My criteria is: Does it do it's intended job efficiently with out problems.
Been using it since it's inception - A little rough back then.
Only distro I feel I can't replace or do with out.
Easy. (Or advanced if you so choose. I have no idea what most of that stuff is so I don't muck with it.)
Simple interface / low overhead.
For me, the only backup since the bootable version of Norton Ghost on floppy.
I never worry about destroying my install because I get it back within minutes.
I can back up my install, try a new distro, restore my installation and get back to work.
Gets better with every version.
I'd like to see a newer manual for simpletons like me.
I have night mares about the distro being discontinued.
The user interface (UI) is terrible, awful, hideous and prehistorical one. The background orange colored image interferes with foreground white text, for those people with less than perfect eyesight, like myself. I used this only SW only once - for cloning HDD to SSD - with existing Linux OS. Objectively, I must admit, the SW surprised me that it identified an issue on the source disk - conflict between GPT and MBR partition tables (an old HP notebook vintage circa 2009 had an UEFI for developers' usage- unsupported for the end-users). The suggested command line performed the repair and the source disk was then being ready to be duplicated. The cloning was an affair of 5 minutes (256 GB only). The new SSD was fully functional once installed in the notebook. I would rather prefer to receive a root canal than to use this SW again.
The user selection of which distribution to be used is cumbersome, Debian vs. Ubuntu. Sayonara c-zilla.
1. A complete disk and or partition imaging solution.
2. Has many options to get things done.
3. A mature project with a desirable frequency of updated releases.
4. Stable and reliable.
1. Not new user friendly, requires a decent amount of knowledge about the operating system being cloned along with the underlying protocols being utilized by Clonezilla mostly being because the menus aren’t very intuitive for new users leading to confusion and mistakes easily made.
2. According to the website lack of UEFI support in the current stable branch, one has to use the alternative stable branch to gain UEFI support.
3. Lacks UEFI label customization input field from within the user restore menu, you have to manually edit UEFI labels after restoring a complete disk image example: efibootmgr -c -L "Distrowatch" -l "\EFI\boot\grubx64.efi".
4. Lacks a centralized configuration file or data base where options can “easily” be tailored to your environment and made protestant.
I’ve been using Clonezilla for more than 5 years and I currently use it as a quick backup solution with an external hard drive enclosure with two partitions one is 500MB fat32 with the boot flag set the other partition is fat32 rest of drive, I extract the Clonezilla zip to the 500MB boot partition and backup to the other partition, works good this way the second fat32 partition is jest for file system compatibility Windows/Lnux.
I hope they address UEFI soon other than that the “cons” are tolerable, I highly recommend Clonezilla to moderately experienced/skilled Linux users.
Regardless of the version, this distro saved me many times in the past, and I always keep live USB with it around, just in case. Its ability to backup and restore disks/partitions locally or over the network is wonderful. Other utilities for disk recovery are great as well. Not to mention Windows password recovery (on non domain joined rigs).