Ghost 2002 vs. Ghost 2003

Is there any big difference between the two?

Here is a chart of comparison between Ghost 7.5 and Ghost 2003.

http://www.symantec.com/region/au_nz...parison_03.pdf

Hi Falcon Speed,

Did you mean to ask of the differences between Ghost 2002 and Ghost 2003? If so, two big differences that I know of are:

1) Ghost 2003 is the first version to have a Windows interface.

2) Ghost 2003 is the first version that has the ability to write an image file to a local drive that is formatted NTFS.

*** Edit ***

I edited the thread title to change it to 2002.

Limerick

Hi Limerick,

How are you?

Yes, thanks for the correction and also thanks for the info.

How can Ghost2003 see the NTSF partition from DOS? In other words, how can it write the image file to an NTSF partition when DOS does not see NTSF. Wouldn't that go against Microsoft security issue?

Thanks

Hi again, Falcon Speed,

Sorry that I don't have any intricate details to offer as to how Ghost 2003 is able to write to NTFS from DOS. I'm content to simply accept the fact that it does. :D

As to it being a security issue with the good folks at MS, not that I am aware of. The Drive Image product has been doing this for a good while, and this capability of writing to an NTFS partition is indeed a welcome addition to the Ghost product.

Limerick

I have ghost 2002 and backup to CD's. Does this mean I should get 2003. I have XP Home.

Limerick, Thank you greatly.

BTW... Is that you in the picture? :)

Jim Simon, only if your have your drive formatted as NTSF.

It is NTSF, does this mean my backups are no good? I've never had to use one yet.

Hi Falcon Speed,

You're welcome. Yes, that is my ol' ugly mug in the picture. :p I was out in the back yard playing my mandolin one day when my wife took the shot.

Jim Simon, you have nothing to worry about as far as the NTFS issue is concerned, since you are storing your Ghost images on CD. If you wanted to create an image and store it on another partition of the same hard drive, or on a different physical hard drive, your version of Ghost could not do it if the destination drive was formatted NTFS. (Only Ghost 2003 can do so.)

That being said, I would not be comfortable at all in relying on a backup system that I had never tested. When the proverbial chips are down, you don't want to get any unpleasant surprises when you are desperate to restore, only to find that your backup is faulty. I would encourage you to do some testing, to ensure that all is well with your backup regimen...

Limerick

Thanks Limerick for the info.

I know I should test the backups but I've been just a little hesitant, afraid of wiping everything out.

Limerick,

Actually, I just thought of two more questions which I know you probably have the answers to them.

First, what is the main purpose of the window in Ghost 2003? Is it so that it allow the user to make an image of the partition or disk while window is still running? If that is true, what will happen if the partition being image constantly gets new files or files being deleted?

Second, Ghost 2003 has two other options that I have never seen before. "Run Ghost Interactively" and "Create Virtual Partition" What are they?

Third, thank you for your time.:)

Hi Falcon Speed,

The Windows interface in Ghost 2003 is primarily for the benefit of the user. Since many enthusiasts do virtually everything "in Windows" these days, the world of DOS can be daunting for many. Even when using the Windows interface to set up a Ghost task, Ghost 2003 then boots to DOS and carries out the instructions that you have given it. If you choose the "Run Ghost Interactively" option, the program simply boots to DOS and you then have to manually instruct Ghost to do whatever you want. (Like older versions of Ghost require.)

I haven't yet used the "Create Virtual Partition" choice. However, a couple of months ago, I ran into a configuration issue that Ghost 2003 could not work with. I had set up a machine for my son that was a "triple-boot" setup. Each of the three operating systems was in its own Primary partition. Then I had an Extended (with one Logical) that all three OSes could access.

When trying to use Ghost 2003 from within Windows, it errored out with a message that it was not able to create a virtual partition. (No surprise, since I had already used the four allotments, with three Primary and one Extended.) The program still worked fine when booted to DOS and utilized interactively...

Limerick

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Falcon Speed
How can Ghost2003 see the NTSF partition from DOS? In other words, how can it write the image file to an NTSF partition when DOS does not see NTSF. Wouldn't that go against Microsoft security issue?

---

What security issue? The only thing which enforces NTFS permissions is Windows itself - if you boot to DOS, anything which knows how to read the NFTS structure (like Ghost 2003, or NTFSDOS at www.sysinternals.com) can read and write.

Limerick, thank you for being so informative like always.

Tuttle, I thought NTFS was created for security issue. Well, I got that info from my friend. He told me that NTSF is more secure than Fat32. Maybe I misunderstood him.

This might be off the track from this post a bit, but what are the advantages of formatting a partition NTFS rather than Fat32? I know speed is one issue and less defragment is the other one.

Thanks, will do research on NTSF and Fat32

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Falcon Speed
How can Ghost2003 see the NTSF partition from DOS? In other words, how can it write the image file to an NTSF partition when DOS does not see NTSF. Wouldn't that go against Microsoft security issue?

Thanks

---

Not familiar with all the details, but it may be like Drive Image, which uses Caldera DOS...a DOS "emulator" of sorts that can read NTFS.

Going have to check into this Drive Image Software! :D

Thanks Bistro