Home | Blog | Software | Reviews and Features | Forum | Help | Donate | About us
topbanner_forum
  *

avatar image

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
  • December 03, 2016, 12:52:08 AM
  • Proudly celebrating 10 years online.
  • Donate now to become a lifetime supporting member of the site and get a non-expiring license key for all of our programs.
  • donate

Last post Author Topic: Acronis True Image OR maybe not ???  (Read 16076 times)

Carol Haynes

  • Waffles for England (patent pending)
  • Global Moderator
  • Joined in 2005
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,986
    • View Profile
    • Dales Computer Services
    • Donate to Member
Re: Acronis True Image OR maybe not ???
« Reply #25 on: September 25, 2007, 01:11:02 PM »
Quote
did I miss something here (?)
whats 14W?  smiley

to console myself for having bought such a monster (Acronis 11) I can point out that incremental backup is (hopefully) more of a space saver than Differential

I4W = Image For Windows (see about 5 posts up)

Differential backup is more space consuming - but then it is also more flexible - you only need to keep the base copy and any differential chunks you want to keep (you can delete any of the differential chunks and still have a coherent backup). The first differential backup should be the same as an incremental backup.

One of the confusing things with Acronis is that it only has one filetype (unless they have changed something) - this is really stupid as you can't identify which are the base, differential, incremental or file backup files from the extension or icon. They should have 4 separate file types.

In theory you can mix incremental and differential --- eg. you could

Day 1 Base ...
Day 2 Incremental
Day 3 Incremental
Day 4 Incremental
.
.
.
Day 7 Differential - then you can delete the increments.

Not sure if you can then continue to build increments followed by a further differential.

Trouble is you would have to be very careful what you deleted each time!
« Last Edit: September 25, 2007, 01:17:56 PM by Carol Haynes »

tomos

  • Charter Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • ***
  • Posts: 10,315
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Acronis True Image OR maybe not ???
« Reply #26 on: November 01, 2007, 12:40:16 PM »
wasnt sure whether to post here or there (another Acronis thread)

just For The Record

I noticed in Chip (german) computer mag
that Avanquest's Perfect Image 11
get's tops of a short list of best-of "Image-Programme"

The review was in a previous issue so i havent seen it
Gets 91/100 to Acronis True Images 70/100

for what it's worth.

I must say I'm fairly disappointed with True Image's interface -
dunno, backup utilities in general (that I've seen) seem to think they are exempt from good GUI design requirements -
probably goes with the utility image :D

But I guess if it does the job thats the important thing...
Tom

Armando

  • Charter Member
  • Joined in 2005
  • ***
  • Posts: 2,727
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Acronis True Image OR maybe not ???
« Reply #27 on: November 01, 2007, 01:17:09 PM »
Thanks tomos!

Darwin

  • Charter Member
  • Joined in 2005
  • ***
  • Posts: 6,984
    • View Profile
    • Read more about this member.
    • Donate to Member
Re: Acronis True Image OR maybe not ???
« Reply #28 on: November 01, 2007, 01:27:44 PM »
Like Carol, I'm on Acronis True Image Workstation 9.1 and it is rock solid. I don't mind the GUI (but then I've no idea what's been done since ATI Home 9).
"Some people have a way with words, other people,... oh... have not way" - Steve Martin

Armando

  • Charter Member
  • Joined in 2005
  • ***
  • Posts: 2,727
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Acronis True Image OR maybe not ???
« Reply #29 on: November 02, 2007, 12:46:05 AM »
My experience too: 9.1 is rocksolid.
I wonder which version caused problems to Zaine's hard drive...

tomos

  • Charter Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • ***
  • Posts: 10,315
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Acronis True Image OR maybe not ???
« Reply #30 on: November 30, 2007, 06:44:16 AM »
I must say I'm fairly disappointed with True Image's interface -

the thread about new Acronis Workstation got me looking at this again

this Post is either a complaint or I simply havent figured out this programme yet :-\

if I do a manual backup:
actually I'm just after doing one, was overdue :)

and I counted:-
After opening the programme
I have to go through TWELVE panes before clicking on the final "Proceed"
Excluding files that were previously excluded: FOUR clicks for each file, more if not previously excluded
"Settings" - I have to set each time, there's ELEVEN "pages" of those in the settings tree to be adjusted.
There's no obvious way to save all this for the next manual backup (incremental).

In fairness I've only skimmed the help file.
If this possibility is there, well and good, but they could make it a bit more obvious

If it isnt there, all i can say is WTF  :tellme:

it's possible the solution might be to schedule a backup, deactivate it and then reactivate it manually when required ?
I havent scheduled anything cause I prefer doing it manually (but not because of all that above :P)
Tom

Carol Haynes

  • Waffles for England (patent pending)
  • Global Moderator
  • Joined in 2005
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,986
    • View Profile
    • Dales Computer Services
    • Donate to Member
Re: Acronis True Image OR maybe not ???
« Reply #31 on: November 30, 2007, 06:57:14 AM »
tomos - can't you just set up a scheduled job (at the bottom of the window) but rather than schetting a schedule time just choose run manually later and then when you want to run it you just click on the job and hit run ?

tomos

  • Charter Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • ***
  • Posts: 10,315
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Acronis True Image OR maybe not ???
« Reply #32 on: November 30, 2007, 07:15:25 AM »
tomos - can't you just set up a scheduled job (at the bottom of the window) but rather than schetting a schedule time just choose run manually later and then when you want to run it you just click on the job and hit run ?
Yes,
I'll try that-
that's what I was thinking here
solution might be to schedule a backup, deactivate it and then reactivate it manually when required ?

to give it a bit of context:-
I was posting after reading in the other thread about "bored programmers" at Acronis adding bits & pieces..
and was thinking here's something they can sort out/make more user friendly.
It's minor but when you're using the programme for the first time it's a pain to have to dig so much to figure this basic stuff out
Tom

Curt

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • **
  • Posts: 7,089
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Acronis True Image OR maybe not ???
« Reply #33 on: December 15, 2009, 01:03:23 PM »
just For The Record

I noticed in Chip (german) computer mag
that Avanquest's Perfect Image 11
get's tops of a short list of best-of "Image-Programme"

I just won a license for Avanquest Perfect Image 12, over at Ghacks' Christmas giveaway, so I am pleased to read that at least version 11 once was considered good; it makes it likely that my version 12 also is fine. I was of course a little worried that Perfect Image never has been mentioned here at DC, except for these two posts!

Carol Haynes

  • Waffles for England (patent pending)
  • Global Moderator
  • Joined in 2005
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,986
    • View Profile
    • Dales Computer Services
    • Donate to Member
Re: Acronis True Image OR maybe not ???
« Reply #34 on: December 15, 2009, 01:30:35 PM »
The biggest issue with Avanquest is that most of their products seem to be adopted from other companies. Updates are few and far between once they have the Avanquest badge on them and usually even minor updates cost (eg. Powerdesk 6 to 7 is an almost imperceptible upgrade - really a bug fix - and yet it was a paid upgrade). I bought and used AutoSave 2 from them years ago and there hasn't been an update in the last couple of years (even though Vista and 7 have been released) and yet they are still selling it - and it isn't as though it is bug free.