🚀 go-pugleaf

There's no such thing as a FAST backup utility, but Acronis is certainly 
faster than Windows Backup. And more secure, easier to restore whole 
partitions or just versions of files, etc. And, as you'll note here, the 
Home version supports 64-bit.
http://www.acronis.com/homecomputing/products/trueimage/requirements.html

Try the 15-day trial (though it certainly isn't long enough to decently work 
out a backup system, it will give you an idea of what speeds you might 
attain), and if you decide to buy, get it here. Cheaper:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&DEPA=0&Description=acronis&x=15&y=26

TinyURL for above link = http://tinyurl.com/5cad33

Another one I'd consider is:
Image for Windows
http://www.terabyteunlimited.com/image-for-windows.htm
However, note this line at the bottom of the product description:
"Compatible with Win64 (x64) (AMD64/EM64T) but not with IA64, GPTs, nor 
Dynamic Drives."

And while I hate Symantec to an unhealthy degree, many users swear by Ghost.

-- 
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
http://grystmill.com

"wrreisen2" <wrreisen2@yahoo.com> wrote in message 
news:5f972ebc-b1d6-404d-b622-d4d6d523b955@j22g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> Please recommend backup software for xp x64 that is quick. I have been
> using the built in Windows backup software but it is so slow in
> comparison to just copying and pasting folders onto a backup disk. The
> problem with just copying and pasting is that this process is often
> interupted because the occasional file in these folders can be in use
> and stops the copying process. Is there software that is as fast as
> just copying and pasting folders in explorer but isn't likely to be
> interupted?
>
> Thanks for any advice? 

wrreisen2 <wrreisen2@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:5f972ebc-b1d6-404d-b622-d4d6d523b955@j22g2000hsf.googlegroups.com: 

> Please recommend backup software for xp x64 that is quick. I have been
> using the built in Windows backup software but it is so slow in
> comparison to just copying and pasting folders onto a backup disk. The
> problem with just copying and pasting is that this process is often
> interupted because the occasional file in these folders can be in use
> and stops the copying process. Is there software that is as fast as
> just copying and pasting folders in explorer but isn't likely to be
> interupted?
> 
> Thanks for any advice?

If you don't have any documents open and it says a file you're backing
up is open then you're backing up wrong to begin with. You backup *only*
your documents, not windows, not installed programs, just *your*
documents full stop. 

-- 
(setq (chuck nil)  car(chuck) )

On Aug 27, 11:51 am, wrreisen2 <wrreis...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Please recommend backup software for xp x64 that is quick. I have been
> using the built in Windows backup software but it is so slow in
> comparison to just copying and pasting folders onto a backup disk. The
> problem with just copying and pasting is that this process is often
> interupted because the occasional file in these folders can be in use
> and stops the copying process. Is there software that is as fast as
> just copying and pasting folders in explorer but isn't likely to be
> interupted?

Google is your friend.

Google "copying file in use" ....

http://alt.pluralsight.com/wiki/default.aspx/Craig/HoboCopy.html

Baloney. Purely ignorant BS.

And why the Follow-up setting? More ignorance? Header is fixed.

-- 
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
http://grystmill.com

"chuckcar" <chuck@nil.car> wrote in message 
news:Xns9B079F0A5B7DFchucknilcar@127.0.0.1...
> wrreisen2 <wrreisen2@yahoo.com> wrote in
> news:5f972ebc-b1d6-404d-b622-d4d6d523b955@j22g2000hsf.googlegroups.com:
>
>> Please recommend backup software for xp x64 that is quick. I have been
>> using the built in Windows backup software but it is so slow in
>> comparison to just copying and pasting folders onto a backup disk. The
>> problem with just copying and pasting is that this process is often
>> interupted because the occasional file in these folders can be in use
>> and stops the copying process. Is there software that is as fast as
>> just copying and pasting folders in explorer but isn't likely to be
>> interupted?
>>
>> Thanks for any advice?
>
> If you don't have any documents open and it says a file you're backing
> up is open then you're backing up wrong to begin with. You backup *only*
> your documents, not windows, not installed programs, just *your*
> documents full stop.
>
> -- 
> (setq (chuck nil)  car(chuck) ) 

Yes, Google is your friend, but only if you are asking the right question, 
and you have the question wrong. The question was: "Please recommend backup 
software for xp x64 that is quick."

