Problem imaging Inspiron 7500 hd for replacement

Question

I have an Inspiron 7500 w/ Windows 2000. Original hd was 4.8 gig. Bought Dell compatible 30 gig hd for upgrade. Techs at CompUSA can't image the hd. They say they can image individual files but not the applications. They say the hd is 'noisy.' I have no idea what's going on. The computer was working perfectly. I just needed a larger hard drive. Is there anything you know of peculiar to any of the Dell system files that would cause a problem w/ imaging? They're now saying that they need to install the Dell system disk files and Win2K on the new hd since they can't image them. Also, Win2K was an upgrade from Win98 that the system came with. Is there anything on the Dell system disk that's going to cause a problem w/ Win2K? Thanks for any insight you can provide.

kc_kitties · Answer

The CompUSA techs are saying they can't 'see' some of the system files that would allow them to image the os and applications. What does this indicate to you?

DELL-BobT · Answer

kc_kitties,

Thank you for using the Dell Community Forum.

I have personal experience with NortonGhost. You should see if you can image the system using this program. Another consideration may be to install the drive, assuming the BIOS can see all 30 GB, and copy the data from the smaller drive. Again, from personal experience, I know of some third-party hardware that can help with this. Please let me know if this helps.

GreyMack · Answer

It sounds like they are referring to the process of copying files rather than using imaging software. GM

kc_kitties · Answer

@GreyMack wrote:

It sounds like they are referring to the process of copying files rather than using imaging software.

GM

They say they tried Norton Ghost and a couple of other imaging programs and none would image the entire hd.

GreyMack · Answer

There are some conditions and limitations with imaging software, but I would not immediately suspect your system of presenting any difficulties. The explanation provided does not adequately specify which technical restraints might be preventing successful completion. Conversely, they indicate a lack of understanding or an attempt to evade honest discourse. The service of another qualified professional seems to be in order, unless you elect to image and replace the drive yourself. The process should not be dificult and good imaging software, Ghost 2003, may be purchased for under ten dollars.   Download the 1.5MB Ghost User Guide and check pages 67 and 68 for relevant limitations of Norton Ghost. Are you using spanned, striped, or RAID-5 volumes? http://www.symantec.com.au/techsupp/ghost/ghost_2003_info_man.html   GM

kc_kitties · Answer

GM, thanks for responding! Actually, the story gets more bizarre. Not only did he say they couldn't image the disk, when I told them just to installl Win2K on the new hd, he said the new hd was 'bad.' I've got the computer back now and will start all over again. Thanks for the Ghost reference. I'll look it up. As for your question about 'volumes,' I'm afraid I don't know enough to even understand the question :( but I'm a pretty quick study if you can point me in the right direction.

GreyMack · Answer

The question I posed was in regard to limitations mentioned in the Ghost manual. I don't suspect they apply.

Hopefully the process will go a little smoother under your direct control.

I believe the W2K Disk Manager will tell you everything you need to know about your old drive, assuming it's returned in working order. There may be a very small DOS partition with Dell Diagnostics in addition to a single large partition, but you'll have to check.

Here's a link regarding partitioning strategies.
http://partition.radified.com/

They also host Doc's FDISK guide.
http://fdisk.radified.com/

Avoid their Ghost guide. Reading the guide is much harder than using Ghost 2003.

If you have a CD burner, it's a simple matter to install Ghost and burn an image to a set of bootable CDs, which can then be used to start your system and restore the image to your new drive. I'm not sure how many I7500s have been retrofitted with a CD burner, nor whether it's even practical.

An alternate method is to install your hard drive as a second drive in another system which has a CD burner or some free hard drive space, make an image, install your new drive, and restore the image to it. Then you can install it in your I7500 and everything will be exactly as it was when you removed the old drive, with the exception of more free space.

GM

kc_kitties · Answer

I looked at Disk Manager. It says the layout of c is partition, the type is basic and the file system is fat32 and the status of the system is "healthy."

Actually, I installed a cd burner last year as a first attempt to deal w/ the diminishing hard drive space issue. I will give it another try over the weekend. Thanks for your help. You may hear from me again.:smileyhappy:

GreyMack · Answer

I like your chances, and look forward to hearing from you in any event.   As you know, a current image of the system can be helpful to avoid reinstalling the operating system, drivers, utilities, and applications, with subsequent updates and configuration adjustments. In addition to being quick and convenient, imaging software provides the only complete and reliable method of assuring an identical configuration. There may be occasions when reinstallation is preferrable to the recovery of a backup image, but those occasions are limited to the quality and condition of the system configuration when the image is created. Multiple backup images taken as the system configuration develops over time are beneficial in assuring a suitable recovery image is available.   If I might offer one recommendation, it would be that you consider making a separate data partition on your new drive. Keeping the system partition separate and lean makes it more convenient to keep a current image of the system configuration for backup in the event one is ever required. Imaging the system partition might be done following installation, a major update, or other system configuration change. The need may be less frequent for those with an operating system and applications that are not under continuous development, but the advantage of a small system partition remains for those occasions when the need does arise.   Imaging a larger single partition with data is effective, but it is a much larger project as data accumulates, and the occasion to backup the system configuration may not coincide with the occasion to backup data. Separate partitions allow the flexibility of separate scheduling, reducing the effort required and increasing the likelihood that a current backup of the system configuration will be maintained.   You may never need to recover from system file corruption or a hard drive failure, and an image of your current configuration may be sufficient for quite some time in the event recovery is ever required, but the only cost of maintaining a current system configuration backup image, beyond the aquisition of imaging software, is planning and execution. Because the partitioning process is destructive, strategies and the implementation process is best addressed when a drive is installed, unless non-destructive partitioning software such as Partition Magic are used.   The strategy outlined above is one method of implementing and maintaining a collection of system configuration images for backup and recovery. It is the easiest inexpensive method that remains effective, as far as I am able to determine. Like other forms of insurance, it's best if a backup image is never needed, and your needs may vary.   Many of the regulars here may roll their eyes when reading another post of mine on this same topic. I don't intend to rant, but I see this as yet another change to the default configuration that could be of benefit to all individual owner/users.   Those in an enterprise environment with the administration and support of professional technical staff are unlikely to ever need to address this issue, as the limitations of the default configuration and other challenges are routinely addressed and solutions are planned, documented, implemented, and maintained.   I hope others will point out errors in this recommendation and alternative solutions. I've assumed backup images will be stored simply and inexpensively on bootable CDs, though they may also be stored on a second hard drive and also on the originating hard drive - as long as it's not on the same partition the image is being taken from.     GM Message Edited by GreyMack on 12-21-2004 02:09 PM

Storage, Drives & Media

Was this post helpful?