Vista - Is there a Microsoft 'recommended' approach to swap BOOT disk on VISTA?

I second that. Every old DOS type copy or image program I have tried does
NOT work with the new iteration of the NTFS file system.

TrueImage HOME just works. You can't want any more than that.

--


Regards,

Richard Urban
Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User
(For email, remove the obvious from my address)



"John Barnes" <jbarnes@email.net> wrote in message
news:%239e95WQvHHA.4732@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Just a note of caution. Vista is not listed for that version of Copy
> Commander and Vista uses a different version of NTFS. Others have had
> problems down the road with copies produced with several older imaging
> programs that are not specifically Vista ready.
>
> <markharris2000@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:1183417577.475268.269790@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com...
>> Actually, the reason I asked in this forum is to prepare myself for
>> what lays ahead. I'm actually NOT complaining here, I just wanted to
>> know what to expect. When you start the process of swapping HD drives,
>> say for example at Sunday at 7PM, you kinda want to know what you need
>> on hand to complete the process. What to expect. You also want to know
>> to allow an extra 30 minutes fo phone re-activation, etc.
>>
>> Just want to know in advance. Kinda like the old recommendations to
>> 'Read all instructions entirely before you begin'.
>>
>> Anyway, I will fire up my COPY COMMANDER V9 CDROM over the next few
>> days and clone my current drive to a new drive. COPY COMMANDER V9 says
>> it is compatible with ANY operating system and it boots from the CDROM
>> and runs in Pseudo-DOS mode to assure a clean CLONE is possible.
>> Sounds like the simple hardware swap, COPY COMMANDER CLONE, followed
>> by Phone Activation and I'm golden.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>>
>> On Jul 2, 2:50 pm, "Richard Urban"
>> <richardurbanREMOVET...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> Yes! Instant death for a hard drive swap IS ridiculous. And it does
>>> occur.
>>> Talking about it here doesn't do much good. All we can do is explain why
>>> it
>>> happens.
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Richard Urban
>>> Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User
>>> (For email, remove the obvious from my address)
>>>
>>> "cquirke (MVP Windows shell/user)" <cquirken...@nospam.mvps.org> wrote
>>> in
>>> messagenews:rdqi83h2mi291i3rkik879nov7gjcta8bj@4ax.com...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> > On Mon, 2 Jul 2007 11:29:50 -0400, "Richard Urban"
>>>
>>> >>As long as you don't change out the hard drive (that in itself may
>>> >>cause a
>>> >>need for reactivation) there is a way around this. Build up your
>>> >>system to
>>> >>where you want it to be "before" you activate the system. Activate the
>>> >>system. Then make an image of your system partition using Acronis
>>> >>TrueImage
>>> >>HOME. Save the image in multiple places (on a 2nd hard drive + on an
>>> >>external hard drive + on DVD's. As long as you are restoring the image
>>> >>to
>>> >>the original hard drive, the system will just start up without having
>>> >>to
>>> >>reactivate again.
>>>
>>> > And if the HD fails? I'm using HDs with as long as a warranty I can
>>> > get (Seagate, 5 years) because I find they are a fairly common (and
>>> > very significant) point of failure.
>>>
>>> > Instant death for a HD swap is ridiculous.
>>>
>>> > Before the "weighting" shell game, you'd have to have (on paper) 4
>>> > items change, which in reality could drop down to 2 due to conjoined
>>> > items (CPU type + serial number, physical HD + volume serial number)
>>> > so already, we have a "large print giveth, small print taketh away".
>>>
>>> > Then when weighting was added (only for LAN adapter) in XP SP1 I think
>>> > it was, it was to make WPA *less* trigger-happy, particularly in the
>>> > context of laptops and docking stations. Although the total point
>>> > count went up by 2 points, the threshold was the same, so the effect
>>> > was for a retained LAN adapter to mute the effect of other changes.
>>>
>>> > And now we have this; significant changes made, causing a single item
>>> > to trigger the payload, and not a thing announced or written about it.
>>>
>>> >>------------ ----- ---- --- -- - - - -
>>> > The most accurate diagnostic instrument
>>> > in medicine is the Retrospectoscope
>>> >>------------ ----- ---- --- -- - - - -- Hide quoted text -
>>>
>>> - Show quoted text -
>>
>>
>

I also recommend Acronis for this. I have used it and it works as
previously stated. If your version of Copy Commander doesn't state Vista
ready (last few weeks and 32 bit only) I would either upgrade to the Vista
version or get Acronis. Works on both 32 and 64 bit versions.

