Alternative to True Image (nervous nellie)

Not so - Drive Snapshot works by intercepting file writes (at driver level) and backing up any data affected before allowing the write to proceed (whereupon it recommences the image backup). It can therefore create an image in Windows, without having to lock the partition at all. The only possible problem is if you have other software that also bypasses Windows' filesystem to make changes - such software would have to be shut down first.

 

I've seen BING/IFW/IFD and now DriveSnapshot, I still prefer Acronis True Image.
BING/IFW/IFD and DriveSnapshot are typical products created by programmers only.
Both are most probably technically very good, but programmers don't know what userfriendliness really means and that's why the GUI of both products sucks.
Of course every complicated software becomes userfriendly when you finally understand the software, but that's not the userfriendliness, I have in mind.

The ART of creating an userfriendly software is to hide the difficulties of an application behind the screens and make it look easy on the frontside and this requires alot of thinking before you even start programming.
Any software (paid or free) that turns a difficult job into an easy job will become popular.
Any software (paid or free) that wasn't able to do this will be used by knowledgeable users only.
If you want to create ONE software for average and knowledeable users, provide a setting "expert mode".
The majority of the users use only backup and restore and they don't fool around with partitions and they don't know what MBR means.

If you want to improve the popularity of a software LISTEN to the average users and create an easy to understand and clear nice looking GUI. Combine that with high technical quality and you have a guaranteed bestseller.

Acronis True Image isn't perfect either, but it's the most userfriendly one.
The Acronis Rescue CD is full of bugs :
- it displays wrong partition letters
- it numbers my disks 1,2,3, while winXPproSP2 numbers my disks 0,1,2
- it thinks I have a SCSI-system, which is wrong
- my AZERTY-keyboard acts like a QWERTY-keyboard
- and only God knows the rest of the bugs
After all I'm just an average user.

Concerning 100% reliability, there is no such thing and certainly not in softwares.
Softwares are written by programmers, programmers are people just like users and they make MISTAKES and they FORGET features. Some programmers are very good in their job and there are also bad programmers.
That's why each software has new versions on a regular base and each version is supposed to have lesser bugs and more usefull features instead of gadgets.
The rest of the bugs are still there and they will show up somewhere in the world, when a rare combination occurs, that wasn't provided or forgotten in the latest version.
There is also the combination of softwares, which often results in conflicts and I'm not even surprised by this. I consider that as NORMAL.

 

No, not fact, but FALLACY. When you claim something to be fact, you better be damned sure what you are talking about. You are wrong in this case. There's no need at all to lock (or 'snapshot') a partition in order to image it. Take Drive Snapshot's approach (for instance, that is - there are other feasible technical solutions) ... when an imaging job starts, its driver intercepts all disk writes at the sector level. If the write will overwrite a sector that is yet to backed up, the sector is saved before allowing the write to proceed. Bingo - the disk is imaged at the point in time that the job starts, but Windows and its running programs can happily continue their work. For a fuller description, see here.

Leaving aside the question that what you talk about really are 'compatibility issues', in most cases this compatibility race you allude to is pretty much a misinterpretation on your part. Sure, there are imaging programs that are constantly patched (TrueImage is a case in point), but that is mostly due to poor quality control, inadequate testing, and all the other ills that beset some of the less capable software developers. Take a look at DS's release history, for instance, here - you won't see a constant battle to resolve growing incompatibilities.

Don't get me wrong - DS is not perfect (but it is, for me, by far the best of the bunch), and there are additional features I would like to see, especially for Windows Server and SBS imaging. I would also like to see an easier command line interface for the DOS util (this would address Peter2150's concerns). That said, if you ever start to make use of a PE recovery disk this will become a moot point - it really is liberating, in all sorts of ways.

 

I've been using Acronis TI Home for a few weeks now and I have had wonderful results.

I recently decided to reformat and reinstall Windows since I have made the decision to be more responsible with system security. Through the process, I have been making images after each major install and after major updates. I have restored images multiple times without a hitch after testing various security programs. There was one time that I attempted to restore an image from the "Secure Zone" and it said that the image was corrupt (though I had done a few restores from SZ without problems before that).

I still have a secure zone on my hard drive, but it is set to the minimum size that allows the Startup Recovery Console to run from it. That allows me to hit F11 while booting the machine to run Acronis and create or restore images without having to boot from a CD. When doing that, I can have Acronis up and running and restore a 3gig image in less than 20 minutes. Creating images takes about the same ammount of time as well. I usually image to a second hard drive or another partition on the main hard drive. I have imaged to a DVD without any problems, though it seems to make the process drag on a lot longer than if I just burn the image to a DVD with Nero.

If you decide to purchase it, I'd recommed buying from an authorized reseller. Newegg.com is one such place where you can purchase it for much cheaper than Acronis. Be careful, however, as there are apparently some unathorized resellers that are selling counterfit serial codes. I emailed Acronis support before making my purchase and they verified that newegg is an authorized reseller.

CT

 

As SPM says drivesnapshot on a UBCD4WIN disk is very easy to create and then use - with full gui.

 

I haven't used BING ,DS, or TI, but I have used (not just tried) IFW/IFD and I completely agree.
They don't need to bloat it up with fancy graphics, but they have to do common usability testing if they ever want to expand their market.
Well said Erik.

 

From Snapshot webpage...

SnapShot takes the image at a certain point of time

When SnapShot gets started, it will take some time to collect information about the disk to be saved, such as disk size, used disk space,...
Then the OS is instructed to write all data from the disk caches.

And then, Snapshot takes the SnapShot.

