Alright, my new computer (by the way I got those g.skill memories and returned the a-data) is almost set up, i'm still missing processor. I now have 2 hard drives, and I thought I could go for dual boot system. I, however have never before done it. I will explain how I want to do it; I have one completely new HD. I will install win7 64bit to it. I have one HD that has stuff in it that I will copy to the new one, after win7 is installed. After i have transfered the data from old HD to the brand new, I will format the old one, and install ubuntu to it. It needs to support 8GB of RAM. Does ubuntu do this natively? My questions: What linux distrobution would you suggest to me, first time user. I'll be mainly using it for backup HD, so I need the OS to be reliable (if win7 install gets corrupted, I need to access the files somehow, which is where the ubuntu / other distrobution comes in) It also needs to be user friendly. Ubuntu is just the only distro I know to be user friendly, but I'm perfectly open for suggestions. So, what would you suggest to me? How will I set up the dual boot, so that every time i boot I get to select which one out of 2 OS I want to select? Should I put my 2 HDs to RAID or keep them apart. If you need additional information for your answer, please ask as I'm not sure if I provided enough information. tl;dr version: I need to install 2 seperate OS (win7 and ubuntu most likely) on seperate hard drives, how? Which linux distrobution would you suggest that's easy to use and reliable?
Theres no need for ubuntu simply to do back ups. The best options are pretty much do do RAID, but your talking about redundancy, so this is where RAID5 usually comes in. For RAID5 you need 3 discs, and while Im not sure that they have to be the same size, I would certainly think same size drives would be best. Another option is scrap ubuntu or linux. Simply use Acronis to back up your data to your spare hard drive. If your primary drive bites the dust, all you need is a copy of a linux CD. With linux you can boot straight off a disk and never have to install it. Another possible option is convert your spare drive to a USB or Firewire drive if possible. Then back up your data to it, say once a week, and only power it on when your backing up or restoring. Since you will be able to turn the USB drive off and on, this can expand the potential life span of the drive since it is not turned on 24/7. As for linux, Id stick with Ubuntu.
Acronis sounds tempting. Are there any disadvantages in using linux cd to boot os without installing it? converting it to USB /firewire sounds far-fetched, as I don't feel like buying anything extra. So I'm now between using acronis / installing ubuntu to the disk and using it as backup. Is it easy to add new data to acronis? Or would you always have to create a new image? One reason why I thought about linux was that I can easily transfer my data to other HD on a daily basis if needed. My drives are 1TB (old one) and 750gb (new, got it free bundled with my order that was big enough) so the option with 3x same HD:s doesn't sound too nice either. If my win7 install would crash and refuse to boot, could I retrieve the data from that HD via ubuntu linux cd (without installing the OS)?
The only disadvantage of using linux/ubutu strictly in a live environment is that it will perform a bit slower then as if it were on the HDD, and none of your settings will be saved. Acronis is great. You will need to create a full back up originally, but after that, you can run an incremental back up daily if you like. Incremental, to sum it up very briefly will only add new files/data to the back up, and possibly modified files. Google it for more details. However, you still want to run a full back up about once a week if I remember correctly. Well for the sake of being through, yes, you can easily retrieve the data using just live CD. However, that all depends on the mechanical state of the drive. If the OS Crashes, your fine, but should something go wrong mechanically you have almost 0 chance of recovery. I would suggest an app like HD Inspector, Hard Disk Sentinel, or something along that lines to monitor the SMART status of the drive. This will help you be aware of the condition of the drive, although SMART status is still not a completely fool proof prediction of a drive dieing.
rubbish.. puppy loaded from cd into ram is even faster than from the hdd.. AND it has native NTFS support. settings are saved to a tiny file somewhere on the hdd, but as it's only an 88mb os I would just dump it on a small partition all it's own.. like that empty space the M$ garbage seems unable to partition? "NEEDS to support 8gb ram" .. then you NEED a 64 bit OS .. for a small boot/emergency os there is no need for all that idiocy.. puppy linux will suit your purposes splendidly.
An imaging program isn't necessarily a must however it does make life somewhat more easy,best to start making them from the moment windows is installed then another image taken after a few apps added then another after updates etc,that'll give you a base to work from & a few images with minimal software installed in case you want say a basic fresh reinstall with little or no extra stuff. Imaging software norton ghost,acronis true image or macrium reflect which is free Need a little help with imaging go here,they specialize in it help is free http://radified.com/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl What linux distro well you can sort that one out by yourself & there's only one way to do that & that's run as many that work as live cd's or dvd's so start at the link below,i will agree with scum puppy is fast as a live cd & yep i use it on a quadruple boot of xp,Sabayon KDE XBMC,Sabayon KDE & Puppy 4.31 http://distrowatch.com/
Since when was this an M$ issue? It certainly cant hurt and allows the OS to access the data faster since its all in the RAM, so seems to me it's even better to run a x64 distro then x86 under live settings.
for data recovery there's little point running a large live distro if that's all it's gonna be used for you'd be loading crap you don't need,then it comes down to cpu & front side bus speed since the rest of the ram won't get used regardless if 32 or 64bit so for the OP to install a distro for that purpose puppy is ideal as it can run from fat or ntfs as well as ext2 or 3 & most importantly has a small foot print.It can be run from USB stick as well if the comp boots from usb
Your missing the point. I wasnt even discussing ubuntu vs puppy. I havent used puppy, so I cant comment. I was strictly speaking of x64 vs x86 on a live distro. Puppy sounds good, but then again it seems there is no point in running linux for him period If the OS Disk crashes, just format it, install Windows 7. Install Acronis. Restore back up, and your good to go.
backup image is the way I went. The whole backup image thing was new to me, but seems to be a good solution.
Link below is to radified they specialize in imaging advice is free http://radified.com/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl
