Must Acronis Abandon there Linux Boot and Use Bartpe/VistaPE?

Ok here is the case.

Very often the linux boot is just dreathfull slow with backup and restore operations. Also many time a poor media error happens because the network drivers are poor in the linux boot.

My own created Bartpe resque cd with mustang plugin works PERFECT! all the time everytime.

When We look at other Image vendors like Storagecraft or Symantec they all have a VistaPE resque cd which work perfect!

My statement! Abandon Linux Resque Boot and go for the standard Bartpe/VistaPE Boot!

Please VOTE!

p.s people who vote here should also vote here

Should Acronis Create a standard support tool
https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=205265

Universal Restore should be available as an standalone option
https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=205143

Vote: Acronis VMWARE ESX Converter Direct Upload to ESX!
https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=204210

 

Since it is made from a Windows installation, I doubt it is legal for an entity like Acronis to distribute a BartPE disk?

I'd like to suggest an alternative route.... have an option for TI itself to create a new BartPE or VistaPE bootable CD after installation, from the (assumed licensed) installation currently on the PC. That should eliminate licensing issues and at the same time produce a CD that is truly bootable on at least the machine it was made on.

The Linux bootable CD worked fine for me for years... until SATA drives hit the scene.

Paul

 

This post really hit a raw nerve with me. I've been a customer of Acronis True Image for several years (since at least version 6, now using 11), but I'm fed up and ready to jump ship.

Functions, flexibility, and cost keep me coming back to Acronis (vs. e.g. ShadowProtect), but I keep running into problems with not being able to recover images with the TI Linux boot code. Either it won't boot at all, or it will boot but not recognize the device containing the image, or it won't connect to the network to get to an image on a network share. Most of the problems have been with newer hardware -- Windows will recognize the hardware but the TI Linux code won't.

I've been able to get VistaPE or BartPE versions to work in a couple of critical cases, but every time I have to update the Acronis code I have to relearn the process of creating one of those CD's. It isn't terribly difficult, but I shouldn't have to spend hours learning a special process to get what I already paid for to work. And VistaPE/BartPE is totally out of reach of most consumers if they have to build the CD themselves.

I'm in a position to recommend software to many of my friends and family, and I've been unable to recommend Acronis True Image because of my fears that they will be caught with an unusable image when their HDD crashes. Instead I tell them to use the software that came with their backup drive (e.g. Maxtor OneTouch, etc.), even though I know how much better a full drive image can be.

My understanding is that ShadowProtect is shipping with a VistaPE recovery CD (can someone confirm?), and I assume that for future hardware support that's the way to head vs. BartPE. I really hope Acronis is listening and considers a change in direction.

Note that I'm not criticizing Linux, which I have used and still value. But I think it's a big mistake to create a Windows backup program that depends on Linux code for emergency recovery. That greatly compounds the driver compatibility issues and frequently creates the environment where the program works for backup but NOT for recovery. That's not a good situation for customer satisfaction.

Jim

 

I'm in the same position as far as no longer recommending True Image. I use it, but I can make a BartPE or VistaPE disk if necessary. I think Shadow Protect with the VistaPE boot disk that does come with it is a much safer choice for most users. For $20 more, you get a product that is much more likely to work.

 

Yes Storagecraft Uses VISTAPE!

 

Ofcourse its legal ;-) otherwise Bartpe wouldn't be here at all! Microsoft would have suide him from the beginning..

Even when you look at VistaPE you can download it even if you dont have a legal license. To build VistaPE you need WAIK 2.0

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/cc160884.aspx

download it here: http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/...6d-15f3-4284-9123-679830d629f2&displaylang=en

and its free to download no strings attached! Thats also why storagecraft and symantec use VISTAPE 2.0 as there boot environment!

 

When you search the storagecraft forum you also see people who are switching to Storagecraft just because of this..

http://forum.storagecraft.com/Community/forums/p/463/2108.aspx#2108

What also is very strange is that you never see and old storagecraft user on this forum who switched from storage craft to acronis..

but on the storagecraft forum you see alot of ex acronis users who switched to storagecraft. The LINUX BOOTCD being one of the major complains......

 

I just downloaded a copy of the full evaluation 30-day trial, and it appears to include both WinPE and VistaPE bootable from the same CD. That apparently resolves some compatibility issues with one or the other, especially when doing HIR recoveries.

 

Also look here! this is also an issue

https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=205143

 

Umm, Might want to read the fine print...

This download is available to customers running genuine Microsoft Windows
This update is provided to you and licensed under the Windows Vista License Terms.

The download does require Microsoft Validation.

Also just because an end user can download it, does not mean that Acronis could distribute it without incurring licensing fees from Microsoft.

Then there are also the Acronis Linux users, who would not want to be booting to a VistaPE disk, so Acronis would have to maintain both a linux and a VistaPE Boot option.
(Though I acknowledge that I'd pay extra to get rid of the linux boot.)