-- 
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
http://grystmill.com

"Harry" <harryooopotter@hotmail.com> wrote in message 
news:7771bcf8-f97a-4bc3-ae12-1bec66708d61@t54g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
On Aug 27, 11:51 am, wrreisen2 <wrreis...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Please recommend backup software for xp x64 that is quick. I have been
> using the built in Windows backup software but it is so slow in
> comparison to just copying and pasting folders onto a backup disk. The
> problem with just copying and pasting is that this process is often
> interupted because the occasional file in these folders can be in use
> and stops the copying process. Is there software that is as fast as
> just copying and pasting folders in explorer but isn't likely to be
> interupted?

Google is your friend.

Google "copying file in use" ....

http://alt.pluralsight.com/wiki/default.aspx/Craig/HoboCopy.html 

Gary S. Terhune wrote...
>
>Yes, Google is your friend, but only if you are asking the right question, 
>and you have the question wrong. The question was: "Please recommend backup 
>software for xp x64 that is quick."

The OP's context of "quick" was that copy was slowed down by
failure due to "file in use."

If you use this context of "quick," it will be quicker.

"Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in
news:Odosw$ICJHA.1224@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl: 

> Yes, Google is your friend, but only if you are asking the right
> question, and you have the question wrong. The question was: "Please
> recommend backup software for xp x64 that is quick."
> 
You want a quick answer, I'll give you a quick answer: pkzip. There,
happy now? 


-- 
(setq (chuck nil)  car(chuck) )

"Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in
news:OUyjT#ICJHA.524@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl: 

"chuckcar" <chuck@nil.car> wrote in message 
news:Xns9B079F0A5B7DFchucknilcar@127.0.0.1...
> wrreisen2 <wrreisen2@yahoo.com> wrote in
> news:5f972ebc-b1d6-404d-b622-d4d6d523b955@j22g2000hsf.googlegroups.com:
>
>> Please recommend backup software for xp x64 that is quick. I have
>> been using the built in Windows backup software but it is so slow in
>> comparison to just copying and pasting folders onto a backup disk.
>> The problem with just copying and pasting is that this process is
>> often interupted because the occasional file in these folders can be
>> in use and stops the copying process. Is there software that is as
>> fast as just copying and pasting folders in explorer but isn't likely
>> to be interupted?
>>
>> Thanks for any advice?
>
> If you don't have any documents open and it says a file you're backing
> up is open then you're backing up wrong to begin with. You backup
> *only* your documents, not windows, not installed programs, just
> *your* documents full stop.
>

> Baloney. Purely ignorant BS.
> 
Completely useless criticism and completely wrong as well. You *install*
programs, you don't just copy them onto the hard drive. But then again,
I'm supposed to accept the word of a Top-posting OE droid? Hardly. 

> And why the Follow-up setting?

Because *that's* the group I read. Restored to normal behavior.
> 


-- 
(setq (chuck nil)  car(chuck) )

wrreisen2 wrote:

> Please recommend backup software for xp x64 that is quick. I have been
> using the built in Windows backup software but it is so slow in
> comparison to just copying and pasting folders onto a backup disk. The
> problem with just copying and pasting is that this process is often
> interupted because the occasional file in these folders can be in use
> and stops the copying process. Is there software that is as fast as
> just copying and pasting folders in explorer but isn't likely to be
> interupted?
>
> Thanks for any advice?

http://www.arkeia.com/

I answered the OP's question, plain and simple. Copy/Paste is NOT a form of 
"backup software." Get your terminology straight.

-- 
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
http://grystmill.com

"Harry331" <harryooopotter@hotmail.co_> wrote in message 
news:Somtk.227367$gc5.150224@pd7urf2no...
> Gary S. Terhune wrote...
>>
>>Yes, Google is your friend, but only if you are asking the right question,
>>and you have the question wrong. The question was: "Please recommend 
>>backup
>>software for xp x64 that is quick."
>
> The OP's context of "quick" was that copy was slowed down by
> failure due to "file in use."
>
> If you use this context of "quick," it will be quicker.
>
>
> 

Gary S. Terhune wrote...
>
>I answered the OP's question, plain and simple. Copy/Paste is NOT a form of 
>"backup software." Get your terminology straight.

And what has your answer anything to do with my answer?

