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

It should be a clear thing that the acronis support department would get far LESS driver and restore speed problem when they just focus on a Bartpe Bootdisk with enough drivers.

I myself use the drivers that are made on the site http://www.driverpacks.net
this way I can create a boot cd which will work on virtually any system. If Acronis would make a packed with these guys for example they could provide us with this great performing resque environment.

And even if a driver for your disks wouldn't be in there with Bartpe or WinPe or whatever you like to call it you will always have the F6 driver add option.

Maybe they could also make a packed with this with the makers of the Universal Imaging Utility..... http://www.uiu4you.com they even go further in preparing an system to be trully universal in restoring on any system + all the plug and play drivers..... they just prepare and with acronis you can make the image afterwards that Image is universal....

Just brainstorming here but there are so many relative simple options to make the life of there customers so much easier.

I really think they should listen more closely to us .. only then they can become the number 1 in imaging land....

There is by the way 1 other Imaging company which had the same problems as Acronis with there bootcd. And its also because they use Linux. This company is Paragon http://www.paragon-software.com/

 

Also look here for an answer to this from storagecraft user

http://forum.storagecraft.com/Community/forums/p/619/2895.aspx#2895

 

From Acronis I got a Bartpe version with Acronis Recovery Environment which uses XPE and loads AcronisPE......

Has anybody else got this also when they created Bartpe with the standard Bartpe Plugin supplied from Acronis....?

 

Hmm they told me I shouldn't tell... oops it was something about V10(of the echo line)... ;-)

 

I'd prefer to see it as an add-on option -- worth the xtra cost for some but linux is cheaper and adequate for most folks -- not me, but for most folks.

 

Wel when you say most folks..... When you see the stats it 27+14(41) against 4

thats 90 percent in Favour of the VOTE!!

 

Not wishing to re-ignite this thread, though that will probably happen.

I recently took up a U$10.00 crossgrade offer from a competitor (I have their defrag utility) less well known for disk imaging (though well known for defragmenting utilities), their rescue CD arrived and lo and behold it uses VistaPE and a small subset of drivers.

Seeing as how the full price for their offering is about U$70.00 including a posted rescue CD, I doubt that it would make TIxx much more expensive, even if Acronis did have to pay some licence fee to Microsoft.

They could still service the Linux users by making the Linux image a download, similar to BartPe at present.

Colin

 

Yes, if for the restore speed, and nothing else.

~Dave

 

May I ask? is it Paragon or O&O?

 

This topic was mentioned to CEO Walter Scott. Let's wait for his reaction..

 

BartPE is NOT legal unless you have a Windows XP license.

 

The problem I see is that the TI boot disk has no way to add drivers.

Of course, even with a "windows" boot disk, you might have to add drivers but windows has the ability to add drivers at boot time.

I just started looking at Ubuntu, and have not yet looked for a way to add drivers at boot time. If such a capabiliy is available, then TI needs to add the critter.

TI should add a quickee option to verify that all needed drivers are available BEFORE one uses a boot CD for the first time, and provide a way to slipstream those drivers onto the CD, or to load the drivers during the reboot.

 

O&O.


Colin

 

again loading (or finding) linux drivers isn't as easy as windows drivers. And non linux users would have problems adding them....

 

can't agree furthur. I copied an old forum article from 2 years ago when I said the same thing. At the time my username was different working somewhere else back then.


April 25th, 2006, 10:21 PM
Cat-21
Regular Poster Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 60

WOW!!! A non-corrupted image.........

--------------------------------------------

I recently got the time to add TI 9.1WS b3567 to my BartPE Disk and I finally created a working image. To all wondering how this feat occurred, build yourself a Reatogo or XPE version of the Bart CD as the standard NU2Menu shell didn't work for me. Add Mustang's TI driver, run the auto-driver and you should be all set. I haven't tested across a wide range of hardware, so I'm unsure if it's going to be a reliable solution for me and others yet, but hopefully it can help those who were stuck in corruption land.