 

so storagecraft and symantec are illegal dont think so...

 

I did not say that.

Perhaps, unknown to you, they have made a deal with Microsoft that allows them the right to distribute it legally.

 

I for one, have moved to ShadowProtect due to severe problems with the TI Linux bootable CD in v11.

I had upgraded to v11 last September and dealt with Acronis support from early October to mid March trying to resolve the issue. The issue centered around corrupt restores of files and folders in a Vista / NTFS / Sata environment that had ADS attachments to files and folders. Those files could not be accessed nor deleted after a restore using the bootable CD. The only solution was a reformat of the drive to get rid of the corrupted data.

It should be noted that a like issue was present in v10 of ATI but was subsequent resolved. Yet the resolution wasn't passed onto v11.

I continue to use v10 on two of my older PCs but acquired ShadowProtect to protect my main beast.

As a last note, late March, Acronis did refund me the cost of the three v11 licenses that I acquired in September. In total I probably spent close to 150 hours testing and working with Acronis trying to resolve the bootable CD issue. Never again.

Regards,

Bob

 

At this moment there are 31 votes of which 30 votes that say we don't want the linux resque boot anymore.

this means that 96,7 percent want to see Bartpe/VistaPE boot instead of Linux Boot

and just 3,3 percent in favour of the linux boot!

Let see what the votes do in a few days but Acronis Must listen to these percentages....

 

That only means that 97% of the people who voted want a BartPE disk. What you should be using is the percentage of numbers of copies sold versus how many voted (or even normalise the percentage in favour with the total forum membership). It'll be substantially lower; perhaps <1% and Acronis shouldn't listen to those percentages.

I'm happy with the linux boot but didn't vote because I don't really care about your poll

Cheers.

 

Linux boot has always worked for me as well, both to backup and restore. I have actually switched to BartPE environment lately, but only because I wanted to run some other software (JkDefrag) from the same bootable media as TI.

This poll is misleading because, as can be safely assumed, lots of users who are happy with Linux CD and have no other problems, simply don't follow these forums, and many of those who do, have ignored this thread.

 

Kimberlito is correct as far as the stats go - this poll is very likely to be biased towards dissatisfied users or those people like me who are satisfied but know how many people have trouble because of the Linux recovery environment.

Having said that, the Linux portion of TI is its Achilles Heel and is the cause of many of the support issues. Not only are they issues that might be considered annoying, they are the support issues most often responsible for the product not being able to restore data when necessary - the very reason people buy the product.

Yes, I'm confident it would cost Acronis more money to license the PE software but I'm sure they would save money for supporting the product and also have a better product for Windows users.

One thing that has not been mentioned AFAIK, is that Acronis also markets TI as a Linux product. This could be a problem for the PE component or the optics of the Linux users.

 

So why not give both of the best worlds one PE for the windows users (who are the most users) and one linux boot for the Linux users.

Linux boot boot much faster but restoring with PE is much much faster so PE will win always in the long run..

 

They certainly could do that - my train of thought was along the lines of reducing the support burden that the Linux environment causes. Also, software companies tend to avoid providing 2 mechanisms where one can suffice due to cost concerns.

 

Thanks for the link to the PC Mag review - I should have bought the magazine before getting Acronis. And I think I'm going to give ShadowProtect a try.

Just to show how bad Acronis True Image 11 is, I tried the following:
My existing system has an onboard ATi/AMD RAID controller (SB600 chipset) that True Image Rescue CD just can't recognize....but...

if I boot the machine using an ancient copy of Norton Partition 8, which uses an even older, croaky Caldera DR-DOS boot, it sees the RAID no problems whatsoever.

 

Remember this post is not intented to show how bad Acronis is. Just to make it Alot better so that no one whill have to go to a competitor....

So keep voting and maybe acronis will listen... Would even be better to make this poll a sticky for a few weeks...

 

There are some things I'd like to point out about this situation. In reading this thread, I see much misinformation. It's clear most people don't understand what BartPE and VistaPE really are and how they relate to Microsoft's WinPE. I'll try to explain the differences. I'll also share some of my thought about Acronis products under a Windows based recovery environment.

BartPE was originally created by a single person with the first name of Bart. He saw the need to have a Windows based recovery environment bootable from CD. Microsoft had WinPE (Windows Preinstall Environment). It was used to install Windows. They only offered it to Microsoft Partners, so it was not widely available. Bart created a similar environment with some improvements that made it much easier to create custom shells and add plugins for running programs. Microsoft tried to stop him. I don't know any of the details, but after some time Microsoft and Bart came to an agreement and he was able to continue. There is now a very big community that work on BartPE plugins. BartPE remains based on WinPE and can be built using a Windows XP or Windows 2003 Server as a source. There are license requirements for using BartPE that can be read on Bart's website. Microsoft is very aware of BartPE and it is legal as long as the license requirements are followed.

