I back up my data files from my network drive to an external drive on a wired desktop connected to the network. My backup program - Windows Explorer Drag and Drop. I simply create a new folder (by date) on the 750GB drive and then simply copy all the files over. (Approx 150GB per backup).

Straight forward, simple, cheap and no propietary format. It does that 3 1/2 hours as it's across the network, and the file copy verificiation slows it down some. But, I start it and go to bed. In the morning it's done. It's also easy to verify, and then I shut down the machine and turn off the external drive.

To back up the OS and applications on each machine, I clone the HD to another HD and store the clone. If desired the clone can be substituted for the original and booted to verify that it works before continuing. If doing a major update (like installing an SP or program I'm not sure about, I update and verify the clone and then to the installation/upgrade.

This process is easier if you keep your data separate, preferably on a separate drive. I have kept my data separate for decades (going all the way back to two floppy systems) and find it easier to backup and restore.

---

Thanks to Solar Wings for the special siggy.

I agree with Smax that a separate data partition and a backup partition on the same drive will not do the job. The idea of a separate data partition is good, you can do the same thing with simply setting up a Data folder and then sub-folders for the programs or data type from that. Then you simply back up the data folder. I have this basic structure as below:



Now mine obviously is not on my C: drive, and there are other first level folders, but you get the idea. This solves the problem of what do you do if you set the data partition too small and run out of room.

For the back up to be effective, it must be physically separate from the original files. If you had the capability that many Corporations do, you would even remove the backup to a separate location. That is part of their disaster preparation. If you want a good example, think Galveston, Tx. If a small business or person had the backup physically in the same computer, they would have to take the computer or lose everything. An external drive or flash drive if the data files are small enough, can easily be grabbed and carried with you. If the HD encounters a physical crash, everything on that drive is gone, unless you want to spend large dollars for a pro to recover them.

A good procedure would be to back up to a very small external drive, something like the WD Passport, and do that on a weekly basis. Then take the drive with you and put it in a safe deposit box. The nice thing about those small external drives based on notebook drives, is they only need a USB connection. And they will fit easily in a SD box, even the smallest. This is real handy if the bank is handy.

---

Thanks to Solar Wings for the special siggy.

Worthwhile discussion here. Everyone has their own preferences on how they go about backup, and it's up to the user to make an informed choice. Our thinking is that we try to keep the C drive as windows and programs only, this makes for a smaller C backup image and less to restore after a failure. Keeping the data and files on a separate NTFS filesyste on a separate partition means we don't have to deal with as many corrupted database and spreasheet files when a trojan corrupts the windows os in the C. As they say elsewhere, YMMV.

No matter what, always, always backup early and often plus test your backup to be sure it's good. That's why I like file sync backups, you can see and read the files and logs. IMHO, a good backup makes hardware more reliable. Seem like a backed up system seldom failed, but a system without backup will dropout at the worst possible time.

Personally, I think something in the system can sense weakness or fear... kinda like copiers, they go down only when your in a rush to do something important.