Cloning WindowsXP Vs. Slipstreaming

I just posted a thread on slipstreaming when I recalled an article I read about cloning your hard drive or creating a mirror image.

Since I know I will be upgrading and reformating my computer in the future (as well as half of my familys computers) I am looking for the best approach.

(1)So what are the pros and cons to cloning and slipstreaming?
If any.

(2)Am I comparing apples to oranges?

(3)Is one better than the other or would it come down to personal preference?

(4)What about the difficulty of slipstreaming vs. cloning

 

Dan,

You are comparing apples to oranges... 'Cloning' your hard drive is an easy and convenient way to move all information from your old HD to a new replacement HD. Where 'imaging' would replace a partition or HD the had become corrupt or whatever. You would use imaging software to make an 'image' of your partition or HD when the drive was in proper working condition, then store the created image file on a separate HD or burn it to a CDr or DVDr, then if your drive becomes corrupt you can restore it to the exact condition of the drive when the original image was made.
Slipstreaming is something different and is used to merge a Service Pack (i.e. SP2 for WinXP) with your operating system disk. This technique can be used with Win2000 or WinXP. So if you had a WinXP sp1 disk, you can merge that with sp2 then burn a new disk that would have WinXP sp2. This makes for an easy (re)install and actually cuts down the time because you wouldn't have to install sp2 after Windows was done installing.
Hope this helped, I tried to make it clear without getting into too many details. If you do a search of the BBS with these topics there are many, very specific, threads covering these subjects.

B

 

Thank you very much for your time. It is apriciated.