Very Disappointed

LOL. I know my method sounds crazy on the surface, but in my case, I have multiple systems, so I don't have time for unstable foolishness. After all, time is money.
I've lost count as to the number of backups and restores and disk clones I've done with Ghost 2002 since it first came out. It's simple and reliable, and has never failed me. Not once. (knocking on wood... LOL)
Along with that, I'm a die-hard believer in cold imaging. Winblows is an unstable OS to begin with. Asking an imaging program (ANY imaging program) to image while Winblows is running strikes me as just too damn risky.

And as for FAT32 vs. NTFS, in my case there's no performance difference. The partitions are small and I keep the systems well maintained. I only use NTFS on my production systems (i.e., audio and video), because of the file size limitations of FAT32.

When someone releases an imaging program that actually performs like an imaging program, I'll buy it. But the current products that are available are too hit and miss, and some are downright crap. The only exceptions are the pro grade ones, but I'm not willing to part with that kind of money.

 

Good point. Actually, I have looked into BESR, but considering Symantec's track record when buying other company's products, I'm still a bit iffy on it. At the very least, the server version has been on my table of future options for some time now.

 

Quote

When someone releases an imaging program that actually performs like an imaging program, I'll buy it. But the current products that are available are too hit and miss, and some are downright crap. The only exceptions are the pro grade ones, but I'm not willing to part with that kind of money.

I totally agree with you Joe in PA.

If we bought a new car, home appliance etc and something was not right with it, we would have it repaired by the company at no charge and no input by the user. What REALLY gets me with the Acronis threads is that THEY expect the user to fix THEIR problems all the bloody time and that is not on. They do not even consider that many of the users are not computer geeks and that is why users want a reliable backup program. Acronis insist on demanding so much information which is such an inconvenience to the user. Sure, all computers have different setups etc, but Acronis and other image programs should consider this and provide a hassle free program that " JUST WORKS ".

P.S. Notice how silent Acronis is with all the criticism!! They know we are all right and they will not and never will admit it.

 

Hello all,

We're doing our best to help our customers. If you've encountered any issue then please start a thread on this forum and fill it with details or contact our Support Team and we will do our best to assist you and to resolve the issue or explain any feature.

Regarding 'Product A is better' discussions - such threads are based on personal experience. For example, product A can work like a charm on the system #1 and would fail completely on the system #2, product B would work only on system 2 and so on. If our software is not working on your system then let us assist and fix it.

Thank you.
--
Michael Levchenko

 

That's too bad actually. On the other hand I might not have added the emphasis "especially" to the bad news about SATA & RAID configurations. Version 9 has trouble with some perhaps - but not all. I myself did NOT! Although for reasons unrelated to my imaging software, I no longer run my SATA disks in RAID. But when I did (RAID 0 stripe), I recollect no problems imaging or restoring with version 9 b2337. Guess I was lucky. But that aside, I realize that Vista incompatibility is a deal breaker for most.