Ghost - Bad for your HD ?

daveg

I spoke to a guy yesterday who said Ghost was very hard/bad for your HD. He recommended not using it (write an image) morethan once a month.

Anyone know more ?

JohnK

Did he say why it was bad? I cant imagine that it should affect the disk any more than normal use.

longword

Ghost is bad for your hard disk in the same way that using your hard disk is bad for it. As such, I recommend you carefully remove the hard disk from your machine and place it in a fireproof safe. It's not quite as good a way to secure your data as keeping regular backups, but it should certainly improve the lifespan of the drive.

Koopa

ask him why its bad and then draw your own conclusions

i'd be interested in finding out if he really thinks ghost is bad for your drive, or is he just repeating some crap someone once told him?

He recommended not using it (write an image) morethan once a month

this suggests to me that your friend hasnt a clue what hes talking about

daveg

No... the guy is an IT manager for a service company in Galway. I would assume he know what he is talking about.

He meant it was bad for your HD as it "wears" the tracks during re-installing an image.

Praetorian

Yea, it probably does wear the tracks down on the drive more...

Instead of running for 1,000,000 hours...it will probably run for 999,999 Hours

daveg

Instead of running for 1,000,000 hours...it will probably run for 999,999 Hours

lmao I think he meant worse than that.... perhaps it was just a passing comment and I took it up wrong

Hobbes

I heard of this guy who had his cat run over after he used Ghost so it must be true!

Seriously though, in what way is it bad? The testing people here rountinely ghost machines 1-3 times a day and never seen or heard of any problems.

longword

It's a classic anecdotal tale. A hard disk is more likely to fail while a ghost is being performed, simply because no other operation so completely exercises the disk. Doesn't mean that ghost causes the damage, just that it makes the breakage come to light.

TacT

I've been ghosting the same machines in work for 3 years and never heard such a mythological ludicrous urban myth in all my time

Doesn't make a difference, I've seen machines that were never ghosted have hdd's crap out, maybe the presence of ghost had something to do with it :rolleyes:

please ask him how in the name of god it is bad for your hd?

BigEejit

I have never had a HD die while Ghost was running, and every machine here has been ghosted dozens of times ... I am led to believe that the data is written sequentially so it is probably kinder to your HD than defragmenting it ...

daveg

Thanks for all the reply's guys. It would appear I must have taken him up wrong... but he did say it was bad for your machine.

I had better take ghost back out of the bin then

Koopa

just because hes an IT manager for a company doesnt mean he has a clue what hes talking about
whenever someone makes a statement like this, ask them to back it up with something, so you can see their reasoning, ie. how they concluded that ghost is **** - then you can decide for yourself whether you think ghost is **** or not, etc. based on the new info

Cake Fiend

Of course it's bad for your HD.
Reading and writing data to your HD is bad for your HD.
Switching your computer on and off is bad for your HD.


FYI, most of the machines (about 90) I admin have been reimaged once a day for the past year and a half or so. Total hard drive failures: 2.

sceptre

Originally posted by longword
It's a classic anecdotal tale. A hard disk is more likely to fail while a ghost is being performed, simply because no other operation so completely exercises the disk. Doesn't mean that ghost causes the damage, just that it makes the breakage come to light.

That sounds about right. File it under "explained"