I recently upgraded from Vista Home Premium to Windows 7 Home Premium (much to my relief).
Before this upgrade, I used Acronis True Image to image my system to a USB HDD, on a regular basis. However, I now discover that Windows 7 HP has a built-in imaging function, as well as its data backup facility.
Has anyone restored their system from an image created by W7? I'm interested to know whether the process is as reliable and effective as ATI.
I use the Win7 system image to back up all my pcs and have had to use it to restore the system several times and it's always worked perfectly.
Depending upon how much data you have it can take a little while to backup though (took over an hour for 300gb the other day, although that's probably because I was backing up via USB). More importantly though, it's free!
One is that the W7 imaging function takes a lot longer than ATI to backup the system.
The other, from a couple of people, is that - when a restore is needed - it works fine.
I have certainly made the necessary rescue disk to boot the restore function in the event of a system boot failure.
I tend to image my system in the evening, when I've finished using the computer. So, to be honest, it doesn't much matter to me whether the process takes one hour or three hours.
All of this tends to suggest that I can have confidence in the Windows imaging system.
BUT - I have (I think) discovered one thing that changes my view of that. So far as I can tell, the only option in the W7 imaging system is to have the new image overwrite the old one. I regard this as very insecure, because it leaves you without a fall-back position.
Or have I missed something? Can anyone confirm or refute this view, please?