Norton Ghost 9.0

Discussion in 'Computer Security' started by Chas_G, May 19, 2005.

  1. Chas_G

    Chas_G Guest

    I've received an email from Symantec advertising 'Norton Ghost 9.0'.
    Symantec states that it is an advanced program which offers a backup
    to the computer and gives protection. It sounds interesting but costs
    £29 and I wonder if it is worth using Norton Ghost.

    Does anyone have any experience of this program? I would value any
    comments.

    Many thanks.
    Regards,

    Chas_G
    Chas_G, May 19, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Chas_G

    c0ntex Guest

    Chas_G wrote:
    > I've received an email from Symantec advertising 'Norton Ghost 9.0'.
    > Symantec states that it is an advanced program which offers a backup
    > to the computer and gives protection. It sounds interesting but

    costs
    > £29 and I wonder if it is worth using Norton Ghost.
    >
    > Does anyone have any experience of this program? I would value any
    > comments.


    It's a multicast ghosting application that allows you to "ghost" disk
    images from one PC to another, and take backup images from PC's, it has
    other function too.

    "gives protection" - not sure about that one.

    regards
    c0ntex
    c0ntex, May 19, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Chas_G

    optikl Guest

    Chas_G wrote:
    > I've received an email from Symantec advertising 'Norton Ghost 9.0'.
    > Symantec states that it is an advanced program which offers a backup
    > to the computer and gives protection. It sounds interesting but costs
    > £29 and I wonder if it is worth using Norton Ghost.
    >
    > Does anyone have any experience of this program? I would value any
    > comments.
    >
    > Many thanks.
    > Regards,
    >
    > Chas_G


    Ghost, like other disk imaging programs, is indispensable, if you want
    to make sure you have a reliable disaster recovery option. I personally
    use Acronis True Image. Regardless of which product you choose, a disk
    imaging program is worth every pence you pay for it. Open your check
    book and buy it.
    optikl, May 19, 2005
    #3
  4. Chas_G

    Rock Guest

    Ghost is wonderful.

    We use it for deployment. Build one image and every PC you/ve bought
    only takes a few minutes to hotload. When the PC crashes, it takes
    only a few minutes to restore.

    We use it in the test grop, because for some reason, I can't
    understand why, the software releases we do just seem to
    crash.....With ghost, the previous test image can be recreated in a
    few minutes so the crash can be easily duplicated and investigated.

    Sometimes we get evaluation software with timeouts, and it takes
    longer than the timeout to do the testing. Using Ghost, we just
    restore the image then reload the test software. It's easier than
    calling the company and trying to get a time extension.

    We use it on NTFS and FAT.

    Rock


    On Thu, 19 May 2005 12:10:02 +0100, Chas_G
    <chasg@DELETE_THIS.elmstead.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:

    >I've received an email from Symantec advertising 'Norton Ghost 9.0'.
    >Symantec states that it is an advanced program which offers a backup
    >to the computer and gives protection. It sounds interesting but costs
    >£29 and I wonder if it is worth using Norton Ghost.
    >
    >Does anyone have any experience of this program? I would value any
    >comments.
    >
    >Many thanks.
    >Regards,
    >
    >Chas_G
    Rock, May 19, 2005
    #4
  5. On Thu, 19 May 2005 12:10:02 +0100, Chas_G
    <chasg@DELETE_THIS.elmstead.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:

    >I've received an email from Symantec advertising 'Norton Ghost 9.0'.
    >Symantec states that it is an advanced program which offers a backup
    >to the computer and gives protection. It sounds interesting but costs
    >£29 and I wonder if it is worth using Norton Ghost.
    >
    >Does anyone have any experience of this program? I would value any
    >comments.
    >

    I've used an earlier version of Ghost for many years now - it's
    practically indispensable as a backup tool.
    As regards protection, it only does so by allowing you to create
    storable archives of your drives/partitions, as well as being able to
    copy entire disks or partitions on the fly.

    As an aside, if you were thinking about upgrading your machine, many
    motherboard manufacturers bundle Ghost as a freebie..so you could
    consider it as £30 off the price of a new motherboard....

    Regards,



    --
    Stephen Howard - Woodwind repairs & period restorations
    www.shwoodwind.co.uk
    Emails to: showard{whoisat}shwoodwind{dot}co{dot}uk
    Stephen Howard, May 19, 2005
    #5
  6. Chas_G

    nemo_outis Guest

    Chas_G <chasg@DELETE_THIS.elmstead.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in
    news::

    > I've received an email from Symantec advertising 'Norton Ghost 9.0'.
    > Symantec states that it is an advanced program which offers a backup
    > to the computer and gives protection. It sounds interesting but costs
    > £29 and I wonder if it is worth using Norton Ghost.
    >
    > Does anyone have any experience of this program? I would value any
    > comments.
    >
    > Many thanks.
    > Regards,
    >
    > Chas_G



    For convenience, I prefer the Acronis product. However, for fine-grained
    control (especially from the command line version) nothing beats Norton
    Ghost.