"John Barnes" <jbarnes@email.net> wrote in message
news:%239e95WQvHHA.4732@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Just a note of caution. Vista is not listed for that version of Copy
> Commander and Vista uses a different version of NTFS. Others have had
> problems down the road with copies produced with several older imaging
> programs that are not specifically Vista ready.
>
> <markharris2000@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:1183417577.475268.269790@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com...
>> Actually, the reason I asked in this forum is to prepare myself for
>> what lays ahead. I'm actually NOT complaining here, I just wanted to
>> know what to expect. When you start the process of swapping HD drives,
>> say for example at Sunday at 7PM, you kinda want to know what you need
>> on hand to complete the process. What to expect. You also want to know
>> to allow an extra 30 minutes fo phone re-activation, etc.
>>
>> Just want to know in advance. Kinda like the old recommendations to
>> 'Read all instructions entirely before you begin'.
>>
>> Anyway, I will fire up my COPY COMMANDER V9 CDROM over the next few
>> days and clone my current drive to a new drive. COPY COMMANDER V9 says
>> it is compatible with ANY operating system and it boots from the CDROM
>> and runs in Pseudo-DOS mode to assure a clean CLONE is possible.
>> Sounds like the simple hardware swap, COPY COMMANDER CLONE, followed
>> by Phone Activation and I'm golden.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>>
>> On Jul 2, 2:50 pm, "Richard Urban"
>> <richardurbanREMOVET...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> Yes! Instant death for a hard drive swap IS ridiculous. And it does
>>> occur.
>>> Talking about it here doesn't do much good. All we can do is explain why
>>> it
>>> happens.
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Richard Urban
>>> Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User
>>> (For email, remove the obvious from my address)
>>>
>>> "cquirke (MVP Windows shell/user)" <cquirken...@nospam.mvps.org> wrote
>>> in
>>> messagenews:rdqi83h2mi291i3rkik879nov7gjcta8bj@4ax.com...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> > On Mon, 2 Jul 2007 11:29:50 -0400, "Richard Urban"
>>>
>>> >>As long as you don't change out the hard drive (that in itself may
>>> >>cause a
>>> >>need for reactivation) there is a way around this. Build up your
>>> >>system to
>>> >>where you want it to be "before" you activate the system. Activate the
>>> >>system. Then make an image of your system partition using Acronis
>>> >>TrueImage
>>> >>HOME. Save the image in multiple places (on a 2nd hard drive + on an
>>> >>external hard drive + on DVD's. As long as you are restoring the image
>>> >>to
>>> >>the original hard drive, the system will just start up without having
>>> >>to
>>> >>reactivate again.
>>>
>>> > And if the HD fails? I'm using HDs with as long as a warranty I can
>>> > get (Seagate, 5 years) because I find they are a fairly common (and
>>> > very significant) point of failure.
>>>
>>> > Instant death for a HD swap is ridiculous.
>>>
>>> > Before the "weighting" shell game, you'd have to have (on paper) 4
>>> > items change, which in reality could drop down to 2 due to conjoined
>>> > items (CPU type + serial number, physical HD + volume serial number)
>>> > so already, we have a "large print giveth, small print taketh away".
>>>
>>> > Then when weighting was added (only for LAN adapter) in XP SP1 I think
>>> > it was, it was to make WPA *less* trigger-happy, particularly in the
>>> > context of laptops and docking stations. Although the total point
>>> > count went up by 2 points, the threshold was the same, so the effect
>>> > was for a retained LAN adapter to mute the effect of other changes.
>>>
>>> > And now we have this; significant changes made, causing a single item
>>> > to trigger the payload, and not a thing announced or written about it.
>>>
>>> >>------------ ----- ---- --- -- - - - -
>>> > The most accurate diagnostic instrument
>>> > in medicine is the Retrospectoscope
>>> >>------------ ----- ---- --- -- - - - -- Hide quoted text -
>>>
>>> - Show quoted text -
>>
>>
>

On Mon, 2 Jul 2007 17:50:04 -0400, "Richard Urban"

>Yes! Instant death for a hard drive swap IS ridiculous. And it does occur.
>Talking about it here doesn't do much good. All we can do is explain why it
>happens.

We weren't even doing that, before.

I disagree; if we find something that sucks, we should hilight it.

Yes, MS not do anything if we complain, but they sure won't do
anything if we *don't* complain, and an informed public is more likely
to vote with their wallet. Maybe with more users and attention,
alternatives will improve by the time MS makes things even worse.

As it is, if Vista's terms and conditions were flat-out unacceptable,
we'd have a hard time switching away.



>------------------ ----- ---- --- -- - - - -
The rights you save may be your own
>------------------ ----- ---- --- -- - - - -

On Mon, 2 Jul 2007 20:26:11 -0400, "Richard Urban"

>I second that. Every old DOS type copy or image program I have tried does
>NOT work with the new iteration of the NTFS file system.

Does BING work?

>TrueImage HOME just works. You can't want any more than that.

Is it free? ;-)



>------------ ----- ---- --- -- - - - -
The most accurate diagnostic instrument
in medicine is the Retrospectoscope
>------------ ----- ---- --- -- - - - -

Just what is the big deal about re-activating. Even if you have to
telephone activate it is no big deal and your license is still good.

