Clone vs. Clean Install on HDD Replacement

[jft135]

I think this should start an interesting discussion. When you are replacing a bad hard drive, do you prefer to clone the old drive, or do a clean install? What are your criteria for picking one vs the other? If you will clone, do you charge more or less vs. a clean install?

I have always favored a clean install because if things have gotten bad enough that the customer decided to bring it in, then I'm not confident we are going to get a clean copy. I have occasionally done a clone when the customer really needed to preserve their programs and settings with limited success. Now that I've discovered ddrescue, I'm considering offering cloning again. I think that my criteria for a clone would be that we have detected HDD problems, but I can still boot the OS. I'd also require that we get at least 99% in ddrescue. Anything else gets a clean install.

What are your thoughts?

 

[lcoughey]

Unless you can confirm that all the system and program files are 100% clean, I suggest that you go with a fresh install and simply import the user data. A corrupt DOC is not going to make the system unstable, but a corrupt DLL might.

I do suggest that you still make a full sector-by-sector clone of the bad drive and copy the files from the clone rather than the original. The reason for this is that a direct file transfer causes more head thrashing and is more intensive on the failing drive and it might fail before you get the files off. A clone is a lot easier on the drive and if done correctly, you should never have to read a good sector twice.

 

[johnrobert]

I just did a clone it was a complicated setup and there are problems with network disconnecting so it looks like I am going to have to do a clean install on my $ will take many hours

 

[frederick]

I'll go for the clone. I've had many successful clones where I could recover the whole thing, and do a windows (or equivalent) repair and it works just fine.

Some of the drives that have come in, where a clone did not work, we salvaged what we could, and transferred the recovered data to a fresh install. This includes the few times we have had to send it out for a more in-depth recovery.

Clones are transferred over to a NAS in RAID5 (4x1TB), from there we copy it over in to a VM and see if it works. If not, we can try to repair the VM or just get files and what not off it.

 

[mraikes]

I'll go for the clone. I've had many successful clones where I could recover the whole thing, and do a windows (or equivalent) repair and it works just fine.... snipped...

Same here. Oftentimes the drives I replace are on the basis of them being "slow" and subsequent SMART check shows creeping crud. They aren't in a catastrophic failure situation.

Way more often than not cloning with an SFC and general tune-up works out just fine.

 

[Boston Pro Comp Serv LLC]

I'll clone if

1.) Client can't install applications that will need to be reinstalled
2.) doesn't have the media to reinstall
3.) obviously the system files and everything was in good order
4.) Original windows install was with in a couple of years, so those old xp machines that have a 10 year old install I'll usually just reinstall

Basic criteria for me to do a clone over a reinstall.

Before the reinstall I always like to use produkey and search for any keys that might be there like MS Office etc.

I always try to go for the reinstall, after explaning to the client all the ins and outs. Always nice to have a fresh install.

 

[YeOldeStonecat]

A lot of times the drive isn't badly corrupted.....if at all, just starting to fail, being very sluggish. In this case cloning is quick, low cost to the client, and they get back a machine that runs many times better, and will last for a few more years.

 

[smashedbotatos]

Most of the time I do fresh installs. Every so often I will try to completely clone and run the factory restore.

 

[Larry Sabo]

I prefer cloning, but it depends on the condition of the drive (number of bad sectors and their location). One bad OS sector is enough to make a drive unbootable, but that sector is only one of 4096 sectors in the block that couldn't be read. Recovering the 4095 good sectors in that block is usually enough to make things run normally, or enough to do a chkdsk /F and SFC, if necessary, rescuing the system.

Clients are usually really pleased, because life can continue with the least disruption. Few clients know where their media and keys are for programs they paid for and would need to re-install (aside from what can be scavenged with ProduKey). Sometimes I charge the same as a re-install, sometimes a tad less if it doesn't take long. Re-installs are such a PITA they take so long, even with WSUS.

 

[Markverhyden]

As others have said or indicated - it depends. One thing is I do not do a clone under any kind of flat rate situation.

First off I look at the applications issue. As mentioned if they do not have the disks or the cost to upgrade is prohibitive I'll give cloning a try. Situations like that clients will be happy to spend a few hundred on labor to get things going again.

If the customer is a consumer I generally tell them I will try a clone but if there are problems it a bare metal install.

Hard drive problems. Depends on the symptoms. Running very slow, etc I'll give it a try. Even if the clone finds bad blocks things still may work. But if they are getting BSD's, failed app launch its a nuke and pave.

 

[ell]

I always use my tweaked clean/updated images that I have on hand that include itunes, libreoffice, antivirus, firefox. They are super fast and then I just move their data over with fab's.

 

[RoseburgHelpDesk]

I usually do clean installs. This usually takes care of any problems floating around in the system. Sometimes its best to just start out clean and saves you from problems. I usually just move data from old drive to new drive. don't really do cloning. So as for my charge I would say the price is the same.

 

[cypress]

I usually do the clean re-install unless the programs they have aren't easy to get ahold of.

Generally the consumer will get the re-install since most of the apps are easy to find and usually aren't complicated and a clone for the business clients.

 

[brandonkick]

If it's a complicated setup, with many programs and other items which would be all but impossible to re install... I'd do a clone. Using something like clonezilla will get you pretty much up and running from making the clone to deploying it in under an hour.


If it is a pretty simple setup, with not much data to migrate then I start fresh.

 

[Doctor Mouse]

Clean install

I usually do Clean Installs. But when the client have a lot of software that can´t be installed again, we clone.

 

[DataMedics]

All depends. If you clone it and only hit a few bad sectors near the middle or end, you're probably good to go. But if you're hitting lots of bad sectors especially near the beginning of the drive... go with the fresh install (less callbacks).