Discussion in 'backup, imaging & disk mgmt' started by pszilard, Dec 14, 2008.
At last with SP i never needed any support anymore.
I looked at SP but they would not let me trial the CD without buying the program .
Let's do that:
1. You couldn't get ATI v9 and v10 (later changed to v10 and v11) to work on your Vista PC. I missed your explanation whether you tried trial versions or bought licensed versions without ensuring they would work on your PC first. If you couldn't get trial versions to work, presumably you possessed sufficient wit not to purchase the software and aren't out any money.
2. There's nothing unusual about certain programs, even popular ones, not working on certain PCs or conflicting with other installed software.
3. Because you couldn't get ATI to work on your PCs, you denigrate people who didn't have your unfortunate experiences. ATI didn't work on your PC so it's a "complete ripoff" no matter how many people use Acronis products without any difficulties.
4. You accused Karen76 of "deliberately leaving out" words you only know about because she wrote them in this forum. That's just one of the more bizarre statements you've made. I found her comments both cogent and factual.
5. You labeled Acronis support as "virtually nonexistent" and you're not about to let any pesky facts to the contrary affect your opinion. Is Acronis e-mail support slow? Yes, at least in my experience. Their Live Chat support, however, is extremely prompt, at least in my experience. Is Acronis support "virtually nonexistent"? No; that's absurd.
6. Seagate DiscWizard IS Acronis True Image v10 less the ability to make incremental and/or scheduled backups and the requirement to have a Seagate hard drive installed or connected.
I've used, and still use, multiple versions of Acronis True Image on my PCs. I've also used DiscWizard. I've never had any problem creating or restoring any backup image with any Acronis product.
Is ATI the best imaging software? Not in my opinion but it certainly works well for most users. That's a fact no matter how much certain people may wish to deny it. What's "best" is what works well on a particular PC, is affordable to the user, and meets that person's needs. I've tried several backup imaging programs and each has advantages and disadvantages.
The answer should be obvious: Because your experiences with ATI aren't the same as most Acronis customers. I've can't recall having any problem with v9 after I stopped using its Secure Zone; an essentially useless feature. I noticed a very trivial glitch with a previous version of ATI v2009; the latest build fixed it.
I had a problem with scheduled backups using Paragon Drive Backup 8.51 Professional. Paragon Support finally gave me a solution for the problem but it took them months. There are things I like better about True Image and there are things I like better about Paragon. IMHO neither program is perfect and neither "sucks."
You couldn't get ATI v9 to work; it works swell for Karen76, myself, and thousands of other satisfied users. RAD couldn't get ATI v10/v11 to work; I've read plenty of posts by Wilders members who like v10 and dislike v11. Then there are the folks who like v11 and don't like v2009. ATI v10 worked fine for me. I never tried v11 but v2009 (v12) is working perfectly on my Vista PC. I wish Acronis would quit trying to add "extra features" to its imaging software, but I realize this was a marketing decision they think will cause the program to have more appeal to the general public.
I think ShadowProtect is a fine program. If money was no object, it would probably be my first choice for backup imaging software. For the price of a single SP license, however, a person can buy (with available discounts) three or four Paragon or ATI licenses. Then there's also that pesky annual maintenance fee for SP.
What soured me on ShadowProtect (besides the initial price and annual support fee) were their license activation scheme and the fact SP is geared for corporate, not individual, customers. When I contacted SP support while I using the trial version their attitude was "We don't really care if you purchase our software or not. We cater to big companies, not guys like you." Also, once I purchase a program, I prefer the ability to uninstall it and reinstall it on a new PC without having to contact the developer and beg permission to reactivate my license key.
I can't speak for others but money for me was no issue at the time i purchased SP licenses.Remember Imaging is the foremost and most essential part in computing !! Sadly many ignore the fact and are living on a knife edge so to speak.
What happened to your "100% reading comprehension"?
What part of those three sentences I wrote in a previous post in this thread do you fail to understand?
How many people have to tell you ATI works fine on their PCs before that unpalatable fact sinks in with you? Is there a software support forum for any program which doesn't have people reporting problems? I know I've never seen one.
Acronis has won me back over. I now have 2 different OS's imaged with all my apps working. I can switch between them in about 10 minutes.
How many times does Karen76 have to tell you she's made and restored images with three versions of ATI? I've made scores of (always successful) image restorations with multiple versions of ATI. Are you one of those troll characters I read about?
I congratulate you on your good fortune; for some of us money is an issue, especially in the current economy. The one program I'd consider under the "money is no object" scenario is FirstDefense-ISR.
I'm keenly aware of the importance of backup imaging software, a fact several friends of mine are probably tired of hearing me preach about. I submit, however, that a competent person using a couple free imaging programs (such as those offered by Paragon, Acronis/Seagate and Macrium Reflect) is probably as well, or arguably better, protected than a person relying only on ShadowProtect. I'm not aware of any single program that can't suffer a failure of some type.
