Backup vs. Clone
So, some people say, "use Backup". Others say, "use Clone". Backup and Clone are two different animals. They both do kind of the same thing.
They move "stuff" from one location to another. But what stuff and how.
For someone to simply say, in my opinion Backup is better than Clone, and nothing else, is a meaningless statement. In my experience using almost any "backup" systems, some "stuff" is always ommitted, in the backup giving you a kind of restore but not a perftect restore. "Stuff" can include: files, folders, locations of files and folders, drivers, settings, registry (also a file), directory structures, attributes, permissions, system files, etc. A lot of "stuff". Clone on the other hand, implies a kind of mirror image, where everything is saved. That may not be the case with TrueImage, I don't know but that is the implication with Clone.
Forget for a minute, why someone might want one or the other. What exactly are the differences?
Exactly what "stuff" does Clone move?
Exactly what "stuff" does Backup move?
Exactly what "stuff" isn't moved by either?
If you believe Clone is better than Backup or visa versa, give specific details on why? If you believe they have different purposes, give specific details on why?
Thanks,
- Accedi per poter commentare