I would never use anything other that terabytes IFW/IFL. I haven't ever had a single bad restore. It's very scriptable. Plus it's able to image usb flash drives, which reflect is not. That's important to me because I have a large multi-boot drive.
@Brian K - the Default for Reflect is mb/s but one of their settings allows that to be changed to mB/s when being displayed... I use that all the time.
If you were stuck in a middle of the desert and you're only allowed to keep one program, would you keep TIB or Macrium Reflect? I'm currently using Macrium Reflect and had been for a couple years but I had use TIB before and during the time, I find it slow BUT was very reliable. I'm now revisiting it again, haha. Especially since I was not aware it has something like delta restores now. There is also Drive Snapshot but I'm going to continue to use that as a backup.
Luckily I've never had to make that choice... REFLECT is my main imaging system and TIB is my backup. I use them both (one to backup the other) and, as mentioned above, TIB images UFDs (USB Flash Drives) just fine which is the exact requirement I have that @n8chavez mentioned above.
Since I don't have a need to backup UFD's I chose MR over IFW because of the following 3 reasons: 1. Reflect's user interface provides a straight-forward method for creating almost any backup schedule whereas IFW does not. Perhaps that's achievable with IFW's scripting facility but I don't consider that a user-friendly approach. 2. Reflect offers a Boot Menu option where you can choose to boot into your normal Windows or into Reflect's recovery environment. I have found that to be extremely useful. 3. Reflect offers a Free Edition whereas IFW does not. While there is no incremental backup functionality in the free edition (which can be valuable for intraday backups) I find differential backups work great for my daily backup routine.