I would like to express my own opinion about support issues that have been mentioned in this thread. I have Acronis TI 9 on my XP computer, ShadowProtect Desktop 3.3 for my Vista machine. I have done a few restorations with Acronis and they have always worked; I've done many restorations with SP and they are faster. Undeniably if one spends some time reading the Acronis forum there is a perception of a product with many problems. But this is the nature of a support forum: to report problems.
When I first bought Acronis I had a persistent problem with it (not worth mentioning). Acronis support was excellent, not through the forums, but through private e-mails (replies would often come the same day). Storagecraft (the makers of SP) have a terrible forum (you often don't get a single reply) but when I contacted them for an issue with ShadowUser (same company, different product) through the e-mail system and with a registration number, they replied the same day and solved instantly the problem.
The bottom line is in my opinion, when companies are sure they are dealing with genuine paying customers, they'll respond (the only exception I found was Symantec a few years ago, they say it is a lot better nowadays). Forums have all sorts of people posting, and can't be a real testing ground for support issues.
I am not sure if you are asking me or not but yes, I have actually made and restored images with ATI 10 but not 2009 since I do not own a copy. I have however also made and restored images with ATI 11.
1. ATI v9 is not ATI 10 or 2009
2. DiscWizard is claimed to be ATI 10, but who can really say that for certain ?!?!? It is a different product, marketed by a different company. It is obviously "stripped down", so it is different in at least a few aspects. Again, a different program is not ATI 10 or 2009. You may continue to claim it is the same. I congratulate you for your ability to see into the code.
3. Your own statement: "I've only performed two restorations with ATI 2009 ..."
So your defense of ATI is based on two restorations......
YOU'VE GOT ME !!!
My reading comprehension falls to 99%. You have the last word. This is just plain silly.
After reading your post I downloaded the free version of Macrius Reflect and gave it a run. The backup was created in around the same time as TI and the verify ran really fast (no auto verify in the free version). Image size was around the same as TI images, using the default settings in Reflect.
Mounting and unmounting an image was virtually instantaneous. At this stage I haven't created a rescue disk, but on the second time of opening the software I was reminded to make a rescue disk. I invited a friend over (who's looking for an image programme) to have a look and he was so impressed he's decided to download and play with the free version for a few days with the idea of purchasing the full version.
When the time comes for me to upgrade TI I'll give serous thought about using Reflect.
Thanks for the tip
You have to apply for ShadowProtect Desktop Edition Evaluation Request:
Don't worry if it sounds like a corporate application, it works for home users as well. You should be able to get a link where you can download an ISO image that can be transformed into a recovery CD.
Who said ATI v9 is the same as ATI v10 or ATI v2009? Surely not me.
Who? Well, let's see: The programmers at Acronis who designed it, officials at Seagate who contracted for it, and anyone who has used DiscWizard and/or bothered to do a tad of research on the subject. Since you won't believe me or other members who've used both versions, there's nothing (other than fear) stopping you from simply asking the folks at Acronis and/or Seagate. It's not exactly a big secret.
FirstDefense-ISR and Rollback Rx have been marketed by different companies under different names yet the fundamental core programs remain the same. Seagate doesn't exactly "market" DiscWizard; they give it away to anyone who wants to download it (you need to have a Seagate hard drive for it to work, however). If you'd actually used DiscWizard (which you obviously haven't), you might not be writing so many foolish and inaccurate remarks about it. As DiscWizard users already know, it's clearly branded as an Acronis product and contains Acronis marketing features (e.g. a nag screen which appears during the image creation wizard encouraging you to buy the full version of ATI).
So removing the ability to create incremental and scheduled backups (in order to produce the basic, bare bones imaging program Seagate wanted and prevent Acronis from losing sales of its full version) mysteriously transformed ATI v10 from being garbage to a trouble-free program as the DiscWizard variant? Right, thanks for explaining that. Did I miss your explanation why so many DiscWizard/MaxBlast users eventually wind up buying the full version of ATI since, according to you, it's a "complete ripoff"? No, I didn't think so.
As much as you seek to evade reality in an attempt to obfuscate your inaccurate statements, DiscWizard (and MaxBlast) is ATI v10 minus some bells and whistles plus a requirement to have a Seagate (or Maxtor) drive present. Your ludicrous, unsubstantiated assertion Acronis was inexplicably capable of producing a trouble-free variant of ATI v10 for Seagate (and Maxtor) yet sold a full version to thousands of customers which didn't work at all is such that only a person of little wit can excuse you.
The free versions of imaging software offered by Paragon, Acronis, and Macrium Reflect are all "stripped down" of certain features when compared to the full, pay versions. The only person I'm aware who has ever suggested (naturally without citing a shred of evidence) this affected reliability between the free and full versions is you.