This success motivated me to test furthur so I rebuilt the plugin using TI 9.1 b3534 as I was curious to see if the newer version had actually fixed the problem and to my surprise build 3534 can also create and restore as well, keep in mind that this computer previously failed with corrupt images both in Windows and with Acronis' Bootable Media (both builds). So now I tried to restore an older image that verified corrupted and I could not restore it with the BartCD. Now I flipped it and tried to restore my good image with the Acronis Bootable Media that did restore with my BartCD and it failed restore saying it was corrupted. I then rebooted with the BartCD and now the image was corrupted and unrestorable.

This leads me to believe the crazy notion that somehow TI is more stable on Bart than it is in either Windows or it's Linux-based bootCD. This is about as tricky as it gets. My only guess is that:
1. Corruption occurs on the Windows side because of some type of conflict with software/drivers/Windows as my BartCD could image and restore the machine, hardware not stopping things.

2. Corruption occurs on the bootable media side due to limitations of the Linux-based Bootable Media. Also if you have seen other Linux builds out there, you'll know that Acronis' Linux build is very limited and not quite as robust as other Linux distributions like Mepis, Knoppix, etc. so it makes sense why users have USB related issue that other distros don't have.

So in the end my opinion is that my BartCD stikes a perfect balance between stability and compatibility. Less intensive imaging without Windows in the way, yet better hardware compatibility as well as PNP USB support from BartPE, unlike the shaky Linux build that TI is using. Has anyone had a better experience using BartPE

 

they should keep linux, becuase it's free, but they should update it much more often, and use the latest kernal

becuase they're using a poor kernal at the moment, many of us are having intel raid issues, which is unacceptable

 

That's 90% of poll resonders, who are only a sample of the forum folks. Most folks with no probls don't come to the forums and so aren't voting.

I'm fed up with the Linux as a backup environ but it's terribly hard to extrapolate from the specialized sampling to the ATI user population at large. Standard statistical inferences aren't valid in cases where the sampling is specialized.

 

Is it free? Free to whom - perhaps just hiding the cost to the end-user? Updating the kernel and jumping to the latest version certainly don't make it free to a company trying to offer a reliable environment - these activities take time, people and therefore money. The amount of time Acronis staff spends chasing around Linux driver issues, responding to email, and forum questions also costs money along with creating dissatisfied customers. It is called Total Cost of Ownership and is something the "free software" advocates often overlook. Linux twiddlers might find it a good few hours fun looking for drivers, tweaking them so they might run and posting their findings but for a company it is money out the door.

This does not mean there are no costs in supporting a Windows or other environment either.

 

well they can't go giving out bartpe copies, that's illegal!

 

No that's not right. ShadowProtect doesn't use linux for a restore environment, it use VistaPE or a form of it. Perfectly legal for it to do so. It's only illegal if it violates any copyrights or any licenses between it and MS -- and that depends on the particular license.

 

sure if they have an agreement with MS that's fine, (like ghost), but the extra cost would likely be filtered down to the user

either way, they need to pull their socks up

 

WEll, this is the point folks have been making all along about ATI. Some think it's worth it to avoid the bulk of probls that (pre-11) ATI has had. Some just wish it was an option even if one had to pay for it. Me, I just got Mustang's guide and made one.

I played around wtih shadowprotect. The PC Mag review is misleading. It's fast insofar as it's not any slower than the other image backup progs out there. Unlike Paragon, it does have some backup management capbility--you can set the number of full or full+incs backups that a task makes before oldest one is deleted. Deletion is done after the backup creation jsut as in ATI.

It does allow editing a backup image but it saves the changes as an inc file the same way that ATI does.

Unistall left behind the prgam files sub dirs with log files and also 78 registry entires.

Couldn't test the restore CD since you only get one when you buy the program -- that's a bit inconvenient.

Yes, the color scheme and font is very much like ATI's but he layout is a bit diff and you can customize the menus.

 

Shieber,
To test the recovery disc you have to request a full evaluation.

 

So as we can all see we are all fedd up with the linuxboot cd otherwise this topic wouldn't be so hot!

 

Yes, that's info not easily found. Like, can one make a sp bootcd with the program or only get copies from sp? Guess I'll find out when I have some more time to poke around. There is a forum but not much on it -- hmnnn, maybe that's because it's new or because there aren't many probelems, hmnmm