Acronis - great disappointment

Discussion in 'backup, imaging & disk mgmt' started by Zeno2, Nov 27, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Zeno2

    Zeno2 Registered Member

    Nov 27, 2005
    Since few years ago when TrueImage was in version 6.x, then 7.x and so on, I was attracted by the nice features promised by it, compared to its main concurent, PowerQuest DriveImage.
    Despite using normal IDE HDDs and no RAID or other odd combinations, my enthusiasm disappeared quickly after testing it and running in numerous and serious bugs.
    I remained devoted to PowerQuest, for its reliability and never having troubles on my pcs.
    From time to time I tested again newer TrueImage versions, hoping for a bug-free and 100% reliable backup options, always being attracted by the newer features added. To my disappointment, I had to stay on my PowerQuest.
    I migrated later to V2i Protector-successor of DriveImage Pro, and later to Symantec LiveState Recovery. It never let me in trouble, always performed secure and bug-free on my pcs.
    Again I wanted to try the newer TrueImage, but reading this forum, I stayed away, being afraid of troubles.
    I sincerely envied the new features added, but...what's the point of all these newer features and nice extras, when BASIC RELIABLE operation is not guaranteed.
    I'm really sorry to say, but Acronis adopted the same curious and disppointing line, like Ahead Software from Germany (Nero): the product is continously developed, improved..BUT NEVER RELIABLE!
    That is why I prefere a more expensive software, but RELIABLE, becuase I consider a reliable backup solution much more important than some hundreds or thousands $, the price difference.
    Same reason make me to adopt Sony (SonicFoundry) DVD Architect instead of Ahead Nero for DVD mastering.
    Same reason makes me to use LiveState Recovery instead of TrueImage.
    I really and sincerely admire Acronis software, but it's a pity that things which can be done 100% bug-free with 3 years old PowerQuest software, CAN NOT YET be done the same manner with Acronis! It's a real pity!
  2. MKairys

    MKairys Registered Member

    Oct 13, 2005
    Ann Arbor, Michigan
    If the moderators will permit, what is that? How does it compare to Ghost? (If they won't, well, okay :))
  3. Detox

    Detox Retired Moderator

    Feb 9, 2002
    Texas, USA
    Since this is clearly a comparative editorial and puts forth no Acronis support issues, it has been moved to the appropriate forum section.
  4. nod32.9

    nod32.9 Guest

    I've never been a big fan of bloatware. I'm also disappointed with Nero. It has turned into BLOATWARE. Nero user should be able to selectively install individual Nero components. Currently, I only need the main Nero burn software and Nero Recode. Unfortunately, I have to install a bunch of unused applications along the way.

    You definitely want to keep it simple in the world of imaging. Bells and whistles will NOT improve the RELIABILITY/STABILITY of the image file. The current trend is to do everything from windows with incremental backup.
  5. Hello ;)
    Stick to Powerquest (I do, and never regret it), then, and stop sending your mind into frenzy :)
  6. ErikAlbert

    ErikAlbert Registered Member

    Jun 16, 2005
    Norton Ghost v10.0 = Powerquest Drive Image 7 ?
    I don't know the history of Powerquest, but it seems to be sold to Symantec or something like that, because I'm always redirected to Symantec.
  7. Acadia

    Acadia Registered Member

    Sep 8, 2002
    Actually, I believe Ghost 9 was DI 7, if memory serves me correctly.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.