I never said DiscWizard was the same as ATI v2009; I said it's (by design) a limited version of ATI v10. More of that objective reality stuff which seems to confound and distress you. Why do you persist in attributing remarks to me which I never made?
Try to follow along: ATI = Acronis True Image. ATI encompasses all variants of Acronis True Image, not just v10. My "defense of ATI" is, as previously described, based on dozens of successful restorations using ATI v9 (for over three years) and DiscWizard (ATI v10; for a year and a half), and the two restorations I've made so far with ATI v2009. I've never had any unsuccessful image creation or restoration with any version of ATI. Is there a reasonably bright child handy who can read my words and explain them to you?
Since you appear to have a pathological aversion to facts which contradict your unreasoning hatred of Acronis, I doubt there's any number of successful restorations ATI users can report which will satisfy you. Perhaps you missed the fact I have multiple imaging programs as well as FirstDefense-ISR on both of my PCs so ATI is only one option when I decide to restore an image or snapshot. That's one reason why I haven't performed more restorations using ATI; my first choice is usually FD-ISR.
I assure you that's no great feat.
More like 10% and that's being charitable. With your overt disdain for facts and telling the truth, you'd have a promising career in politics, law or used car sales.
Quote Karen 76 : FirstDefense-ISR and Rollback Rx have been marketed by different companies under different names yet the fundamental core programs remain the same.
I don't think so. Can you explain how Todd(Leapfrog) is involved with Rollback Rx ?
Acronis is a really good product! Lots of people love it. Very few problems.
(pssst.....check the acronis forum: https://www.wilderssecurity.com/forumdisplay.php?f=65 )
The major thing I dislike about chat groups is this kind of nonsense. This is supposed to be a place for folks to help each other and this sort of thing helps no one.
Huupi, I can't explain what I never wrote. I said FirstDefense-ISR and Rollback Rx have been marketed by different companies under different names; I did not write that FD-ISR and Rollback Rx were the same core program (they're entirely different and unrelated). As recently as two years ago, what we usually call FD-ISR was marketed as FirstDefense-ISR by Raxco; the same program was sold by Software Pursuits as Bootback; a third reseller sold it under another name which escapes me at the moment. The fact FD-ISR was sold under three different labels was often discussed here on Wilders back then.
I direct your attention to TechSpot.com: "I wanted to share this information about this invaluable program I have been using since the first of the year . This program is [sic] has saved my system sooo many times I lost count. The name of the program is BootBack. FD-ISR and BootBack are the same exact program from Leapfrog Software which distributes the software to different resellers."
Rollback Rx and Eaz-Fix are essentially the same core program sold under different names by two companies. I'm sorry if my previous post confused you.
Yes, your right misread the sentence,Sorry.
The main problem with Acronis is the verification tool. I have seen more than once a verified image reported as ok, in reality to be corrupted.
Karen if you really believe that acronis is as reliable as you say it is, then why do you have installed macrium and paragon along with ATI on your pc?
Using multiple copies of the same backup is a very good idea. If the place you store one image fails, you have another copy ready to replace it.
But using multiple imaging software, means that either the one you like is not reliable (and you have a backup strategy just in case..) or that it doesn't offer all the features that you need.
I have begun thinking of adding a 2nd backup (imaging) program as just in case protection. While I have found TI to be reliable that does not mean that something will not go wrong at some time....say my rescue disk becomes corrupted and is not there when I need it. If I have a plan B for the backup plan I have extra protection. Its not like it would cost an arm and a leg to implement so I can't see the harm.
I use the Acronis Secure Zone in addition to a boot cd. Double back up
And what exactly is impeding you from making a second or a 3rd copy of your rescue cd?
But, I agree. There is nothing wrong using a second imaging program as a backup...
For telling the truth I always reccommend it at my friends that have acronis home or norton ghost for imaging their pc.
As an advise always use imaging products that are based at the same engines(/builds) with their pro/enterprise brothers, or go directly with the pro versions. (True Image Echo Workstation or Symantec backup exec desktop)
lodore - I have disabled these services and still been able to make and restore full images. There is certainly no need to have them run in the background if all you want is a simple image.
Never gave me any problems when I used versions 6, 7, 8, 9, 9.1, 10 and 2009 .Shadow Protect is a bit faster . My only criticism is that Acronis seem to feel they have to add all sorts of features making each new version more bloated than the last.
Nothing at all apart from a chronic case of not getting around to it. I was considering using Paragon or ShadowProtect as a 2nd backup program. I do not want a Symantec product as I have had issues with their tech support model and bad experiences with NAV back in the days when I used it. My only Symantec product is GoBack but I became involved with that one before Symantec bought it from Roxio and have been using the last standalone version since 2004. I am now finally getting away from Symantec altogether since I am replacing GoBack with RollBack RX. That being said I don't understand your comment
Why would the imaging programs engines (whatever that is) be an issue. I would think different approaches would be better from an insurance point of view.