Just one question...when is the next newest version due out??

I think that a direct answer to the above, will really help all the poster's to this forum. They will all update at once to the new version, if it is ever issued, everyone already knows that!! Why continue with this constant inquiry from present 'beta' testers that are not offered a free beta product to test?

These are people that have bought a supposedly well tested and working version of a program, yet are being forced to keep posting issues with said program, until the Acronis program engineers are satisfied that users have found all issues that could exist with the program?? So in effect have completed the work that Acronis should have completed before the issue of the 9 versions in the first place??

If that question, were answered truthfully, or just truthfully inform this forum that the present users must continue their free beta testing further still, as more issues could exist? I for one, think this deserves an answer, and sooner, rather than later!!

 

Here here, well said.

 

I agree.

 

I won't blame Acronis for not wanting to promise any dates for future releases... who does that anyway? On the other hand, I've seen Acronis make reference to builds that are much newer than the "current" (dated) 2337.

We are approaching 3 months now since the last release, and let's be honest, the current build seems to have a lot of people up in arms.

I for one am an advocate of Acronis announcing a general timeframe for the next release.

 

Then you basically agree with my first post in this thread, correct?

...Allen

 

Folks,
This thread is a perfect opportunity to tell Acronis that we are upset with them. Please don't be afraid to agree with the original poster. I, for one, would love to see a string of "I agree" just to let Acronis know how we feel.

 

I do agree... but I don't expect Acronis to say all these problems are going to be fixed on April 5th, or that 32.5% of them will be fixed in the next release.

I've been involved in numerous closed beta programs, to include 3 major software releases and a very cool piece of hardware from a major manufacturer (which ran over 9 months). All required me to sign my life away with NDAs. My point here is that from my experience, and perspective of almost 15 years working with software: there are always problems, there are always a certain percentage of people with problems, and software developers aren't going to promise or predict anything.

Keep in mind, there are still many people who have zero problems with Acronis TI, I being one of them. People rarely flood the forums because their configurations work perfectly with the product they are using.

That being said, I still advocate Acronis keeping their customers informed on projected releases.

 

I agree! However, wouldn't a new (i.e., a *splat* ) release mean just another round of the *beta* scenario? I'd just be happy with TI 9 working for me.

 

2 posts regarding other products etc removed...

 

Hello all,

Thank you for choosing Acronis Disk Backup Software.

Please accept our apologies for the inconvenience.

Please note that in most cases issues that some users of Acronis products have are related to specific hardware and software that customers use. We collect the information from these customers and therefore each new build fixes particular problems reported by Acronis customers. If you have a problem with Acronis software, please report it to Acronis Support Team. By doing this you will ensure that your particular problem is known by Acronis and we'll do our best to analyze and fix it as soon as possible.

Information about the release of update for Acronis True Image 9.0 can be found at this thread.

Thank you.
--
Aleksandr Isakov

 

Isn't this the definition of Beta Testing?

 

Yea but how can they possible predict when they will finish the new update if the program itself can't even predict when your image will complete accurately.

Joking aside, a time table would be nice.

 

While I totally agree that V9 was released before it should have been and I certainly advocate comprehensive testing. However, you have to face some very hard facts when dealing with the PC world and in particular dealing with the PC world at a level that TI does. TI is much more dependent on hardware specifications and peripheral quality than say a program that calculates the trajectory of a rocket on its way to Mars.

A large beta testing group is very important but there is no way you can test every possible make and model of storage device and PC hardware. Then you have to factor in the permutations and combinations of software with the hardware. For absolute total testing you would have to have a beta test group numbering many thousands. Of course, after the testing is completed a bunch of new components will be released and you have to test them and it goes on and on.

Did you ever wonder why a Macintosh got such a good reputation for reliabilty over the years? One reason, is that the hardware was very limited. You could indeed do comprehensive testing on it. This even had the effect of making their OS look good because it didn't have to support cheap knock-offs of other hardware. One of Window's big problems was other vendor's drivers crashing it and then Windows getting the blame.

I do consider the use of Linux for the recovery OS to be a weak link in the Acronis strategy again due to the need to deal with so much different hardware. I know little about Linux so I can't comment on how easy it could be made better.

Acronis should make the creation of its boot CD more bullet-proof. It doesn't inspire confidence if you can't easily create the key component of the recovery strategy. To paraphrase the airline manager who was quoted in "Search of Exellence", dirty trays to the passenger means we don't do engine maintenance!