What do you mean by my terminoloy ? I mentioned Google.
I mentioned "file in use." I did not mention "backup software."

What the fuck is wrong with you?

Gary S. Terhune wrote...
>
>I answered the OP's question, plain and simple. Copy/Paste is NOT a form of 
>"backup software." Get your terminology straight.

So you want to stick your fucking head to the OP's subject line.
And you mentioned that "There's no such thing as a FAST backup utility."
Why the fuck did you mentioned Acronis?

You are slapping your own fucking mouth!!!

Gary S. Terhune wrote...
>
>I answered the OP's question, plain and simple. Copy/Paste is NOT a form of 
>"backup software." Get your terminology straight.

Google "definition backup software."

http://www.google.ca/search?
hl=en&defl=en&q=define:Backup+software&sa=X&oi=glossary_definition&ct=title

   Definitions of Backup software on the Web:

   Backup software is software designed to backup data for the purpose 
   of having a second copy of an original source in case of damage to 
   the ...

Copy/Paste does not contradict this definition.

Why don't you get your terminology straight?
The laugh is on you!

Gary S. Terhune wrote...
>
>I answered the OP's question, plain and simple. 

Here is the OP's question.

   Is there software that is as fast as just copying and pasting 
   folders in explorer but isn't likely to be interupted?

Your answer to the OP:
    but Acronis is certainly faster than Windows Backup. And 
    more secure, easier to restore whole partitions or just versions 
    of files, etc.

So, the OP did not say "Windows Backup"; the OP mentioned "explorer."
The OP did not ask for "secure." The OP did not ask for "partitions."
The OP did not ask for "easirt to restore."

Your answer was actually Off Topic.
Fuck off, idiot!!!

Nope. Not interested in a stupid 
dictionary-definitions-versus-real-world-usage argument.

-- 
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
http://grystmill.com

"Harry331" <harryooopotter@hotmail.co_> wrote in message 
news:sbqtk.228113$gc5.159936@pd7urf2no...
> Gary S. Terhune wrote...
>>
>>I answered the OP's question, plain and simple. Copy/Paste is NOT a form 
>>of
>>"backup software." Get your terminology straight.
>
> Google "definition backup software."
>
> http://www.google.ca/search?
> hl=en&defl=en&q=define:Backup+software&sa=X&oi=glossary_definition&ct=title
>
>   Definitions of Backup software on the Web:
>
>   Backup software is software designed to backup data for the purpose
>   of having a second copy of an original source in case of damage to
>   the ...
>
> Copy/Paste does not contradict this definition.
>
> Why don't you get your terminology straight?
> The laugh is on you!
>
>
> 

On Aug 27, 7:51 pm, wrreisen2 <wrreis...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Please recommend backup software for xp x64 that is quick. I have been
> using the built in Windows backup software but it is so slow in
> comparison to just copying and pasting folders onto a backup disk. The
> problem with just copying and pasting is that this process is often
> interupted because the occasional file in these folders can be in use
> and stops the copying process. Is there software that is as fast as
> just copying and pasting folders in explorer but isn't likely to be
> interupted?
>
> Thanks for any advice?

To overcome the copy and paste problem use a DOS window and xcopy.  I
do this as part of my backup procedure by scheduling a call to a batch
file that does an xcopy of critical files to a different PC.

Backup speed is only part of the equation.  The most important aspect
is that  backup must be done on a very regular basis.  Anything added
or changed between backups can be lost.  I would therefore rate
automation before speed.  I often get customers saying they were going
to backup their system next week.

I am very found of the many online backup systems one can get.  They
monitor 24x7 and backup your selected files automatically.  Unless you
are generating large video files, online backup, once the main part is
loaded, is reasonably quick.  An initial upload may take a few weeks.

