"Graham Mayor" wrote in message
...

Ghost 9/2005 adds a few features including the ability to backup from
within Windows and to open image files from Drive Image also, but Ghost
2003 is still included for use with major failures when Windows cannot be
started. I am not convinced it is a worthwhile upgrade.

Actually Ghost 2003 is included for use with Windows 9x, Me, NT, Linux and
DOS.
Ghost 2005 can not _create_ a backup image by booting from the CD, it can
only restore (regardless of Windows ability to boot). That means you have to
create your disk images from within Windows. Ghost 2005 relies on the
Microsoft .Net Framework, which is only available for Windows 2000/XP.

Although running Ghost 2005 with incremental updates from within Windows
seems to work flawlessly, I still have a gut feeling that an image created
from a manual boot from a Ghost 2003 floppy is better. To be safe I do both,
a daily incremental backup using Ghost 2005 and a (semi)weekly complete
backup using Ghost 2003. Just to be on the safe side.... :-)


Ed