Backup Image of Hidden Lenovo Factory Service Partition?

[eecon]

I can't think of any reason that the original WinXP hidden factory service partition would ever change, other than corruption on my T61 (and T42)?

So if it never changes, is there any reason to keep including the original hidden WinXP service partition (along with my C drive) for full Acronis 11 backup images? To the credit of Acronis software writers, it does default to the "unchecked" option for the service partition during the step-by-step setup for a full manual backup image to my external USB HD.

Since I already have several full backup images which included the service partition, I'm tempted to skip the service partition from now on ..... Or, at least make one more backup image of it alone (without C Drive) and store it on my external HD (and maybe also on a DVD-DL)?

Is this a reasonable approach? Or, should I continue to include the service partition along with my C-Drive when making routine full Acronis backup images to my external HD?

[teetee]

My suggestion is to make a backup of the recovery partition. Store the backup outside of the computer along with the restore software and make sure you remember how to restore it back when you need it. DVD-R is good media to store the backup file.

Then I would remove the recovery partition on the hard drive and make good use of the space that's now available. You don't even need the recovery partition since you have your full backup copy of the main system partition on the external drive. The recovery partition is only needed when you want to restore the hard drive back to the factory state(ex. when you try to sell the computer).

It will be another story for people who constantly change/re-build their recovery partitions due to different needs.

Just my .02

[eecon]

My suggestion is to make a backup of the recovery partition. Store the backup outside of the computer along with the restore software and make sure you remember how to restore it back when you need it. DVD-R is good media to store the backup file.

Then I would remove the recovery partition on the hard drive and make good use of the space that's now available. You don't even need the recovery partition since you have your full backup copy of the main system partition on the external drive. The recovery partition is only needed when you want to restore the hard drive back to the factory state(ex. when you try to sell the computer).

It will be another story for people who constantly change/re-build their recovery partitions due to different needs.

Just my .02

Lenovo also sent me the factory product recovery disks at no charge, so I guess that's another layer of backup protection for restoring the unit to original factory state. It sounds like the hidden service partition is only needed if you want to boot to Lenovo's R&R without disks.

Anyway, with my 200GB HD only being 10% untilized, it probably won't hurt me to leave the original service partition on the HD for now (most everything I use is on external HDs) ..... I'll just stop including the service partition when performing Acronis full image backups to speed up the backup process and keep my product recovery disks in a safe place.

Thanks for the help ...

[Ken Fox]

I can't think of any reason that the original WinXP hidden factory service partition would ever change, other than corruption on my T61 (and T42)?

So if it never changes, is there any reason to keep including the original hidden WinXP service partition (along with my C drive) for full Acronis 11 backup images?

YES.

Backup storage (most commonly on another hard disk) is CHEAP CHEAP CHEAP nowadays.

What's more, I'm almost certain that the contents of the recovery partition is subject to change. The reason I say this is that when you boot up into the recovery partition (with the blue button or F11), the recovery space program(s) you are presented with change as the version of R&R changes, assuming that you update the R&R installation. My X32, for example, which shipped with an ancient version of R&R (or was it a predecessor, I forget) now has R&R 4.2 on it when I use the blue button. This happened as a result of Lenovo updates, rather than anything I actively did myself.

I guess it is possible that the recovery space hasn't changed, but that it uses the interface present in the R&R program on the main partition, but this seems extremely unlikely since the recovery space is "protected" and intended to function if the main partition is corrupted. In addition, I have reconstituted systems from the recovery partition when all I did was copy the recovery partition and the MBR onto a hard drive, with no main partition present, and I got the R&R interface nonetheless.

If you don't want or need the recovery partition, by all means eliminate it if you have the means to restore the system later should you desire to do so. But if you are going to make sequential backups of a system that has both a main partition and a recovery partition, I think you do need to image both if your goal is to restore your system to current contents in the event of a disaster or other issue.

Advanced users of imaging programs can even mix and match partitions to work in a system whose operating system was upgraded but lacks a recovery partition in the same OS. I have done this and with some effort gotten it to work. I wouldn't recommend this as a general rule, but it does illustrate the functionality of these programs for more advanced users.

[eecon]

I can't think of any reason that the original WinXP hidden factory service partition would ever change, other than corruption on my T61 (and T42)?

So if it never changes, is there any reason to keep including the original hidden WinXP service partition (along with my C drive) for full Acronis 11 backup images?

YES.

Backup storage (most commonly on another hard disk) is CHEAP CHEAP CHEAP nowadays.

