News and Reviews > Backup Guide

Good new Acronis TrueImage vs. Norton Ghost review

(1/2) > >>

oBFusC8r:

I believe there has been some threads in this forum in the past regarding imaging apps such as Norton Ghost and Acronis TrueImage..and a donationcoder review of course. Here is a brand new review that compares the two.

http://www.techsupportalert.com/drive-imaging-reviews.htm

Check out the part where the author is in contact with both Acronis support and Symantec..it is quite interesting.

To summarize the review: TrueImage beats Ghost. It is cheaper and better. Acronis support is better. Ghost still seems to suffer from corrupt images.

mouser:
excellent find.

Carol Haynes:
I have to say my experience of Symantec support has been at least as bad as described in that review (and at times completely non-existant). One of the reasons I no longer use any Symantec products.

They seem impressed with Acronis support - all I can say is they do seem to get there in the end but email response time can be up to a week and they are unlikely to find a solution on the first attempt. They have forums but if you post problems you are instantly asked to contact tech support - OK if you are in the US but not practical by phone if you live elsewhere. The biggest problem though is that support get the practice because they are hampered by the premature release of seriously flawed software. My advice is if you buy Acronis software make sure you leave it until at least 6 months have elapsed from the release date, and if you are tempted to get an upgrade on a special offer perhaps buy it but then wait until the kinks are ironed out before you try to use it. A good example of this was TrueImage 9. I purchased version 8 and they immediately brought out version 9 and gave me a free upgrade. Version 8 worked fine but version 9 had SO many problems as to be virtually unuseable. None of the new features worked at all (my backup scripts were reported corrupted repeatedly, archives would verify on completion but not mount because it said they were corrupt, pre/post scripts didn't work at all, file level backup sort of worked but was completely useless - and still is as far as I can see - it certainly doesn't come near even basic file backup methods like the free Backup Wizard in Win2k/XP). Most glitches have been ironed out but customers got a really raw deal doing free work as alpha testers (it was nowhere near beta release standard). Similar problems plagued DiskDirector 10 from the forums - again I got a free upgrade but couldn't face installing, esp. as DD9 had corrupted my partition map.

urlwolf:
So Carol, would you say Acronis 9 is ready for normal use now?
Even though the catalog is not working oK? Or is it?
Thanks a lot

Carol Haynes:
I use it for disc imaging and it works fine - certainly better than Norton Ghost (IMHO). For file backups I use Genie.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page