Don't forget to factor in the people who actually have previously undiscovered hardware faults. Just because TI doesn't run properly doesn't necessarily mean it's TI's fault.

 

Testing is NOT the key to software quality.
The keys are proper design and review and testing METHODOLOGY.

Yes, ANY software that has to depend on hardware is going to have issues not faced by ordinary software, but those issues are best handled by including proper error handling in the code that interfaces with the device controller, be it SCSI, ATAPI or whatever. All TI can do is design and test that interface, and, most importantly trap errors and clean up after itself.

In any case, this is not a forum for proper design techniques.

 

Seekforever, very good point. The fact that there is so many different hardware configurations does create a problem for any software developer. I happen to know a lot about Linux though and would like to see a full linux version included on the recovery CD. Acronis has made a severly stripped down version of Linux which is limiting in my opinion. Geeze, Linux is free why not include it? Especially the CDR +rw tools and growisofs. It would be great if I didn't have to break out the knoppix disk just to burn some DVD's the way that I want. The actual space used on the rescue CD is minimal. There is plenty of room for more useful Linux related utilities.

 

I agree with this thread entirely. Facts are facts, Acronis dropped the ball here. Some are giving them the excuse of "there's so many different hardware types, how can Acronis test compatibility on all of them". My answer to this is "welcome to the real world". Acronis faces what all software makers face, making software compatible with existing hardware. Other companies have been successful at making this possible when they create software, why can't Acronis?

I use many products that must be compatible with my hardware and guess what, they are. I also use applications which are many times more complex than Acronis TI 9 every week as I am a network administrator. If you work in the computer field you will understand this concept and in turn know that there is no excuse for Acronis on this one.

The real problem here, and why Acronis failed to deliver is simple. Acronis shouldn't let the release dates of competitors dictate their releases as it is better to be 6 months after the competition with a good product rather than releasing TI 9 a week before a competitors release with a product that doesn't work properly for many of it's users. I'm sure all will agree, for a good product, I would have patiently waited another 6 months for TI 9.1, wouldn't everyone else here do the same?

 

In my post I stated that Acronis released V9 well before they should have. My comments were directed to the the post implying fixing problems reported by customers is beta testing and therefore should have been captured with sufficient beta testing.

My principal point is that Acronis can't do testing on all configurations, not that Acronis can't make significant improvements in the product even though the PC environment is not a simple one. Howard Kaikow rightly pointed out that a proper program design methodology is where the quality has to start.

The other factor is that we have biased data on this forum since it is a problem forum not a success story forum. There is no measure of the ratio of satisfied/disatisfied users.

IMO, TI9 shouldn't have seen the light of day until version 2323 and releasing anything prior to that was a very serious mistake. However, the real-world PC environment is one of bug-fix patches from all vendors although the early versions of TI9 are in a class by themselves.

I have said in more than one previous post here that Acronis has a gold-mine of information in this forum to improve customer satisfaction with their product. Shame on them if they don't use it and listen to their support staff who are more aware than anyone of the issues, technical, user-interface, or documentation.

 

I read a lot of these responses and am kind of amazed at the replies as to 'hardware' testing and it's many variances that create massive design probelms. Thing is Acronis is not coming out with a totally new design of True Image from the ground up!. All the previous versions have been hashed through most of the available hardware available, so that information is documented and used in making some changes in the base code to add a new feature. This is not a completely new product! Sure some new hardware has appeared as time moves on, but not vast amounts since v.8.xxx.937, and those appearances should not cause these kind of errors that we are seeing...such as failure to create a recovery disk? Come on, give us a break!!

The items added to version 9 are useless to most of us as they are not as good as other backup programs in use long before Acronis. I won't go into detail, but for backing up data files, and being selective in what folders I want in the backups, and what folders I don't want to include can be accomplished very easy with excellent programs available from other companies. And, I must say, the modifications and version changes to these established programs are extremely small and few between. They are tested rigorously before introduction. Point being...if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

This file and folder backup, is a joke to TI at this time...the secure zone another one (really secure from what?). I believe the majority of users of Acronis True Image still desire the ability to image a hard drive and to be able to restore the image swiftly and be back 'in business' with true speed and accuracy. Forget the frills...just perfect a great program, (which you had already) and forgot the da*m 'Ghost' horserace contest. Just keep perfecting what you had...something new is not always desired.

...Allen