What's more, I'm almost certain that the contents of the recovery partition is subject to change. The reason I say this is that when you boot up into the recovery partition (with the blue button or F11), the recovery space program(s) you are presented with change as the version of R&R changes, assuming that you update the R&R installation

Ken, you are right and I've got lots of external storage drives. Even though I've uninstalled R&R and CSS, there is an interface that you can boot into with the blue button that I like having available and without a service partition I don't think my blue button will work properly.

I'll continue with the way I've been doing things (it only takes an extra 5 minutes or so to back up everything).

Thanks

[semiclue]

What's more, I'm almost certain that the contents of the recovery partition is subject to change. The reason I say this is that when you boot up into the recovery partition (with the blue button or F11), the recovery space program(s) you are presented with change as the version of R&R changes, assuming that you update the R&R installation. My X32, for example, which shipped with an ancient version of R&R (or was it a predecessor, I forget) now has R&R 4.2 on it when I use the blue button. This happened as a result of Lenovo updates, rather than anything I actively did myself.

I guess it is possible that the recovery space hasn't changed, but that it uses the interface present in the R&R program on the main partition, but this seems extremely unlikely since the recovery space is "protected" and intended to function if the main partition is corrupted.

I received my new x61 last week and it came with R&R 4.0, so I d/l 4.2 from Lenovo's site and installed it. The version number in the Windows environment did say 4.2 after that, but the one in the hidden partition continued to reflect 4.0. I checked it by using that option in there which generates a long list of system specifications. Can't recall if that was the exact name of the option but it was similar to that, and located up along the top I think. That seemed to be the only place to find the version from in there. (And the new function of restoring critical OS files added in 4.2 wasn't there either.)

If possible could you check there in yours to see if the version really did change after your update(s)? After that, I was told by tech support that the version in the hidden partition will not in fact change when the version in the Windows environment is updated. And what's more... I was also told that these two versions couldn't operate interchangeably, that backups created in 4.2 from the Windows environment wouldn't be usable from 4.0 in the hpa and vice versa. I would have thought the version difference would need to be larger than that for this to be the case.

But even if the tech was wrong about the compatibility of these two R&R versions (which I do wish I knew the answer to also), the fact remains that updating R&R from Windows did not update it in the hidden partition for me. Would appreciate hearing if it's the same for others? Thanks!

[Ken Fox]

I received my new x61 last week and it came with R&R 4.0, so I d/l 4.2 from Lenovo's site and installed it. The version number in the Windows environment did say 4.2 after that, but the one in the hidden partition continued to reflect 4.0. I checked it by using that option in there which generates a long list of system specifications. Can't recall if that was the exact name of the option but it was similar to that, and located up along the top I think. That seemed to be the only place to find the version from in there. (And the new function of restoring critical OS files added in 4.2 wasn't there either.)

If possible could you check there in yours to see if the version really did change after your update(s)? After that, I was told by tech support that the version in the hidden partition will not in fact change when the version in the Windows environment is updated. And what's more... I was also told that these two versions couldn't operate interchangeably, that backups created in 4.2 from the Windows environment wouldn't be usable from 4.0 in the hpa and vice versa. I would have thought the version difference would need to be larger than that for this to be the case.

But even if the tech was wrong about the compatibility of these two R&R versions (which I do wish I knew the answer to also), the fact remains that updating R&R from Windows did not update it in the hidden partition for me. Would appreciate hearing if it's the same for others? Thanks!

In trying to respond to your post, I have just booted up my X32, manufactured in May of 2006. When booted up into the recovery partition with the blue button, I get exactly the same R&R interface that I get in Windows XP if I open Rescue and Recovery through the XP start menu.

Clicking on the "life preserver" icon in R&R in the recovery space, at the upper right of the screen, it tells me the version number is 4.20.1511.

This computer is 2 years old and shipped with an ancient version of R&R (or maybe a predecessor). I have had many trials and tribulations with Thinkvantage software, and whatever it was that IBM called the software when they were in charge. This software is great WHEN it works, but can give you ulcers if you are unlucky. I don't remember exactly how this software build on this laptop got the way that it is, whether it was upgraded solely through System Update (and its predecessor program, whose name I have now forgotten) or through a combination of that and manual file downloads (more likely the latter, a combination, when the various Lenovo/IBM update programs weren't working right for a while).

In any event, I never have manually updated the recovery partition. What is reflected in the recovery partition on this machine (which differs hugely from how the machine was supplied with its original (ugh) 40gb hard drive) is the result of Lenovo and IBM update programs downloaded from the internet either through automatic updating programs, plus or minus manual downloads.

I have called Lenovo and IBM for software support a number of times over the last 8 or 10 years when I have owned Thinkpads. Out of these calls, I have succeeded in reaching someone who knew more than I did once. All the other times I called, the information I got was either wrong, or added nothing to what I already knew. So it is not surprising (to me) that you might call for software support and get the answer that you apparently got.

