nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Image VS OEM Disc

sthompson86

Good afternoon, At the company I work for we deploy about 2-5 new systems a week. Historically the company has used Ghost as the imaging software.

When I came on board I used Ghost imaging for a while. To begin my leeriness of images we had a string of laptops deployed that caused blue screens a few weeks after deployment, and the only way to fix was to reload it.

Continuing onto my leeriness is all the front end work needed to be done for images. Especially with WDS/WIM Microsoft images which I am testing. In my tests I feel like I spend more time trying to make the images work than I do actually loading the computers. I find this extremely aggravating. Overall with images I feel like its just like playing Russian Roulette. I can get successful system loads, but its just the " what if " factor that gets me.

I have many other stories where images have failed me, but nevertheless as the title says " Image VS OEM Disc " I find myself biased towards the OEM disc. With the OEM Disc I know exactly what is going to happen, and most importantly in the end I will have a working load of Windows with no glitches along the way.

I have had such bad luck with images and waisted soo much time trying to make them work that I do not trust them, and I sooooo do not look forward to having to learn all about the WDS and deployment tools on my future MS exams because I do not care to ever use it lol....

What do you guys think?

Thanks in advanced.

Find more posts tagged with

SAVE $250 on Your Boot Camp — Use Code "EXAM26"

Exclusively for TechExams members for Infosec Boot Camps starting before April 30, 2026

View Boot Camps

Comments

exampasser

I've used WDS in the past to deploy around 30 PC's in a lab. It worked well for me.

Lamini

Currently using a single master image for about a dozen different computers using Binary Research's Universal Imaging Utility (UIU). Theres a very small learning curve to it. Only catch is it doesnt support server operating systems. It makes a backup of everything you installed/customized, security settings, all your applications, preferences, everything. You recover the image on a computer as you would on any other, except you dont get constant BSODs/reboots.

Combine this UIU w/ Symantec Ghost for the network image deployment (ghostcast).

spd3432

I used to work in a very large enterprise (over 10,000 servers). Everything was done by image. When dealing with that many devices, you have to have a standard image in order to begin attempting to resolve any problems that might arise. We KNEW what firmware and device drivers (including versions) were in use, we KNEW what options were chosen during build, we KNEW what hotfixes and service packs were applied and in what order, we KNEW what management utilities and anti-virus software was installed. If we were setting up a web server, we had a standard pack for IIS that was installed on top of the base image. In a small shop, you can get by with using disk install, but you better have a run-book for every system documenting which cards are in which slots and what IRQs are assigned as well as listing every menu option that was chosen in the BIOS, which cards in which slots, what firmware is in use, what device drivers are being loaded, which choices were made during OS install as well as which hotfixes etc were added.

Zartanasaurus

Make an image of the OEM disk.

Imaging is way more scalable than physical media. I've had very few problems with WDS/Ghost image deployments.

Consider all the work you're putting in learning how to make images work an experience building exercise. I've been known to take a bunch of time to make a script work properly when I could've done it manually in the same time or a shorter time. But once the script is done, it's done.

SteveLord

Acronis > Ghost for single/smaller imaging projects.

Asif Dasl

SteveLord wrote: »

Acronis > Ghost for single/smaller imaging projects.

+1 Would agree.