When Microsoft developed Vista, they introduced WinPE 2.0. This was a completely new model based on the Vista platform. They decided to make WinPE 2.0 available to everyone. You are able to download it for free in the form of the WAIK (Windows Automated Installation Kit). There are license requirements for its use that Microsoft has set. Like WinPE, WinPE 2.0 only provides a command prompt shell with no easy way to add custom programs. People saw a need to make WinPE 2.0 function in a Windows like shell as had been done for BartPE. Different projects were born. The ones I use are WinBuilder and VistaPE. WinBuilder is a program that allows different projects to be developed and used in an easy to use GUI form. VistaPE is one of these projects. The VistaPE project uses WinPE 2.0 as its base, but provides its own scripting language to make it easier to add custom shells and programs. VistaPE is legal as long as you follow the Microsoft licensing requirements for Vista and the WAIK. Don't ask me to explain the licensing requirements, I'm no expert and don't want to hear from Microsoft.

Acronis uses Linux for its recovery environment. It's free and open source. This holds down the cost TI and DD. Some other companies are currently using a WinPE 2.0 recovery environment. They pay Microsoft a licensing fee that increases the cost of their products. BartPE can also be used if an OEM agreement is reached with Bart. I'm not aware of any large companies that use BartPE for there recovery environment. What many companies do is to provide a BartPE plugin. This allows the user to build his own BartPE recovery disk using the plugin they provide. This takes the licensing issue out of the picture.

Many people are beginning to refer to WinPE 2.0 as VistaPE. This has created much confusion. I'm not even sure if Microsoft is using the term VistaPE to refer to WinPE 2.0. I don't want to get into any arguments over the use of these terms. I'd just like people to understand that when I use the term VistaPE I am referring to the VistaPE project used with WinBuilder.

Here’s a little explanation about Acronis BartPE plugins. I saw the need for TI and DD plugins for use with BartPE back in the days of TI 8.0. I worked on these plugins for many months without success. I came to the conclusion that it was not possible to make the programs work under BartPE because of the Acronis snapman and timounter drivers. Shortly thereafter, Acronis release a BartPE plugin for TI 8.0. It did not work! After many complaints, Acronis rewrote the snapman driver to work under BartPE. All snapman drivers that followed are working in BartPE. At that time, I discovered the new snapman driver made my DD plugin work. To this day, Acronis has never offered a DD BartPE plugin. I guess they don't see a need because my DD plugins are available. The problem with the Acronis BartPE plugins for TI is they provide only limited functionality. This is because the Windows version of TI was almost impossible to get working under BartPE. Acronis took the approach of writing a special version of TrueImage.exe to work under BartPE. This explains the limited functionality. I continued to work on making the Windows version of TI run under BartPE. I've been working on this for years and had some help along the way. It's been incredibly difficult, but eventually I figured out the right tricks to play on TI to unlock most of the functions including the almost impossible image mounting. Interestingly, image mounting became easier under VistaPE and doesn't require the management of Upper Filters like it does under BartPE. I'm sure the problem is related to the timounter driver, but Acronis has never rewritten it to work under BartPE.

The advantages of BartPE and VistaPE are that Windows drivers can be used, and are relatively easy to install. If Acronis did go to a WinPE recovery environment, they would also need to provide a means of allowing the user to create a custom boot disk with his own drivers installed. There is no way they could provide a recovery CD that would work with all future hardware. Symantec has done this with Ghost. As far as I know, Storagecraft has not done this with Shadow Protect. Both companies are currently using a WinPE 2.0 recovery environment. Storagecraft is also providing a WinPE recovery environment on the same disk. It is also my understanding their recovery environment is based on the Server versions of WinPE and WinPE 2.0. No matter what recovery environment is used, future hardware support will be an issue. However, one thing is very clear. A Windows based recovery environment makes it much easier to deal with the driver issue than a Linux based one.

 

Your goal is admirable and I hope it works. OTOH, it has been pointed out to Acronis many times in the past what a goldmine of information this forum contains to help produce a better product, reduce support burden by better documentation, and to reduce user frustration with new versions by better testing. Certainly, the problems with the Linux recovery environment can be nothing less than very obvious.

This has fallen on deaf ears or has been "cherry-picked"; it seems any idiotic idea that would result in a new feature for the marketing department is implemented. The fact that it doesn't work on virtually every system (the email backup feature for example) when introduced doesn't matter at all. A lot users feel that the Acronis marketing and accounting departments drive the introduction of new versions rather than the technical departments. I do have a bit of sympathy for this happening since you have to make cash to stay in business but I find the abandonment of TI10 for TI11 without fixing a serious Vista restore problem disgusting. The same thing happened with TI9 and TI10 (DVD writing, IIRC) but there was sufficient outcry to get one more release of TI9.

One thing that might help stem this unhealthy tide is the fact that magazine reviews are now mentioning some of the problems with TI rather than give it a thumbs-up because of a list of features that aren't really necessary or don't work.