Will there be more updates to TI9 Home?

Hi guys,

Acronis Support has just replied to the PM I sent earlier this week. Basically, the matter regarding bug fixes for TI 9.0 is still being discussed internally with their Development Team. No timescale given for resolution but I will give Acronis the benefit of doubt for now and hang around a little longer.

Regards

 

Well, if any one member in this forum can put pressure on Acronis about this issue with version 9, it is you, Menorcaman. I'm certain that Acronis would feel they are losing their best "beta-tester-& forum group communicator" plus more, in regard to their public relations, by making a hasty decision and not 'finishing' version 9, as they have stated many times in their past posted replies to these still pending issues.

Ahead Nero is one company that keeps upgrading old versions after their new ones are issued. Acronis should follow their patterns, as Nero is a fine product and Ahead is a company that is very 'big' and successful.

Allen

 

Hi Allen,

I agree with you entirely. This was the main reason I eventually paid out my money to upgrade from Nero 6 Reloaded to Nero 7 Premium. Not that I needed the new features but I just liked the way Ahead conducted its business.

Best Regards

 

Ahhhhhh, Menorcaman, time to hang up your TI mouse and enjoy those lovely beaches.

 

Hi Menorcaman.

Thanks for the feedback.

F.

 

Don't listen to Ralphie, Menorcaman - sun rays are getting more harmful by the hour. Monitor shine has become a much safer option.

 

Ben, come to New Zealand get all the copies you want, including version 8.

http://www.dse.co.nz/cgi-bin/dse.filereader?4551e948009cfb26273fc0a87f9906eb EN/catalogs/CTG0000100

John.

 

Seems ole Dick Smith has a bit of larceny in him according to his prices! No small wonder he had item available. There is not that much difference in the currency rates to my knowledge.

Better hurry down for a good ripping off!

 

It seems strange to me that Acronis moves to a new version so frequently. Most software developers only do so after a particular version has been around for a while and has been sorted out. A company that doesn’t perfect a version before moving to a new one deservedly gets a bad reputation.

Of all the types of software an imaging program is one that needs to be free of bugs. The backup part of Vista is surely only going to be a basic one and not a major threat to Acronis but moving from one version to another before a version is perfected and expecting people to shell out again to maybe have their problems fixed is unforgivable. Two years between versions gives enough time for a version to be sorted out but not with a new version every year.

I’ve told a number of people that Acronis True Image 8.0 is the best imaging software program there is because it works so well and is easy to use. With most programs a new version every year with a few new features is okay because whether it works flawlessly is not crucial but with imaging software it is.

I’m sticking with version 8.0 until I have to upgrade because it is relatively trouble free and when I do upgrade the most important thing will be whether the imaging program is reliable rather than whether it has a lot of new fangled features. Acronis may be growing exponentially as one person claimed but with reliability being crucial in imaging software it’s what needs to be put first before new features and constant change for the sake of it or the exponential growth will consist mainly of people who tried it once and decide not to do so again.

 

Hmm. I wonder if my Acer AL1922 TFT gives off any UV A/Bs? Might have to smear some sunblock on, even though it's nearly winter here in Menorca .

Regards

 

Depends on which country you're posting from?

For instance:
$1NZ = 66 cents US
$1NZ = 52 Euro
$1NZ = 35 pence UK
$1NZ = 75 cents CAN
$1NZ = 86 cents AUS

But you're right about being ripped off

John.

 

Uncle Ben,

I don't mind that you stir the pot. Hey, we are adults, and should be able to take a healthy debate.

But, I do take issue with your premise that we should just look on the bright side, and console ourselves that ATI is selling well. Why shouldn't it? People need reliable backups. And this is a powerful and highly rated program, with some real issues. This is why most of us are so passionate about fighting for Acronis to get this right.

Before my boycott (see post #42 of this thread), I was a frequent poster in this forum, and grew increasingly concerned about just how reliable ATI was. I tried to help when someone came to this forum, and said, help, my thesis is in a .tib file that won't restore, or mount. When they checked that .tib file a week earlier, ATI said the archive was valid. But, now, they can't even get at their data! Turns out, once a .tib file is more than slightly corrupted, even the data recovery pros can't open it or recover the data inside. Sure woke me up.