    I haven't used Ghost 9 - as near as I can tell it's an attempt to catch up
    with some of the convenience features of Acronis (e.g., live backup while
    working, mounting of a backup image as a virtual drive, etc.). However, it
    appears to suffer somewhat from the classic Symantec problem: bloat.

    Ghost 8.2 from diskettes (remember those?) with lots of switches is what I
    use to back up encrypted OTFE HDs (switches for MBR preservation, etc.)

    Regards,
    nemo_outis, May 19, 2005
    #6
  7. Chas_G

    Winged Guest

    Rock wrote:

    > We use it in the test grop, because for some reason, I can't
    > understand why, the software releases we do just seem to
    > crash.....With ghost, the previous test image can be recreated in a
    > few minutes so the crash can be easily duplicated and investigated.
    >
    > Sometimes we get evaluation software with timeouts, and it takes
    > longer than the timeout to do the testing. Using Ghost, we just
    > restore the image then reload the test software. It's easier than
    > calling the company and trying to get a time extension.
    >
    > We use it on NTFS and FAT.
    >
    > Rock

    Rock,
    For development work with applications Instead of ghost I recommend for
    test purposes, a package called VMware. You can recover from a system
    crash by closing the VM. To restore the system to virgin takes only
    seconds. To create a group of virgins on the same machine to emulate
    multiple network functionalities is a breeze and runs all MS OS packages
    and Linux very well. You can do both NTFS disks or fat disks either in
    RAM or on drives attached to the system. If you never have looked at
    this as an alternative to ghost you should for development, it is so
    sweet to test apps with various common application and configuration
    variances looking for conflicts. It has the added advantage of being to
    keep multiple point in time builds that can be examined interactively at
    the same time on the same machine. I believe they still have 30 day
    eval packages. It was the best $200 software package I have ever bought.

    If you are writing drivers or other low level type apps then it probably
    is not a great option, but most everything else..it rocks.

    It is nice to be able to build against all of the various MS OS packages
    at the same time on the same machine. While the more memory the system
    has increase the number of simultaneous VMs you can run, it is amazing
    what you can run in as little as 512mb ram on at 2GHZ. As with
    everything more is always better but it is nice to keep your prog
    machine up while running prog build in separate vm dynamically. I can't
    address their customer support, I have never used them.

    I have got to the point where almost everything I do is inside a custom
    VM designed for the task at hand, even the routine.

    Winged
    Winged, May 20, 2005
    #7
  8. Chas_G

    Chas_G Guest

    Many thanks to all those who kindly responded. Much appreciated!
    Regards,

    Chas_G
    Chas_G, May 20, 2005
    #8
  9. Chas_G

    Rock Guest

    Yeah, Winged, we evaluated VMWare, but mostly they are too
    hardware-limited. I mean, only recently did they decide to support
    USB, and 1394 isn't on the horizon yet.

    They have a problem with any DMA host controller, they need special
    stuff to make sure the target of the DMA goes to the right VM. I
    dunno if they support sata yet, I doubt it.

    Their support of Serial is really poor. Ah yes, but who uses serial
    anymore? Winbag, that's who.

    Their support of GART is pretty poor. I don't think there's any video
    card that's fully supported.

    We never tried soft-ice on vmware. But I suspect it has problems.

    I'd stick to VMWare for it's intended application: production
    servers.

    Rock

    On Thu, 19 May 2005 21:52:39 -0500, Winged <>
    wrote:

    >Rock wrote:
    >
    >> We use it in the test grop, because for some reason, I can't
    >> understand why, the software releases we do just seem to
    >> crash.....With ghost, the previous test image can be recreated in a
    >> few minutes so the crash can be easily duplicated and investigated.
    >>
    >> Sometimes we get evaluation software with timeouts, and it takes
    >> longer than the timeout to do the testing. Using Ghost, we just
    >> restore the image then reload the test software. It's easier than
    >> calling the company and trying to get a time extension.
    >>
    >> We use it on NTFS and FAT.
    >>
    >> Rock

    >Rock,
    >For development work with applications Instead of ghost I recommend for
    >test purposes, a package called VMware. You can recover from a system
    >crash by closing the VM. To restore the system to virgin takes only
    >seconds. To create a group of virgins on the same machine to emulate
    >multiple network functionalities is a breeze and runs all MS OS packages
    >and Linux very well. You can do both NTFS disks or fat disks either in
    >RAM or on drives attached to the system. If you never have looked at
    >this as an alternative to ghost you should for development, it is so
    >sweet to test apps with various common application and configuration
    >variances looking for conflicts. It has the added advantage of being to
    >keep multiple point in time builds that can be examined interactively at
    >the same time on the same machine. I believe they still have 30 day
    >eval packages. It was the best $200 software package I have ever bought.
    >
    >If you are writing drivers or other low level type apps then it probably
    >is not a great option, but most everything else..it rocks.
    >
    >It is nice to be able to build against all of the various MS OS packages
    >at the same time on the same machine. While the more memory the system
    >has increase the number of simultaneous VMs you can run, it is amazing
    >what you can run in as little as 512mb ram on at 2GHZ. As with
    >everything more is always better but it is nice to keep your prog
    >machine up while running prog build in separate vm dynamically. I can't
    >address their customer support, I have never used them.
    >
    >I have got to the point where almost everything I do is inside a custom
    >VM designed for the task at hand, even the routine.
    >
    >Winged
    Rock, May 20, 2005
    #9
  10. Chas_G

