True Image bootable not loading USB2 drivers?

Discussion in 'Acronis True Image Product Line' started by Britnash, Jun 19, 2005.

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

    Britnash Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Posts:
    15
    Dear Acronis technical support,

    It appears that True Image (I'm using 8.859) doesn't load hi-speed USB2 drivers when running from the bootable version.

    It takes about 20mins to restore a small 6GB Windows XP primary bootable partition in this way.

    The True Image file is stored on a USB2 hi-speed portable drive (a Freecom FHD2-Pro 40GB).

    The motherboard supports USB2 and data transfer is fast within Windows.

    The thing is, earlier builds of True Image restores my image faster, e.g. 5mins. Have you now removed the USB2 hi-speed drivers from True Image? I know it needn't take 20mins to restore a 6GB partition - it didn't used to, either.

    Many thanks.
     
  2. pnozay

    pnozay Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2005
    Posts:
    1
    It seems to be the case. It took 6 hours to backup my 30Gb primary partition using the bootable CD into a USB 2 hard drive! True image 8 bootable CD must be using USB 1 :doubt:
     
  3. Chutsman

    Chutsman Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2005
    Posts:
    1,181
    Location:
    Brandon, Florida, USA
    It's gotta be something else ... I created an image (to an external hd) of my 80-gig laptop drive - about 30-gig full - in about 1 hr. 50 min. using normal compression. The ext. hd is connected to a usb 2 port. I did this using the bootable CD build 826.
     
    Last edited: Jun 20, 2005
  4. Britnash

    Britnash Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Posts:
    15
    Hmm. Strange.

    The thing is, a few builds ago it was faster.

    Hopefully the Acronis support guru will pop his head round here shortly.
     
  5. Donprovo

    Donprovo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2005
    Posts:
    82
    I use build 826 which is faster on my hardware. Build 859 is very slow.
     
  6. Polite bump.

    Thanks tech support. My question was, have you removed the USB2 high-speed drivers from True Image bootable 8.859 and recent prior builds? If they're still there, is there a bug that stops them from working at high speed?

    Because that seems to be my experience.

    Thanks.
     
  7. Is there any reason why Acronis Tech support is ignoring this?

    I'm a registered user.
     
  8. Acronis Support

    Acronis Support Acronis Support Staff

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2004
    Posts:
    25,885
    Hello Britnash,

    Thank you for choosing Acronis Disk Backup Software.

    I am sorry for not answering earlier. The drivers for USB2.0 are not deleted and you should be able to restore via USB2.0 at a high speed. Could you please download new build 889, create Acronis Bootable CD with it and check whether the problem persists?

    Thank you.
    --
    Ilya Toytman
     
  9. Donprovo

    Donprovo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2005
    Posts:
    82
    The slow driver problem started with 859 and still exists in 889.
     
  10. Acronis Support

    Acronis Support Acronis Support Staff

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2004
    Posts:
    25,885
    Hello Donprovo,

    Could you please create Acronis Bootable CD with the build that worked fast for you and create sysinfo.txt file as described at Acronis Help Post using this CD? After that please create the sysinfo.txt with the CD create with build 889 and send both files to support@acronis.com along with the link to this thread. We will compare the files and try to find out the reason for the problem you enountered.

    Thank you.
    --
    Ilya Toytman
     
  11. Donprovo

    Donprovo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2005
    Posts:
    82
    Hi Ilya.

    We have the same discussion in two threads.

    I do not have a floppy drive as required to create sysinfo. Is there any other way I can get you the info you need?
     
  12. Acronis Support

    Acronis Support Acronis Support Staff

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2004
    Posts:
    25,885
    Hello Donprovo,

    The only other way is to take photos with digital camera as I described in the other thread.

    Thank you.
    --
    Ilya Toytman
     
    Last edited: Jun 27, 2005
  13. Menorcaman

    Menorcaman Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2004
    Posts:
    4,661
    Location:
    Menorca (Balearic Islands) Spain
    Hi Donprovo,

    Just a thought but did you actually time how long it took to create the image to the USB hard drive, or did you go by TI estimated time?

