imanol1898

joined 11 months ago
sorted by: new top controversial old
Is it better to clone a failing HDD than manually backing it up via copy/paste? in c/[email protected]
[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago

It does seem that way. None of the files are critical enough to warrant spending on a professional.

Docs are synced with OneDrive, and photos, I probably have copies elsewhere. Real loss will be the audiobooks I've collected over the years.

Is it better to clone a failing HDD than manually backing it up via copy/paste? in c/[email protected]
[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Thanks. I'm using HDDSuperClone. Took about an hour to clone 0.15%. I am not hopeful at all the HDD will survive this process haha.

I want to be able to leave it on overnight but I keep getting "skip resets" that stops the process and requires a manual restart.

Is it better to clone a failing HDD than manually backing it up via copy/paste? in c/[email protected]
[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago

drive is only 3Tb. They’re mostly photos, audiobooks, and docs. I’d say file size can range from a few MBs to as big as maybe 500Mb.

0
Is it better to clone a failing HDD than manually backing it up via copy/paste? (alien.top)
 

My HDD is failing and manually copying files to an external HDD is taking forever. We're talking about KB/s transfer speeds. I have around 1.3TB in it, but only really need around 400-500gb. I'm afraid this method is only hastening its death.

I used to use a dos program, Norton Ghost, to clone partitions. Would a similar program be better for backing up my files vs copy/pasting? I feel like the manual copying is wearing the drive out faster. On the other hand, cloning might just copy over corrupted files on bad sectors and all (I know nothing about this so I could be wrong).

Thanks in advance.