If I read you correctly, you seem to be saying, just tell them, relax, mon, it works for most people most of the time, so don't worry, be happy.

I can't say that. This is not elective, non-invasive surgery, in many cases. This matters. To a lot of people. Their data may be their livelihood, or just as important to them. This is not a debate about why a feature isn't so mature, and another one a bit easier to use. It's about how reliable this program is for backing up and restoring digital files and partitions.

Acronis says that this program is designed to protect our valuable data. What it doesn't say is that it may not. Or, that some features may cause an otherwise intact system to suffer, or our data to be lost. It turns out that ATI is dependant on our PCs to run well for it to work accurately. Bad memory or faulty chipsets are often blamed for backup file corruption. But, isn't the idea to have something we can fall back on in just those situations?

Over the past few months I've come to understand that most of the frequent posters here know more than enough about software and hardware to keep their data and systems safe regardless of any shortcomings of ATI. Most don't even use any of the file backup features in ATI, or save to DVDs, and can easily restore corrupt boot files and get their PCs back up and running in short order. A few buggy new features don't cause them any real harm.

But, for those unsuspecting folks who come here and look around and say, well, this must be a well-tested and reliable program, only to find out later that one or more features in ATI may leave them with an unusable backup of their data, or corrupt their boot files, this can be quite significant. The frequent response is, 'oh, no, you shouldn't have done it that way, none of us use that feature to do that.' Not to suggest that this is said insensitively, as I find that most posters in this forum are treated with respect, and the assistance is usually extremely helpful and insightful. But, unless one knows the ins and outs of this ever increasingly complex program, there are real pitfalls, with real implications for your data and systems. After several months of study and experimentation, I can now use ATI to help keep my PC running. But I don't suggest anyone use ATI without first spending considerable time learning what works and what doesn't work. The risks are just too great, and the documentation of those risks too absent.

So, Uncle Ben, you could be right, ATI may work most of the time. I would bet, however, that many who purchase ATI have no idea how well ATI will restore an image on their PC to a new hard drive, after a hard drive failure. They've simply never tried that. Let alone tested all the features that Menorcaman and others have reported as buggy or in-accurate, and which, in most cases, Acronis support has confirmed need to be fixed. So, we really don't know what percentage of users these problems effect. If a few folks report problems with airbags that deploy incorrectly, does that mean that none of the other airbags in similar vehicles are defective, simply because they remain untested? If a bug is hardware and software independent, and central to the functionality of this program, it needs to be fixed. Not in another version, for another set of customers.

I suppose if Acronis changes the user guide to say that a bug is now a feature, as Menorcaman points out in post #114 of this thread, they no longer have to resolve it. Having to keep all differential files in order to validate any is not the way backup programs are designed to run. How many users realize that they can not delete intermediate differential backups, when they run out of room? That it is now included in the user's guide does not make it right. I can restore files to my PC today, with V 9.3677, that ATI reports as a successful operation, and have a corrupt file system, and some corrupt files as a result. With no way in the program to back out of that errant operation. And no fault or error reported. Is this acceptable performance?

I think that a program that claims to be a rescue environment for computer failure should be rock solid. And do what it says it does. Nothing more. Nothing less. Sure, roll out new features -- that are thoroughly tested and work. And, when any bugs slip through, fix them at once, so that we can rely on this program. And tell us what Acronis knows. If something is under investigation, wouldn't it be a good idea to inform users that caution is prudent, on that feature, until it has been resolved? So we can only use what works. This is not a question of the $50 cost of ATI. This is about our data, and our PCs running, and what the value of that is to us. Nothing less.