You need two levels of backup to cope with a total drive failure. The
first is an image of your drive such as generated by Ghost or Acronis,
then you need a responsive, very up to date incremental backup  of
your data files that are changing.  One copy of the data should always
be in a different location eg home, office, mother in law,  online
storage, always subject to any security issues on the data

Michael
www.cnwrecovery.com

On Aug 28, 9:31 pm, "mscotgr...@aol.com" <mscotgr...@aol.com> wrote:
> On Aug 27, 7:51 pm, wrreisen2 <wrreis...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > Please recommend backup software for xp x64 that is quick. I have been
> > using the built in Windows backup software but it is so slow in
> > comparison to just copying and pasting folders onto a backup disk. The
> > problem with just copying and pasting is that this process is often
> > interupted because the occasional file in these folders can be in use
> > and stops the copying process. Is there software that is as fast as
> > just copying and pasting folders in explorer but isn't likely to be
> > interupted?
>
> > Thanks for any advice?
>
> To overcome the copy and paste problem use a DOS window and xcopy.  I
> do this as part of my backup procedure by scheduling a call to a batch
> file that does an xcopy of critical files to a different PC.
>
> Backup speed is only part of the equation.  The most important aspect
> is that  backup must be done on a very regular basis.  Anything added
> or changed between backups can be lost.  I would therefore rate
> automation before speed.  I often get customers saying they were going
> to backup their system next week.
>
> I am very found of the many online backup systems one can get.  They
> monitor 24x7 and backup your selected files automatically.  Unless you
> are generating large video files, online backup, once the main part is
> loaded, is reasonably quick.  An initial upload may take a few weeks.
>
> You need two levels of backup to cope with a total drive failure. The
> first is an image of your drive such as generated by Ghost or Acronis,
> then you need a responsive, very up to date incremental backup  of
> your data files that are changing.  One copy of the data should always
> be in a different location eg home, office, mother in law,  online
> storage, always subject to any security issues on the data
>
> Michaelwww.cnwrecovery.com

What if your drive fails and you then find the online backup company
went out of business the day before?

On Aug 28, 10:45 am, Llanzlan Klazmon <bill.m.tho...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Aug 28, 9:31 pm, "mscotgr...@aol.com" <mscotgr...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Aug 27, 7:51 pm, wrreisen2 <wrreis...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > Please recommend backup software for xp x64 that is quick. I have been
> > > using the built in Windows backup software but it is so slow in
> > > comparison to just copying and pasting folders onto a backup disk. The
> > > problem with just copying and pasting is that this process is often
> > > interupted because the occasional file in these folders can be in use
> > > and stops the copying process. Is there software that is as fast as
> > > just copying and pasting folders in explorer but isn't likely to be
> > > interupted?
>
> > > Thanks for any advice?
>
> > To overcome the copy and paste problem use a DOS window and xcopy.  I
> > do this as part of my backup procedure by scheduling a call to a batch
> > file that does an xcopy of critical files to a different PC.
>
> > Backup speed is only part of the equation.  The most important aspect
> > is that  backup must be done on a very regular basis.  Anything added
> > or changed between backups can be lost.  I would therefore rate
> > automation before speed.  I often get customers saying they were going
> > to backup their system next week.
>
> > I am very found of the many online backup systems one can get.  They
> > monitor 24x7 and backup your selected files automatically.  Unless you
> > are generating large video files, online backup, once the main part is
> > loaded, is reasonably quick.  An initial upload may take a few weeks.
>
> > You need two levels of backup to cope with a total drive failure. The
> > first is an image of your drive such as generated by Ghost or Acronis,
> > then you need a responsive, very up to date incremental backup  of
> > your data files that are changing.  One copy of the data should always
> > be in a different location eg home, office, mother in law,  online
> > storage, always subject to any security issues on the data
>
> > Michaelwww.cnwrecovery.com
>
> What if your drive fails and you then find the online backup company
> went out of business the day before?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

It is why you need multiple backups.  The same case applies if you
backup to an external drive and they both fail, or you have a
lightening strike taking them both out.

The more backups, the less likely it is that they will all fail the
same time.  Not getting round to backing up is in my opinion the
greatest risk, hence the requirement for automation.

Michael

On Wed, 27 Aug 2008 22:46:23 -0700, "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote:

>Nope. Not interested in a stupid 
>dictionary-definitions-versus-real-world-usage argument.

Valid point but in this case, there is a difference.  Copy/paste may
miss hidden files or open files, etc.. .   Regardless tho, every is
entitled to backup (or not) files as they choose whether or not it is
the correct method.

> Gary S. Terhune wrote...
>>
>> Yes, Google is your friend, but only if you are asking the right
>> question, and you have the question wrong. The question was: "Please
>> recommend backup software for xp x64 that is quick."
>
> The OP's context of "quick" was that copy was slowed down by
> failure due to "file in use."
>
> If you use this context of "quick," it will be quicker.

