Lori 1 said:
I wish you luck aussie girl, last night I clicked on a program on my system to make a one time back up, of my registry, Well... I was assuming this was my WIN XP system registry, when I finally got to the point of burning the CD, it told me I would need 6 CD's to do this, when I only had 1 CD to do this on, so I backed out of it, so don't feel alone,lol I am new at XP also. And very confused.
That Utility is very easy to get confused on. The Registry should fit on one CD very easy. You have to be exactly sure what files, functions you are telling it to back up. I don't totally trust the Utility because it also has this habit of getting confused on a Restore too and start claiming it can't find the files.
Many people with only a Drive C will make a partition for backups on that drive. Usually that can give a big enough space to do some decent back ups. The risk is failure of the hard drive. CD-ROM's can be a pain because either burning must be supported or maybe you can use a direct R-W format but the media does introduce some element of risk. I prefer hard drives and ZIP drives because of their reliability and ease of read-write. Back up hard drives have that advantage of as much room as desired in most cases.
So the consideration of where to put the back up is one of the major elements in any back up scheme. In my case I have two separate physical hard drives for every back up file that provide for a very secure method of never having all the eggs in one basket. The only thing ever on Drive C is the OS and the associated program files. One of those spots is a hard drive position where I can use hard drive swappable tray system. All data is backed up this way by a direct bulk copy. I also back up the OS system that way. In addition I have a USB 80G external hard drive that I use for backing up a number of systems.
I will make a OS backup for XP Pro using that built in Utility but don't totally depend on it. I save many backups over a time period, I like to do a bulk copy of the OS to that external drive about once a week. Part of the criterion is to be able to exactly label what is being saved. I use a folder system tagged by OS, then subfolders for what is being saved, Registry, OS, and be sure to time-date the back ups. Some of the big back ups can take ~ a hour so you don't do them every day, once a week or more. All data is treated totally separate. Most is organized by subject on both ZIP disks and swappable hard drives, all back ups are via bulk copy methods. Back up frequency is determined by use and how much data is changing.
For things like Favorites, Registry, Program files, I use a ZIP disk system to save the back ups also. The back up runs are very quick and I tend to do them based on any changes being made. The Registry is always backed up before any tweating at all, either manually, via HiJack or even optimizing runs by other software. I tend to trust that Run > Regedit method I gave before the most. Plus it is fast. So my back up scheme is designed around frequency of runs based on smaller chunks normally of what changes the most. Not every thing gets backed up with the same frequency.
That idea of using ZIP disks to hold the program files is a good one. I maintain one disk that has most of the program files. Is where I initially download. To maintain a number of systems this has an extra advantage in all the programs are in one central spot. If updates are required, only the ZIP disk gets another download and then many systems can be updated from there, serves as a form of back up too.
If you really think this subject thru it comes down to a number of discussions and arguments.
1. What do you consider secure in terms of hardware and how much redunancy do you want?? Which leads to a discussion of what is really secure and potential failure paths that can prevent the back up from being usable.
2. What do you trust as the copy method and storage format for back up files? I always prefer simple bulk copies in the native file format as the most reliable back up.
3. In what size and scope do you want to do back ups???? One large ghost copy of a particular drive is nice but the downside is you are screwed if that is flawed for some reason, plus you may also be depending on some independent software to Read-Write which can be another potential flaw. For this reason, I like both large total back ups of say the entire OS / Program files, Drive C but also recognize they will not get done that often. Also doing smaller back up runs on what is changing the most is another layer of protection.
4. What time frequency and how much work is to be devoted to making back ups. I would argue making smaller back ups of whatever changes the most is a critical feature. Maybe losing your E-Mails is what really scares you.
5. In the end it is what do you fear and what level of protection is desired to make those fears managable?? A bit of what is really important to you??? For me it is never ever having any data at risk and never having to reload the OS due to some minor glitch. A reload and complete setup of the desktop exactly the way I want it can be a major number of hours.
6. You can go with one of those schemes that says it can back up in real time to another drive. No matter, how you lash things up, there always will be a potential failure mode. Murphy never takes a Holiday. Can be a bit of mental walk thru, if this happens, how am I protected and how will I recover? The tricky part is always if multiple failures occur. Are you keen enough to have foreseen the sneak paths to failure and had all bases covered so you can get a total recovery to your liking with reasonable effort in a short enough time? Will vary, system to system, person to person, sure will never fail safe.
Can be a complicated subject from many angles, best when thought out and planned for, set up well in advance. You never are prepared enough when Murphy is on the loose.