So what if buggy software is the rule rather than the exception? Buggy games are one thing. Buggy backups are something else entirely. I didn't even know what imaging was before I bought ATI. I wanted data security. But I now only use ATI as an imaging program to restore my programs and OS, and do not rely on it to protect my non-replaceable data. As I've said before, perhaps Acronis needs more than one tier of backup and imaging software. A pro-level, with fully tested, reliable and secure features, and another one that doesn't promise that level of data security. Or, perhaps Acronis should say, this program is only suitable for users above a certain level of computer fluency.

So, while I'd rather not worry, and be happy, this is not the present state of affairs.

I hope that Menorcaman's report today that Acronis is still considering releasing a new build with needed fixes soon turns into a reality, and that this signals a renewed commitment by Acronis to join their forum members in getting this right. I agree that the market and investment potential of this product is remarkable. And think it will succeed best by performing accurately and reliably.

Regards,

Christopher

 

Sadly I'm not in the market for a product that works for "most people most of the time" Computer software for the home user always strikes me a such a shady business, as there is always that magic get out clause, of "oh it must be something on your system, nothing wrong with our product" I was planning on buying ATI this weekend, but having read through these forums, I think I will continue looking at the alternatives.

 

Well, you can always try the trial version, before parting with any money. If it does all that you require, then it makes the think about list.

Don't forget most vendor forums tend to be of the 'it's not working' variety.


Colin

 

You know while TI may not be perfect or bug free, even with the current known issues, it is still one of if not the best imaging programs out there. Before you just write it off based on the current complaints, I would definately give it a try first and see how it works for you on your system. If your considering Ghost, I can tell you that you will be back looking at TI again in the near future.

 

Hi Tradetime,
The main problem has been the commitment (or lack thereof) by Acronis to fix the issues in version 9 which are regarded as important by the user base (at least those users who participate in this forum).
Bugs do get fixed and I applaud Acronis for the policy of frequent updates which address issues.
However they do need to listen more to the user base and fix bugs which many users feel need addressing.
Undoubtedly there are users who are satisfied with TrueImage and many who try the product but can't get it to work successfully because of the bugs we have been trying to get Acronis to fix. I'm sure it would be in Acronis's best interest to resolve these issues ASAP as I expect they would gain more customers and, just as importantly, retain existing customers.
TrueImage is basically a good product which could totally outshine all the alternatives if these issues were resolved.
As for those alternative products, you should also consider whether those companies will provide you with the support you would want.

 

Even if I have a few problem with ATI v9, I agree with you. Acronis knows that also and that's probably why they are not interested to fix these bugs. They just don't care for let's say, the 10% of us who are not satisfy.

 

Fair comment bodgy, my needs are fairly simple from a product such as this. Understand your point on vebdor forums.
Cheers.

LOL Ghost probably would be one of the contenders, I'm afraid this type of software is not something I have considered a lot before now, so as suggested I will give it a try.

 

Hi tachyon42, yes from what I have read prior to coming across this forum this product is highly thought of, problem is that is mostly by reviewers who no doubt review the product on a sterile testing machine, unfortunately out here in the real world we load all sorts of garbage on our machines and I suppose problems are inevitable, which is why forums such as this are so valuable, as people with real everyday machines running all sorts of software have a voice on how they find the products work.

 

Hmm, still waiting for the official Acronis reply.

Now how many weeks ago was that.

I have a long trunk, big ears and really love bananas, so every now and then this thread will re-appear on page 1.

Until Acronis actually give an answer either way as promised.

Colin

 

I think it is three weeks

F.

 

I'm just bumping this tread up the line! Acronis support is hoping it will die a slow death by getting slowly moved out of sight of all others but I only have this to say:

No way Acronis!!

 

Posted 22nd October 2006, post #65

I have mentioned it before, 1 week ago, I think we have been a patient lot. But it's been three weeks now without any follow up to the "few days" estimate. If Acronis don't come up with a clear signal that they intend to finish V9 before Monday 20th Nov (this is 4 weeks after they estimated a few days) I'm out of here. And I won't be buying V10 either.

Tick..tick..tick..tick..

F.

 

*bump* - Back to the top we go.

 

It does seem odd that they have not provided any response at all yet. Even that they are still thinking about it or something.