Is True Image better then Ghost?

Is True Image better then Ghost if so then why ?

I have used Ghost 8 in the past and it works but its Limited as far as making a Universal Image and using it on other hardware.

Is Snap Deploy worth it and is it an add on to buying True Image?

 

Re: Is True Image better then Ghost ?

In my opinion, Acronis is better than Ghost.

I have used it several times to recover from bad disk drives and it
usually only took about 30 minutes. It recovers everything on the drive assuming you did a full drive backup.

I'm not familiar with snap deploy

 

Re: Is True Image better then Ghost ?

Hello all,

Thank you for your interest in Acronis Home and Home Office products.

You can take a look at the TopTen Review on Data Backup Software Product Comparison for 2009, presented here.

In addition, I can confirm that Acronis True Image Home 2009 offers the following features not supported by the similar products:

*Individual Email Backup;

*Backup Password Encryption;

*Dual Destination backup – it is actually included (which is not stated on the TopTen Review page); you can back up to two separate locations;

*No need for burning software to create a boot media;

*Vista (all versions): supported;

The version comparison page for Acronis corporate solution (key features listed for Acronis True Image line) can be found here.

Thank you.
--
Alexander Nikolsky

 

Hi,

Sounds good but the OE backup dosn't work.

I've got OE backups, they check out as being valid but won't restore.

Was advised on this forum to stay clear of the OE backup wizard.

Nigel
----

 

What's OE? The only thing I can think of is Outlook Express...

 

ATI10 was the most solid version of ATI that Acronis has produced, imo. ATI11 was an embarassment to profession software makers everywhere -- it has serious critical faults unless you use it only inthe simplest most sparing ways. ATI12 is better than 11 in terms of serious programming screwups but still has serious probs, especially in the new design that it uses for "automation of backups". ATI12 does work onthe widest vairety of hardware to-date.

Every backup program has some serious problems or other. Which one has the least varies with each annual edition that the vendors seem to crank out, whether needed or not. Which ones will work on your hardware is something you have to rtest -- luckily the major vendors all allow free trieal periods.

The best reason for not using Symantec's Ghost is that you avoid dealing with Symantec. When negative criticism became plentiful on the knowledge base, Symantec basically purged the thing and stopped letting folks post. Whereas Acronis continues to pay some attention to this forum despite the sometimes stiff (and imo well deserved) criticism of the programming that went into version 11 and 12/2009.

But a company that is at least willing to listen is better, imo, than one that won't.

The Top Ten reveiw website mentioned by the Acronis poster is suspected by some of preferring, in their ratings, products that they vend -- that site sometimes continues it existing review and rating when a software version changes so one might wonder if they really look at the software or just rubber stamp preferred brands -- just my opinion, buyt check th site out over time and see if you don't agree. In any event, for the obvious reason, you have to consider ratings from more than one site -- also check out, for example, Newegg.com, whre you can usually find such a large number of customer reviews, in a very well organized fashion, that you can get a generally idea of quality without being unduly persuaded by an extraneous naysayer or unreasonably exhuberant fan.

 

OE is Outlook Express.

Imaging programs tend to be more sensitive to hardware configuration than other apps. One person may say Ghost won't restore but TI does and you won't have to look too far to find the opposite.

If you want to be sure about any product then you just have to download trial versions and try what you want to do and above all, do a test restore. If you don't do a test restore with any backup program you are living in a fool's paradise.

 

Re: Is True Image better then Ghost ?

I second Shieber comment about TopTen Reviews website. It's my opinion that those reviews are paid for rather than earned.

 

shieber,

I heard that too. Don't know if it was true. Norton/Symantec have a very active Ghost forum now.

 

Re: Is True Image better then Ghost ?

That chart says that ATI doesn't support Vista 64bit. Is that true?

 

I'm using True Image Home 2009, and have used Ghost. If TI actually worked for me I'd say it was better, but I didn't have any problems when I used Ghost. I just can't get TI to work properly even with tech support help. I can't recommend TI to anyone. I'm so worn out from this software I'm going to let them keep my money, and chalk it up to lessen learned...this goes for Disk Director as well.

 

And don't forget to try for free Shadowprotect and the other brands out there -- Norton and Acronis aren't the only choices out there.

 

True image is as bad as Ghost. Maybe a little worse because it does not even cover the basics (https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=244783).

Granted, TI is getting more and more feature laden (bloated?), can create special partitions and provides fancy try out buttons and whatnot.
To me, that's all toys. What counts, is a robust underlying technology that is up to the task of reliably performing imaging (not backup !) jobs on modern hardware and configurations. This is where TI fails.

Here's what PCMag has to say: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2257166,00.asp

"True Image gets more kinds of backup jobs done than any of its rivals, and if you have a plain-vanilla home or SOHO system, this product will do all you need and more—provided you don't run into the kind of compatibility issues I experienced, and which also seem to be reported often on the company's own support forums. Many difficulties that users report on the forums result from simple mistakes in reading the menus, but a number of others involve problems restoring from backups, and Acronis isn't as quick as ShadowProtect in responding to or resolving these reported problems. This is a high-quality, mature program that's surprisingly flexible, but Acronis won't be ready to challenge ShadowProtect for our Editors' Choice until it focuses more on its core functions and less on the size of its feature set."

E'nuff said.

I hear good things about Drive Snapshot as well.