"cquirke (MVP Windows shell/user)" <cquirkenews@nospam.mvps.org> wrote in
message news:kjal83l44mftvhgvfa0fbh3o9d2d2ip3ls@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 2 Jul 2007 17:50:04 -0400, "Richard Urban"
>
>>Yes! Instant death for a hard drive swap IS ridiculous. And it does occur.
>>Talking about it here doesn't do much good. All we can do is explain why
>>it
>>happens.
>
> We weren't even doing that, before.
>
> I disagree; if we find something that sucks, we should hilight it.
>
> Yes, MS not do anything if we complain, but they sure won't do
> anything if we *don't* complain, and an informed public is more likely
> to vote with their wallet. Maybe with more users and attention,
> alternatives will improve by the time MS makes things even worse.
>
> As it is, if Vista's terms and conditions were flat-out unacceptable,
> we'd have a hard time switching away.
>
>
>
>>------------------ ----- ---- --- -- - - - -
> The rights you save may be your own
>>------------------ ----- ---- --- -- - - - -

John, you are correct. The re-activation process SHOULD be easy. But
it is NOT. I have found out with first hand experience that the MS
phone squad who handle re-activations have a very narrow script to get
to the re-activation code. They have a zillion ways to come to the
conclusion that the caller is merely PIRATING the copy of Vista,
knowlingly or unknowingly. I know. I swapped two motherboards not that
long ago (april07) and the re-activation process was a nightmare. The
second time, I needed to call back 5 times before I could find an
operator that understood that a motherboard swap was not 'installing
the license on more than one machine'. They are trained to follow a
script, to the letter. I understand that. BUT their script simply did
not allow for hardware swaps. It was a concept none of them understood
as I found out in the first 4 calls. Their script keep telling them
that the caller was trying to activate the Vista license on more than
one computer, so they wanted to transfer me to some sales channel to
buy a new copy. Finally I found an operator that understood swapping
hardware and she skipped a bunch of script steps, enabling her to re-
activate my license.

Painful...

Given that Vista phones home frequently and if a copy of Vista is installed
on two machines, it would not be long before the old activation would cause
that system to to begin shutting down (been there during beta), therefore
there is no reason for them not to activate. If it is OEM, then their
script does tie to the MOBO and it is more dicey getting them to understand
that it is a replacement based on the exception and not one based on wanting
a newer more up to date board. Sorry you had such a hassle, but many also
have reported no problem.


<markharris2000@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:1183744468.755479.33110@q75g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
>
> John, you are correct. The re-activation process SHOULD be easy. But
> it is NOT. I have found out with first hand experience that the MS
> phone squad who handle re-activations have a very narrow script to get
> to the re-activation code. They have a zillion ways to come to the
> conclusion that the caller is merely PIRATING the copy of Vista,
> knowlingly or unknowingly. I know. I swapped two motherboards not that
> long ago (april07) and the re-activation process was a nightmare. The
> second time, I needed to call back 5 times before I could find an
> operator that understood that a motherboard swap was not 'installing
> the license on more than one machine'. They are trained to follow a
> script, to the letter. I understand that. BUT their script simply did
> not allow for hardware swaps. It was a concept none of them understood
> as I found out in the first 4 calls. Their script keep telling them
> that the caller was trying to activate the Vista license on more than
> one computer, so they wanted to transfer me to some sales channel to
> buy a new copy. Finally I found an operator that understood swapping
> hardware and she skipped a bunch of script steps, enabling her to re-
> activate my license.
>
> Painful...
>

So, I put a few hours aside last night to do the swap. cabled the new
drive to a spare SATA connector, fired up Vista and installed True
Image 10. Rebooted and then ran True Image, I saw all the drives and I
went through the CLONE process.... First Manually, then Automatically.
Each time, the drive appears to be copied, the MBR appears to be
transfered, and yet when I remove the original C: and replace with the
new cloned drive, I get a screen at powerup saying that it Can Not
Start Windows Vista and wants be to go through the REPAIR process from
my original CD.

What step am I missing? The CLONED disk should just fire up and run,
requiring an activation, but should just run.

Anyone have experience with this process or something I missed?

If you plugged it into the same SATA connector as your original drive, is it
in the same relative partition on the drive?

<markharris2000@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:1184423192.027631.203950@e16g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
> So, I put a few hours aside last night to do the swap. cabled the new
> drive to a spare SATA connector, fired up Vista and installed True
> Image 10. Rebooted and then ran True Image, I saw all the drives and I
> went through the CLONE process.... First Manually, then Automatically.
> Each time, the drive appears to be copied, the MBR appears to be
> transfered, and yet when I remove the original C: and replace with the
> new cloned drive, I get a screen at powerup saying that it Can Not
> Start Windows Vista and wants be to go through the REPAIR process from
> my original CD.
>
> What step am I missing? The CLONED disk should just fire up and run,
> requiring an activation, but should just run.
>
> Anyone have experience with this process or something I missed?
>

Hi John, the original drive had a single Primary partition, and the
new cloned drive should have the same config. I guess I need to
reboot with the Windows Anytime Upgrade CD I have to see what to do
next? See if it can repair/fix it?

Stumped...



On Jul 14, 7:56 am, "John Barnes" <jbar...@email.net> wrote:
> If you plugged it into the same SATA connector as your original drive, is it
> in the same relative partition on the drive?
>