[semiclue]

Thanks so much for your quick answer. Wow, that's weird, then I can't imagine why my R&R update only 'took' in the Windows environment... unless, either System Update installs R&R updates in a different way; or installing over the top as I did can somehow cause only one version to be updated..?

In any event, after the tech told me backups wouldn't be interchangeable between these two versions I removed the update... But would still rather know and follow the real bottom lines on both matters, whatever they are... Ouch, between these and the fact that my new system came with startlingly old versions of all drivers and ThinkVantage software (which I plan to start a thread about for opinions, when I get my thoughts together), my brain is throbbing!!

But thanks again for checking this for me. Oh and I am very happy with this little critter so far, it's just that I need to be at peace with what's under the hood too!

[Ken Fox]

Thanks so much for your quick answer. Wow, that's weird, then I can't imagine why my R&R update only 'took' in the Windows environment... unless, either System Update installs R&R updates in a different way; or installing over the top as I did can somehow cause only one version to be updated..?

In any event, after the tech told me backups wouldn't be interchangeable between these two versions I removed the update... But would still rather know and follow the real bottom lines on both matters, whatever they are... Ouch, between these and the fact that my new system came with startlingly old versions of all drivers and ThinkVantage software (which I plan to start a thread about for opinions, when I get my thoughts together), my brain is throbbing!!

But thanks again for checking this for me. Oh and I am very happy with this little critter so far, it's just that I need to be at peace with what's under the hood too!

One thing you could try would be to completely uninstall R&R from your system (using Control Panel, Add and Remove Programs). Then, download the most recent version of R&R from the Lenovo website, and install it. You may find that this accomplishes both the installation of the R&R software on your Windows XP partition, plus updates your recovery partition to the same version number. I think the odds of this happening are pretty good.

You will know if you succeed by going into the recovery partition with the blue button. If the initial interface is the "simplified"one, this is new with V 4.2 (or was it 4.1? I forget), and was not present with v 4.0

[semiclue]

...now that I think about it, it just may have shown that simplified interface in the hpa when I tried it before, can't believe I can't remember for sure. Didn't know about clicking the life preserver to check version, and maybe the system specs area I tried to check it in was a static list or something. Maybe it did 'take' and I didn't look in the right places, tho I sure tried!

But yes, I will try a clean install of it and report back when done. 4.2's "Express" option or whatever it's called did sound good to have. (I read one comment saying it may sometimes mis-identify non-OS files as critical ones, which doesn't sound so bad going in that direction anyway. But if you're aware offhand of other concerns/complaints about this version, would be good to know.)

Thanks again!

[Ken Fox]

But if you're aware offhand of other concerns/complaints about this version, would be good to know.)

Thanks again!

I'm not, but just don't put too much stock in this program. I would not want to depend on it as my major system backup. For that, use a good imaging program such as Acronis True Image or Norton (or probably several other imaging programs) and make sequential full disk backups, which are most easily made to a separate hard drive.

For me, R&R is useful when away from home if disaster were to strike; then, you probably would be able to recussitate your system from an R&R backup on the disk drive, assuming the disaster in question was not a hard drive (hardware) failure.

If you really want near-bulletproof protection from a hard drive failure when away from home, do what I do. I make an image of my hard drive and clone it over to another 2.5" disk drive that can be inserted into the laptop in exchange for the failed one, then put this cloned drive into a 2.5" USB drive enclosure and bring it, along with a screwdriver, in my computer bag. Knowing you have another functioning drive along on the trip is much more reassuring (to me) than Rescue and Recovery, no matter the version.

In order to be REALLY sure, it is a good idea to test the cloned drive, to be sure that the clone worked, since no imaging program is going to be 100% successful.

[eecon]

If you really want near-bulletproof protection from a hard drive failure when away from home, do what I do. I make an image of my hard drive and clone it over to another 2.5" disk drive that can be inserted into the laptop in exchange for the failed one, then put this cloned drive into a 2.5" USB drive enclosure and bring it, along with a screwdriver, in my computer bag. Knowing you have another functioning drive along on the trip is much more reassuring (to me) than Rescue and Recovery, no matter the version.

In order to be REALLY sure, it is a good idea to test the cloned drive, to be sure that the clone worked, since no imaging program is going to be 100% successful.

Yes .... that's what I do and it may have saved the career of one of my clients. I was setting up a presentation that I created for her. She was presenting to her Board of Directors at an out-of-town resort location. 10 minutes before the presentation (before any of the VIPs arrived), my T61 would not boot and my client started to panic and almost started to cry. I kept my cool, sort of smiling and winking at her while swapping in my spare cloned HD (that I cloned the night before).