Ghost 14 is the quickest I've seen.  True Image was good too but not as 
fast; I tried them both & opted for Ghost since they had their update 
campaign still going ($50).

Anything used to back up the system that cannot use the shadow copy 
services does not produce a system backup. 

Shear hogwash! Ever hear of BounceBack?
"Twayne" <nobody@devnull.spamcop.net> wrote in message 
news:eZ7IXwSCJHA.4576@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> Gary S. Terhune wrote...
>>>
>>> Yes, Google is your friend, but only if you are asking the right
>>> question, and you have the question wrong. The question was: "Please
>>> recommend backup software for xp x64 that is quick."
>>
>> The OP's context of "quick" was that copy was slowed down by
>> failure due to "file in use."
>>
>> If you use this context of "quick," it will be quicker.
>
> Ghost 14 is the quickest I've seen.  True Image was good too but not as 
> fast; I tried them both & opted for Ghost since they had their update 
> campaign still going ($50).
>
> Anything used to back up the system that cannot use the shadow copy 
> services does not produce a system backup.
> 

On Wed, 27 Aug 2008 12:19:15 -0700, "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote:

>There's no such thing as a FAST backup utility, but Acronis is certainly 
>faster than Windows Backup. And more secure, easier to restore whole 
>partitions or just versions of files, etc. And, as you'll note here, the 
>Home version supports 64-bit.
>http://www.acronis.com/homecomputing/products/trueimage/requirements.html
>
>Try the 15-day trial (though it certainly isn't long enough to decently work 
>out a backup system, it will give you an idea of what speeds you might 
>attain), and if you decide to buy, get it here. Cheaper:
>http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&DEPA=0&Description=acronis&x=15&y=26
>
>TinyURL for above link = http://tinyurl.com/5cad33
>
>Another one I'd consider is:
>Image for Windows
>http://www.terabyteunlimited.com/image-for-windows.htm
>However, note this line at the bottom of the product description:
>"Compatible with Win64 (x64) (AMD64/EM64T) but not with IA64, GPTs, nor 
>Dynamic Drives."
>
>And while I hate Symantec to an unhealthy degree, many users swear by Ghost.

I'll second Acronis. I use True Image Echo Workstation, both in live mode
while the OS is loaded and from a memory stick. First class solution and so
much better than Ghost, which I use at work.

"Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message 
news:%23hbDInHCJHA.4884@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> There's no such thing as a FAST backup utility, but Acronis is certainly 
> faster than Windows Backup. And more secure, easier to restore whole 
> partitions or just versions of files, etc. And, as you'll note here, the 
> Home version supports 64-bit.
> http://www.acronis.com/homecomputing/products/trueimage/requirements.html
>
> Try the 15-day trial (though it certainly isn't long enough to decently 
> work out a backup system, it will give you an idea of what speeds you 
> might attain), and if you decide to buy, get it here. Cheaper:
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&DEPA=0&Description=acronis&x=15&y=26
>
> TinyURL for above link = http://tinyurl.com/5cad33
>
> Another one I'd consider is:
> Image for Windows
> http://www.terabyteunlimited.com/image-for-windows.htm
> However, note this line at the bottom of the product description:
> "Compatible with Win64 (x64) (AMD64/EM64T) but not with IA64, GPTs, nor 
> Dynamic Drives."
>
> And while I hate Symantec to an unhealthy degree, many users swear by 
> Ghost.
>
> -- 
> Gary S. Terhune
> MS-MVP Shell/User
> http://grystmill.com
>
> "wrreisen2" <wrreisen2@yahoo.com> wrote in message 
> news:5f972ebc-b1d6-404d-b622-d4d6d523b955@j22g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
>> Please recommend backup software for xp x64 that is quick. I have been
>> using the built in Windows backup software but it is so slow in
>> comparison to just copying and pasting folders onto a backup disk. The
>> problem with just copying and pasting is that this process is often
>> interupted because the occasional file in these folders can be in use
>> and stops the copying process. Is there software that is as fast as
>> just copying and pasting folders in explorer but isn't likely to be
>> interupted?
>>
>> Thanks for any advice?


I can second the recommendation of Acronis having just used Home v10.0.4940 
to backup my Vista Ultimate x64 setup. As for speed, Acronis is no faster or 
slower than any other backup utility I've used in the past (Ghost, Drive 
Image, etc.).