Acronis TI Home 2009 and number of tib files
I used the boot disk (of Acronis TI Home 2009) today to make an entire system image of my hard drive. I ended up with one tib file that was about 30 GB. I have used this software in the past and each time, I have always only ended up with one tib file for a single system image of my hard drive.
Now, later on today, I used the same boot disk to image a family member's hard drive. Oddly, after completing the imaging process (using this same boot disk to start the process) on their pc, I ended up up with around 9 tib files for a single backup system image file.
My family member's pc has more data on it versus my own. Maybe 3 to 4 times as much with all the video. However, the total hard drive space on their pc is not over about 150 GB.
So what gives. Why did the system image for my own pc only create one tib file versus the same process on someone eles' pc making 9 or 10 tib files for a single hard drive image?
Does Acronis have a limit on the number of gigabytes that fit into a single tib file? Is that why I ended up with so many tib files on my family member's pc versus a single tib file on my own pc? Thanks for any replies.
Thanks for the reply. Yes, my hard drive is formatted with NTFS (clean install of Win 7). I think Windows (by default) automatically creates a 'very' small hidden partition on a hard drive (even when you don't ask to partition anything). That is the situation on my pc (with the very small automatic partition in FAT32 and again the main area formatted in NTFS.
My family member's pc is also formatted with NTFS with a Dell factory partition of windows (as it was when the pc came out of the box a year ago--formatted in FAT32 I believe for that Dell factory image). So this computer had 3 partitions, the main C drive, the small hidden partition that all windows seem to have, plus that third partition holding the Dell factory image.
When I backed up my family member's pc, I imaged the entire drive to include all partitions. Obviously the vast majority of the disk space (even on this computer) is the main usable area, which is NTFS. So again, I just thought it was very odd to get this many tib files on my family member's pc. I appreciate any further feedback.
Scott:
It doesn't matter whether the partitions in the image are FAT32 or NTFS. All that matters is the format of the disk where you stored the image file. Was it an external USB disk, by chance? Many of these are pre-formatted at the factory as FAT32.
For your family member's PC was the drive where you directed the image to (the destination drive) FAT32 or NTFS? What are the multiple image sizes? As Mark pointed out the images on FAT32 will have an ~ 4GB size.
On my computer, I used my own 250 GB premium edition of Western Digital external hard drive (called My Book). This external hard drive is a couple of years old and it was formatted in NTFS. As I recall, it automatically came formatted that way straight out of the box. Each time I have ever made a full system image of my computer, it has 'always' only created one tib file. My C drive is currently indicating 46.3 space used on the hard drive. The tib file (made through Acronis) that I just created (for my pc) is a total size of 26.1
As for my family member's external hard drive, I don't have it at home with me. However, I would assume it is also formatted in NTFS since it is a newer model (purchased only a year ago). It is a 500GB Western Digital external hard drive. Assumptions aside, I can verify that is 'is' NTFS, just like my older one that I use at my house. I will verify that though and post back. However, I would be surprised to learn that a newer version of WS external media would have now been formatted in FAT32 but again I will verify. Thanks for your feedback and any further thoughts.
FWIW, I purchased a 500GB WD External HD about four months ago. It was formatted FAT32. I had the same issue. My initial image backup was split into several files. Someone here helped me with that. Reformatted NTFS and now I get a single image file. I'd bet that's the underlying cause here, also.
Yes, I found out that was the issue. The WD 500GB external HD was formatted FAT32. Why in the world would they ship an external harddrive now days formatted in FAT32?? It makes no sense at all for a 500GB drive. Can anyone figure that one out?
Now, I will need to go back over to my family member's house to help them reformat the external harddrive, and do another image all over again. I am glad I posted here because it never even occurred to me to look at the format type on that WD 500GB external HD when I was over there doing the image.
I just knew something was strange when I saw 9 or 10 tib files for a single system image.
P.S. Until I get a chance to get back over to my family member's house, does anyone know if the existing image I did (which created 9 or 10 tib files in FAT32) even be a valid system image? Their computer is a modern one that obviously is formatted in NTFS on the internal drive. So I don't know if you can mount an image (in FAT32 mode) back on an internal hard drive that is NTFS) in the event of an emergency need.
The image created on the FAT32 formatted drive would be just as valid as one created on an NTFS formatted drive. TI knows the splits go together and handles it automatically. It can be mounted, explored, restored, validated, etc.
Scott:
Manufacturers used to use FAT32 because it was compatible out of the box with Windows, Linux, and MAC OS. There is no longer any reason to do this.
Thanks for your comments. Given the fact that my family member's external hard drive is only 1 year old, I was very surprised to learn it was formatted in FAT32 out of the factory. In any case, I am glad to learn those individual FAT32 files would mount back on a modern PC with an internal drive formatted in NTFS.
I am going to reformat that external HD though when I get a chance to get back over to my family member's home. From the other poster's comments, I understand they sometimes format out of the box in FAT32 mode to accommodate all types of OS's and computer types. However, in this day in age, I was still surprised to learn this since NTFS seems to be the standard on most large disks all over.
Well, believe it or not, some people are still using Win 98, so they need Fat32.
Hard to believe that some people are still using Win 98, but I am sure it's true.
I still have a 386SX computer running DOS 6.22 that's setup with custom software. Until it dies or is otherwise "forced" out of service, it's staying.
I still have a 386SX computer running DOS 6.22 that's setup with custom software. Until it dies or is otherwise "forced" out of service, it's staying.
Don't tell me .... you're still using 5.25 floppies. LOL.