    I've just finished some tests whereby I measured the actual elapsed time to create an image of my system drive (6.71GB of used space) using the Bootable Rescue CD from builds 826, 859 and 889 in turn. Results as follows:

    Build 826 = 7 mins
    Build 859 = 7 mins
    Build 889 = 7 mins

    As can be seen, as far as my system is concerned, there is absolutely no difference between the three builds. So, unless TI uses different USB drivers for various USB hard drive enclosure chipsets (which I doubt), I'm at a loss to explain why some users are claiming slower performance for builds 859 and 889. Perhaps their HD enclosure chipsets haven't implemented the USB 2.0 standard correctly? There are a couple of lengthy Threads in this forum regarding good/bad USB chipsets, which illustrate that not all chipsets are born equal !!

    Regards
     
  14. Donprovo

    Donprovo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2005
    Posts:
    82

    Hi Menorca,

    I NEVER go by the crazy times that TI8 gives as estimates. If I ever did, I wouldn't live long enough to see a restore. ;)

    No, this problem is hardware specific. You are one of the lucky ones who have seen no speed decrease from build 826.

    The decrease in performance is not something you need a stopwatch to verify. It's so dramatic that with 859 and 889 you think the computer FROZE!

    As with so many other TrueImage 8 flaws, the hardware that it's run on may determine the success or failure of a feature or operation.

    As for USB enclosure chipsets, that's a red herring in this case. When you can run the EXACT hardware and see the decrease in 859 and 889 you know that Acronis broke the drivers feature.

    In your case, you may never have had a FAST process in the first place so you don't see a decrease in speed.
     
  15. Menorcaman

    Menorcaman Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2004
    Posts:
    4,661
    Location:
    Menorca (Balearic Islands) Spain
    Hi again Donprovo,

    I wouldn't dismiss your USB enclosure chipset just yet!! Acronis continue to add and update the Linux device drivers on the boot rescue CD. Perhaps the USB driver fully implements all aspects of the USB 2 specification correctly whereas the chipset doesn't. Hence when the driver is updated your external enclosure falls over.

    Hmm. 6.71GB resulted in an image of 4.67GB, which was transferred in 7 minutes. This equates to approx 16 Mbytes/sec "real world" data tranfer rate. Me thinks that's pretty o.k. over a USB 2.0 link. However, as always, I stand ready to be corrected.

    Regards
     
    Last edited: Jun 28, 2005
  16. beenthereb4

    beenthereb4 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2004
    Posts:
    568
    You will not be corrected by me, I would say that is quite fast and USB 2.0 for sure!
     
  17. feverfive

    feverfive Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2005
    Posts:
    121
    After Ilya suggested I connect my external HD via USB2 instead of firewire (b/c the boot CD didn't load firewire drivers compatible w/ my chipset, apparently), I was able to access my HD outside of Windows. I created an image of 9.8GB in DOS (uncompressed) & it took almost 2 hours complete, & approx. another 20 minutes to verify the image. In Windows, I created a (normal) compressed image immediately after re-boot (around 5.7GB, I think), & it took only around 10-12 minutes.....
     
  18. Donprovo

    Donprovo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2005
    Posts:
    82
    Hi Menorca.

    Your speeds certainly prove it's running at USB2. My speeds USED to be in that neighborhood. Here's my history:

    Image 40GB drive with 10GB used = 12 minutes with 826, 800 & 796.
    Restore above = 22 minutes same as above.

    Now with 859 or 889:

    Image 40GB drive with 10GB used = 1 Hour and 17 minutes.
    Restore above = 1 Hour and 48 minutes.

    Nothing changed except swapping the rescue cd's and performing the same operations with the same hardware.

    To answer your hypothesis about previously faulty USB2 implementation with my hardware I say not very likely. Here's why:

    When I try build 826 vs. 889 on my friend's Dell 700m laptop, I get the same results using his brand new Seagate external 40GB USB2 hard drive.

    I also tested his laptop with my external hard drive with the same results. Mine's a 1 month old CompUSA 2.5" enclosure running a Hitachi 60GB 5400rpm Travelstar drive.

