How to facilitate reinstallation of the Windows XPthe Standartny way of reinstallation when Windows and each program are rearranged on - separateness, it is quite inconvenient. In - the first, it occupies fair amount of time (as a rule, several hours), and in - the second, it is tiresome - again to enter the same values what were already entered a floor - years (month? week? hour?) back.
And programmers met requirements of the working people. There were programs for cloning of disks. What is it? When you installed and adjusted the system, all data remain on the winchester in the form of files. If to create the exact copy of this disk and to replace disks in your computer, then the system will work as before. But the winchester - piece rather expensive and to buy the second only in order that it lay somewhere in a table on a reinstallation case - it is uninteresting. Again - there is a problem of copying of the changing data. One version of the decision was offered for use in computers where any stops are undesirable, for example, on servers. There, for ensuring reliability, data can remain not on one disk, and on two. I.e. two winchesters work “ in parallel “ and in case some of them fails, then data are read from another, and to the operator the warning that it is worth replacing a faulty disk is issued. Certainly, in reality it is slightly more difficult, but the principle such: a simultaneous data recording on different physical carriers (the probability of simultaneous failure of two disks is very small).
But this way as it was already noted, is expensive. And if is able to afford to buy firms for which every minute of idle time of the server means losses “ spare “ disk, usual “ house “ the user, as a rule, is not present. So to it and to suffer, doing all by hands?! No, it is simpler and simpler: if we have no need to keep operability of system even at failures (and in house conditions such requirement practically never arises), then nobody will prevent to stop the computer, to restore a disk and to start the computer again.
Perhaps, you already noticed some error in logic: strictly speaking, these two ways solve a different problem. In case of the server safety of data at a physical exit of one of disks out of operation is ensured (that does not rescue from need of system recovery at all if it is broken it “ logic “ for example, if after installation of some program system files were rewritten). In case of the home computer, we speak about system recovery if physically disks continue to work. Just I wanted to show a little how some idea can develop and change.
But we will return to the home computer. As we already found out - everything simply. It is necessary to establish and customize system, and then to make the copy of a disk. Then, at emergence of problems, we from this copy will restore the original. But just it only in the theory. In - the first, it is necessary to think up something with saving data, and in - the second the program which would create this copy of a disk is necessary and restored a disk. It is possible, of course, to try to manage simple copying of the necessary directories, but this way will not help with a case any “ system “ failures of a disk. Besides, there will be some problems with restoration: when copying in DOS long names will be lost and they should be restored hands, and when copying in Windows the system will not allow to rewrite some files. Generally, with the program it is more convenient!
And such programs were not slow to appear! One of them - Backup is engaged in copying and recovery of the necessary files and directories, at the same time arriving enough “ intellectually “ so you should not care for safety of long names of files. This program is quite convenient for “ daily system recovery “ - i.e. in case you had nothing especially serious, but the system for some reason began to behave not really well. Other, more powerful programs, it is ASR and Norton Ghost. ASR was written at us at work for internal needs in due time (that means lack of any interface :), but it was rather convenient for use and in many other cases. Norton Ghost - production of the Symantec company - possesses considerably bigger functionality (in particular, allows to clone system on disks of other volume and to clone NT, replacing identifiers) and quite convenient interface. The difference in the price is quite notable too - ASR free, and Norton Ghost costs $65 though in our country where the standard price of programs of $3 for 640 MB it not essentially.
Both of these programs are engaged in the fact that they create an image of a disk (the file in which information on everything is stored that is at you on a disk) and allow to restore a disk from this image. If you change a configuration of system not really often, then it is very convenient to keep an image on CD (the benefit, to write down a disk now not a problem) - in case of some problems or, say, acquisition of a new disk, the system recovery takes only a few minutes. It is natural that at the same time it is necessary to keep the data on some other disk and to regularly keep backup copies - the image of these data does not contain!]