect of the drivers working a whole lot better. Especially with older/rarer/very new hardware.

I forget how much computer-building you've done - some on BYOND do a lot, some not so much. I've built a few Windows boxes and had to do a lot of searching for hardware drivers, then later tried Linux on those same machines and had everything work out-of-the-box. It doesn't stop at anecdotes - whereas manufacturers are plenty content supplying builders with binary drivers and making them available via the website for system builders, those same manufacturers are increasingly providing the Linux kernel with open-source drivers, to be included by default.

You're essentially hi-jacking his question to create a salespitch for Linux.

Your criticism there is certainly valid to a point - however, had the question not already been answered adequately, I would not have posted (or I would have included an adequate answer before going off on a tangent). Thus, I feel that it's less of a hijack and more of an addendum.

If your aim is to advertise Linux-based systems as a solid alternative to Windows, there are better and more appropriate areas/times for that (such as your blog). If your aim is to provide meaningful help to somebody, then you're not really hitting the mark here. Your post is roughly equivelant to spam in this context.

Waiting for users to come to Linux works to a degree - however, advertising in all contexts is needed remind people that alternatives are available. Spam acts without regard to context; my comments were specific to this situation.

Flame Sage wrote:

But seriously, I remember there being a Live CD with a ton of tools for basically doing everything to a computer, from backing up HDs to Operating System Repair, it was an amazing CD.

I wonder if you're talking about Hiren's Boot CD? I personally keep a copy of that in my desk for all of those just-in-case moments.

It's not really that, so much as with Linux you ... just don't. It's usually either on the system already, or it's available via a one-liner in a terminal, or it's going to be very troublesome device.

Danial.Beta wrote:

The best backup is good, old fashioned copy and paste.

rsync works really well for that.
http://www.rsync.net/resources/howto/windows_rsync.html

Although I do agree that it gets overrated, Linux is extremely good about working "out of the box" on a lot of hardware. When I install Linux I have to install NVidia drivers and bam, all my hardware works to an acceptable level. When I install Windows, I don't have graphics over 800x600, sound, networking, fan control, BlackBerry support, and a good few other pieces of hardware until I install drivers. Which, I might add, rarely go smoothly, and yes, this is the fault of the manufacturer.

Wireless cards are still a big problem in the Linux world because there are so many different types, many of which require the driver to do half the work the hardware should. Any Linux user who answers the question "Will I have trouble with my wireless card?" with "No" is an idiot. Because there is a good chance that you will. Many people don't, but many do.