    Louise Guest

    In article <Xns965B6510955D0abcxyzcom@127.0.0.1>, says...
    > Chas_G <chasg@DELETE_THIS.elmstead.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in
    > news::
    >
    > > I've received an email from Symantec advertising 'Norton Ghost 9.0'.
    > > Symantec states that it is an advanced program which offers a backup
    > > to the computer and gives protection. It sounds interesting but costs
    > > £29 and I wonder if it is worth using Norton Ghost.
    > >
    > > Does anyone have any experience of this program? I would value any
    > > comments.
    > >
    > > Many thanks.
    > > Regards,
    > >
    > > Chas_G

    >
    >
    > For convenience, I prefer the Acronis product. However, for fine-grained
    > control (especially from the command line version) nothing beats Norton
    > Ghost.
    >
    > I haven't used Ghost 9 - as near as I can tell it's an attempt to catch up
    > with some of the convenience features of Acronis (e.g., live backup while
    > working, mounting of a backup image as a virtual drive, etc.). However, it
    > appears to suffer somewhat from the classic Symantec problem: bloat.
    >
    > Ghost 8.2 from diskettes (remember those?) with lots of switches is what I
    > use to back up encrypted OTFE HDs (switches for MBR preservation, etc.)
    >
    > Regards,
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >

    I used an older version of Ghost to move to another hard drive but found
    it intolerable as a backup. I used Dantz Retrospect Pro instead.

    Then I wanted to have full disk images and bought Ghost 9. To my
    surprise, because I'm not too fond of symantec anymore, Ghost 9 is an
    excellent program.

    You can clone a disk. You can also create a drive image and then Ghost
    will divide that image into small enough parts to enable you to burn it
    to DVDs, or even CDs, along with a burn to an external hard drive.

    It is also very easy (and even user friendly), to restore a particular
    file or folder.

    Louise
    Louise, Jun 21, 2005
    #10
  11. Chas_G

    nemo_outis Guest

    Louise <> wrote in
    news::

    >
    >>
    >>

    > I used an older version of Ghost to move to another hard drive but
    > found it intolerable as a backup. I used Dantz Retrospect Pro
    > instead.
    >
    > Then I wanted to have full disk images and bought Ghost 9. To my
    > surprise, because I'm not too fond of symantec anymore, Ghost 9 is an
    > excellent program.
    >
    > You can clone a disk. You can also create a drive image and then
    > Ghost will divide that image into small enough parts to enable you to
    > burn it to DVDs, or even CDs, along with a burn to an external hard
    > drive.
    >
    > It is also very easy (and even user friendly), to restore a particular
    > file or folder.
    >
    > Louise
    >


    Thanks for the update.

    Regards,
    nemo_outis, Jun 21, 2005
    #11
  12. Chas_G

    optikl Guest

    Louise wrote:

    >
    > I used an older version of Ghost to move to another hard drive but found
    > it intolerable as a backup. I used Dantz Retrospect Pro instead.
    >
    > Then I wanted to have full disk images and bought Ghost 9. To my
    > surprise, because I'm not too fond of symantec anymore, Ghost 9 is an
    > excellent program.
    >
    > You can clone a disk. You can also create a drive image and then Ghost
    > will divide that image into small enough parts to enable you to burn it
    > to DVDs, or even CDs, along with a burn to an external hard drive.
    >
    > It is also very easy (and even user friendly), to restore a particular
    > file or folder.
    >
    > Louise


    You can probably thank the developers of Drive Image (PowerQuest), who
    were acquired by Symantec in December 2003. A lot of that product's
    capabilities were folded into Ghost.
    optikl, Jun 21, 2005
    #12
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. BananaPannaPoe

    Re: Norton Ghost help

    BananaPannaPoe, Jun 29, 2003, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    628
    Rover
    Jun 29, 2003
  2. ooyah

    Re: Norton Ghost help

    ooyah, Jun 29, 2003, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    495
    ooyah
    Jun 29, 2003
  3. Replies:
    0
    Views:
    901
  4. van
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    4,664
    Barry Watzman
    Oct 14, 2003
  5. Aardvark

    Re: Norton Ghost 15 Vs. Norton Save & Restore 2

    Aardvark, Mar 30, 2010, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    606
    Aardvark
    Mar 30, 2010
Loading...

Share This Page