Norton Ghost and Windows XP

I have made a few observations which I discussed on another board. This link,
http://radified.com/cgi-bin/YaBB/YaBB.cgi?board=general;action=display;num=1054902857 ,
will take You there.

When restoring a partition from a Ghost Image, it doesn´t get put back exactly as it was when the Image was created. It seems like Norton takes the opportunity to optimize the partition according to its preferences.

The most significant difference is the position of the pagefile before imaging (fresh Windows installation) and after restoring using the Image. It is moved to the front of the partition where performance is the highest.

In addition to that, Norton Speed Disk completes defragmentation much quicker. I have compared similar installations which haven´t had the "Ghost treatment" with my own installation which had the "Ghost treatment ".

(The inherent defragmentation tool in Windows XP is a joke. Totally useless and takes forever not to make a complete and proper defragmentation.)

On one occasion when I was in contact with Symantec Support, I asked if defragmenting an image would make it less reliable.
The reply was no, I could defragment if I wanted to but it was unneccessary since the files were actually defragmented in the imaging process.

I always defragment the partition as a preparatory step before imaging.
If the files actually are defragmented during the imaging process, then I make it easy for Norton. If I hadn´t defragmented before imaging, it would take longer to create the image since it would have to pick fragments from different places on the partition.
I have not tested this theory, though.

Hope this helps,
Christer
(who hasn´t joined the crusade by some members on this board to annihilate Norton)