All you will get in your Disk Image is what is at this very moment on your disk. What's on the disk is saved; nothing else.
If you would POWER OFF the computer at this moment and make the image from DOS, you would get exactly the same. Because we flushed all data to the disk, Windows will boot without CHKDSK, because the data on the disk are consistent.




Bottomline...this is one MORE step for a windows based imaging program that COULD go wrong. Drive Image 5, IFD, and BING generate the image file when the partition is 100% INACTIVE. No need to freeze, intercept file writes at driver level, or whatever fancy technology to capture the image file in windows. KISS.

We all agree that there are no perfect software. Therefore, eliminating one key step in the imaging process should further reduce the possibility of a corrupt image file.

True, loading BING is not as simple as clicking on an .EXE icon. It would be nice if this program would be this simple to install, but then I suspect one would not be able to realize the full capability of BING with this method of installation. Perhaps that's why Terabyte came out with IFW after the release of their flagship product, BING.

 

Hey guys there's probably not any point arguing here - the guy who says bootitng is the "be all and endall" has pretty much been saying that ever since joining the forum. Check "find all posts by..." and you might come to the conclusion (as I have) that somebody just might be an emp__ee.

(fill in the blanks lol)

 

I absolutely do not agree that furballi has any hidden agenda whatsoever. His comments are EXTREMELY knowledgeable & helpful. I recognize that he is very convinced that BING is a superb program, but he gives good & solid reasons for saying that. It's one thing to disagree with some of his opinions. It's another to believe he is a ringer. I totally and sincerely do NOT believe that the latter is the case.

 

oops - guess I caught a few of his posts before they were removed that you might have missed ;-) mostly the ones in the Acronis forum advertising Bootit

 

IFD would take the lead if I didn't have to use the boot disc. I must deduct 1/2 point with any windows-based imaging program. Another 1/2 point if I have to use a boot disc to restore an active partition.

BING gets 1/2 point extra credit for offering a very generous upgrade policy ($ talks, BS walks). If I factor in BING's partitioning and bootloader applications, then there is no drive imaging software today that comes close to BING for VALUE.

That said, I still use PartitionMagic 5 to manage my drives. BING's GUI is not user-friendly.

If I didn't know about BING, then I would recommend IFD or Drive Snapshot.

 

Glad I'm not the only one that noticed. I was beginning to think I was prejudiced against the hirsute or something. I agree that resistance is futile in this case, a bypass would be more appropriate. Anyways, I seriously doubt normal Terabyte personnel would give such an unbalanced treatment to BING and IFW/IFD.

 

Have you ever used Drive Image 5? Click on the DI 5 icon in windows and PC will reboot to Caldera DOS, WITHOUT a boot disc! DI 5 also comes with two floppy boot discs if you cannot access the DI 5 icon from windows.

BING can be loaded in a small 8MB FAT16 primary partition at the end of the HDD. Because BING is OS INDEPENDENT, your PC can access BING without the use of a boot disc. Simply reboot the PC and the BING splash screen will appear. No need to insert a boot disc to restore a primary active partition.

If you do not insert a boot disc into the floppy or optical drive, then IFW or Drive Snapshot cannot restore a primary active partition.

 

Like Peter2150, a boot disk is a boot disk whether it's floppy or hard.

P.S.
Don't go there...

 

Now, this has got very silly. It's one thing to argue your corner, but it's quite another to go down this road. What you argument has now become is this...

... program P, when it starts, does actions A, B, then C. Clearly, this is unnecessary (because the program R, that I use, does D instead), and is likely to introduce incompatibilities with program Q.

By your definition, therefore, all programs that you install use would have to be comprehensively retested every single time a change is made to your system.

Some of the arguments you were making earlier in this thread, while they were subsequently shown to be based on false assumptions you call 'facts', at least appeared to have some import, but no longer.

 

I use Acronis and agree with someone who said it was the most user friendly. I also have some others mentioned but a friend of mine keeps getting me to try Nortons 'Save & Restore' a sort of image/restore points (goback/ghost cross) saying it beats my TI on user frendlyness and is really quick for him (that depends I know.)
I have my own opinions about the nortons and I think we all know they are not interested in the experienced user (specially I hear you cannot even get up any Stats or terminate a connection with the new NIS.)
Anyway this is imaging and is it worth a look or considered an alternative?
Also any opinions on N360 as alternative, I did have a preview on 'genesis' some time ago and already use this type at work.

Okay perhaps this needed to be another thread

 

Joke of the day:
A HDD is a boot disc.

Perhaps I need to modify my statement. Only one boot disc required with DI 5 and BING. One must use TWO BOOT DISCS with Drive Snapshot or IFW when restoring an active primary partition.

Some people will never see the light.

If the image file program runs in windows, then the only way to assure that the new application does not interfere with the image file is to image/restore the image file.

If the image file program DOES NOT run in windows, then there is no need to retest because the new application is INACTIVE in one of the partition on the HDD.

 

I have to say, Peter, there's not much point in any of us arguing with this guy. You know he's wrong, I know he's wrong, everyone else who reads here knows he's wrong. Whether he has a hidden agenda isn't really an issue any more.

 

Let's stick to technical white paper...BING vs IFW. If IFW does not fail with your rig, then it cannot be said that BING is better for YOU. However, there are advantages in using BING over IFW, per my previous posts.

You dismissed these advantages by claiming that they are based on "theory". You have not provided any technical reason why IFW is better than BING. Comments like "IFW and ATI if used sensibly just work, and work and work" shows a lack of general PC knowledge.

I deal with facts, not FUZZY LOGIC.

 

Now that is funny. VERY funny indeed.