    Then, I did the exact same tests on his Dimension 3000 desktop and got almost the exact same times as on the laptops although slightly faster. The dramatic falloff in speed with builds 859 and 889 existed on the desktop computer as well.

    My conclusion is that all these USB2 enclosure manufacturers cannot be improperly implementing the USB2 protocols as they all carry the same USB2 certification for their enclosures and cables.

    It stands to reason that Acronis has done exactly what we suspect and see the evidence of: That is, the drivers in build 859 & 889 are somehow either different and slower or they are impeded by some other change Acronis made in the rescue cd software.

    There can be no other reasonable explanation based on all the evidence in these threads. Sure we can come up with a million maybe this and maybe thats but before we get way out in left field with blaming the rest of the pc world for Acronis failures in these two recent builds let's look at their track record with these two recent builds.

    Under the circumstances, Acronis should be required to tell US what they did differently in builds 859 and 889 that IN THEIR BEST GUESS would explain why the image and restore speeds dropped a magnitude of 10 times slower on the same mainstream hardware as compared to builds 826, 800 and 796.
     
  19. Britnash

    Britnash Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Posts:
    15
    Dear Acronis True Image support,

    Thanks for your response. I've tried restoring using 8.889 and it still takes about 20mins from a USB2 external drive TI image of 2GB (uncompressed it's 5-6GB). Remember, an earlier build didn't do this it took 4-5mins.

    I'd use an earlier build but I didn't keep it and the earliest I can download from your website is 8.800 which has the same problem.

    Please can you tell me how to download the first release of True Image 8? I didn't buy it boxed. I can give you my serial no. and registration details.

    Thanks.
     
  20. Donprovo

    Donprovo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2005
    Posts:
    82
    I would like to hear an update from Acronis as to what they are doing to cure the problem of s-l-o-w rescue cd driver performance in builds 859 and 889?

    Or, do they just ignore all of us who are experiencing slow performance with these two builds?
     
  21. feverfive

    feverfive Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2005
    Posts:
    121
    I don't mind the slow performance as much as the fact the rescue CD doesn't load drivers capable of reading my firewire connected external HD. When I am connectd via USB2, the performance is VERY slow when not in Windows, but, at least I know (I think) that I can use USB2 to connect my external HD & do a restore if needed. Then again, if/when Acronis gets the firewire issue fixed, I'm sure speed will become an issue for me as well, just to be honest!! :D
     
  22. Acronis Support

    Acronis Support Acronis Support Staff

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2004
    Posts:
    25,885
    Hello all,

    If you have the problem with the slow restoration from USB2 when you use the latest build, please create the sysinfo.txt files with build 889 and with the latest working fast build we will try to find the fix and send all the information to support@acronis.com. It will allow us to investigate the problem.

    Please accept our apologies for your inconvenience.

    Thank you.
    --
    Irina Shirokova
     
  23. Crissy

    Crissy Guest

    Someone could tell me why cannot I boot from CDo_O...every advice from support is not useful at this moment!!!

    Crissy
     
  24. Acronis Support

    Acronis Support Acronis Support Staff

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2004
    Posts:
    25,885
    Hello Crissy,

    Thank you for choosing Acronis Disk Backup Software.

    First of all, please make sure you use the latest (889) build, which is available on our web site at http://www.acronis.com/homecomputing/support/updates/. To get access to updates you should register your software first at http://www.acronis.com/my/products/registration/. Please disable any download managers, internet download/connection boosters, etc. before the download. After that please create Acronis Bootable CD using the latest build.

    If the problem persists please boot your computer from the Acronis True Image rescue disc and press F11 key when the "Starting Acronis Loader..." message appears. After you get the "Linux Kernel Settings" prompt, please remove the "quiet" word, click on the "OK" button and wait till the output stops. Please write down several (~10) last strings of the output and send to support@acronis.com along with the description of the situation.

    Thank you.
    --
    Ilya Toytman
     
  25. Crissy

    Crissy Guest

    Hi Ilya, I tried to do every thing you describe me, when the laptop boot the last screen I read is "Acronis is loading, please wait...", the machine stops working and the screen is black...

    I'm sorry for my bad english, I'm italian, Ihope you understand what I want to tell you.

    Thanks Crissy
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.