Needless to say, she was extremely pleased with the the outcome and later that evening she fondly expressed her appreciation for my foresight to always "be prepared" ......

[semiclue]

I'm not, but just don't put too much stock in this program. I would not want to depend on it as my major system backup. For that, use a good imaging program such as Acronis True Image or Norton (or probably several other imaging programs) and make sequential full disk backups

Matter of fact, I just ordered TI yesterday (version 10 -- seemed to be more widely recommended than v11. And I have pretty basic needs, and knowledge). Was planning to only use it on my and my out-of-state, computer un-savvy family's other non-Lenovo machines. I guess I should reconsider, but the whole matter has given me pause thus far. Had been trying to make a decision and get an order placed for a year. There seemed to be little recommendation for current/recent Norton versions. But each time I'd research Acronis again, I'd get frustrated by the near equal ratio of positive and negative comments in dedicated outlets, including from knowledgeable, longtime users (presumably not likely to have "just screwed up" in reality). During this bout I may have gone for ShadowProtect or Paragon, but the former was too expensive for multiple standalone machines, and the latter was said to be written at the level of experts only. Given various particulars of our needs, more so than the accounts of TI images turning out not to be good (despite the app verifying them as such), I worry about the accounts of the software itself unforseeably messing up a computer. These are very basic, in some cases pretty old machines, tho they do meet TI's system specs.

Finally I decided to believe/hope that despite plentiful heated TI debates, bad experiences -- amongst those who did use it right, and whose HDD really was the problem -- are in reality a tiny minority across its many many users. (And that I just won't ever need that Acronis support which does seem to be overwhelmingly dissed.) TI's great reputation at thinkpads.com helped a lot in the end. Plus I anticipate sticking to the simplest features and implementation, for now anyway.

About R&R -- would you believe, when that decision was giving me a headache, I'd wonder if I should just try R&R on all those machines instead! (Lenovo does say it is compatible with any Windows machine with certain specs, and even sells it for others.) Only because I had a good experience with it when restoring to a new HDD for my parent's Lenovo 3000 C200. And not sure I recall many accounts of it failing someone on a Lenovo machine or new HDD. It's also just the only imaging sw I've ever used, and it worked, so I have no fears associated with it lol. But I couldn't find a single account of someone using it on a non-Lenovo machine, so I gave up the notion. I take it you'd agree it's better that I did!

Thanks so much for your input folks!

[Ken Fox]

But each time I'd research Acronis again, I'd get frustrated by the near equal ratio of positive and negative comments in dedicated outlets, including from knowledgeable, longtime users (presumably not likely to have "just screwed up" in reality).

Personally speaking, I believe there is something in the hardware of newer machines, possibly combined with Vista, which is tripping up these imaging programs, resulting in more failures than they used to have. It used to be, at least in my experience, that Norton Ghost 2003 was bulletproof from a floppy, as long as you knew how to use it, and that True Image was bulletproof even if you didn't.

More recently, with my T60 and X60 machines I've had failures with both programs. Ghost 2003 has never successfully cloned a Vista system for me, and I don't trust the image files it makes for Vista, either. True Image has done much better on Vista with image (TIB) files, but has been very much hit and miss on direct cloning, regardless of where the source and destination drives are located.

Until proven to be otherwise, my impression is that there is something in the newer chipsets and/or dual core processors that are tripping up these stalwart imaging programs.

The more testing you do of your results, the more you will see your failures. Simply making an image file or a clone and not using it gives no assurances that they will work. With testing I'm finding 50-75% success with True Image's image files, and less than 50% success with clones. With Norton Ghost, it has been essentially zero with Vista systems.

[semiclue]

Personally speaking, I believe there is something in the hardware of newer machines, possibly combined with Vista, which is tripping up these imaging programs, resulting in more failures than they used to have. It used to be, at least in my experience, that Norton Ghost 2003 was bulletproof from a floppy, as long as you knew how to use it, and that True Image was bulletproof even if you didn't.

Then that is probably pretty good news in this case, with most of the faraway computers I'm 'responsible' for being of that older more basic variety! And not a Vista OS in the bunch! (Actually, part of the reason for finally doing the imaging is to shore up our XP bunkers and try to make it a couple/few years to Vista's successor. )

[eecon]

The more testing you do of your results, the more you will see your failures. Simply making an image file or a clone and not using it gives no assurances that they will work. With testing I'm finding 50-75% success with True Image's image files, and less than 50% success with clones. With Norton Ghost, it has been essentially zero with Vista systems.

I have had several competitors lose contracts to me when their proposals stated that they use Vista for their presentations (while I always emphasize that I still use WinXP Pro) ...... Now, I finally understand why.