Acronis True Image

  Cesar 09:33 02 Jul 05
Locked

Is anyone using the above Package, and is it superior or inferior to Drive Image 7.0 your comments would be very much appreciated.

  mattyc_92 10:04 02 Jul 05

I use Acronis, and think it is the best (I used to use Ghost)... I haven't actually used Drive Image, so can't really compare

  Joe R 10:35 02 Jul 05

Cesar,

I have used both, and haven't been able to find fault with either.

The only difference IMHO, is the interface, and once used to it, true Image, does the same job, as driveImage.

  rawprawn 10:39 02 Jul 05

I use Acronis, and I find it excellent, it has saved my bacon many times. I haven't used Drive Image so I can't comment.

  dan11 11:01 02 Jul 05

Acronis, also.

I always backup to a spare hard drive. Twice I have had hard drive failure. I just connect the spare hard drive up and I am working within a few minutes.

Perfect image, worked every time.

Not used drive image 7.0

  freaky 11:03 02 Jul 05

I have used Drive Image and Ghost, find Acronis True Image infinitly better in all respects and cheaper. Also their support is excellent, very rapid and helpful response to email queries.

  gudgulf 11:04 02 Jul 05

A big thumbs up to True Image here too.When I needed it,it worked faultlessy and it is very user friendly.

  iscanut2 11:21 02 Jul 05

I use Acronis True Image ver8. Very easy to use program. Only problem is updates for those not on broadband. Acronis release regular updates at abut 24Mb a time. Apart from that, highly recommended.

  The Spires 11:38 02 Jul 05

I have used Acronis since version 6 & have yet to have a problem with it, if any program is a must have it's this.

  JayDay 12:05 02 Jul 05

Same here. Had Aconis for about 18 months. used it last week and it restored my C Drive in less than an hour. No problems real easy to use. Highly recommend it.

  MIke 12:16 02 Jul 05

I use both Drive Image on laptop and true Image on Desktop.
My desktop has a PCI RAID card fitted though I don't have a RAID configuration. DI doen't like this setup at all, the only way to make an image with DI is by booting from a floppy. Whereas on my laptop, I can create an image within windows (well it boots to DOS) but what I mean is I don't need to use the floppy version.

Acronis on the other hand works with my desktop as it should, i.e within windows. It's also much much faster than DI both laptop and desktop have similar speed processors, though Hard drive is smaller on laptop. Even so Acronis is faster.

I did originally have a lot of trouble with Acronis causing random crashes on the desktop. E-mailing Acronis support identified the possibility of faulty RAM which I was not even aware of. Running Microsoft's memory test program available on their website, sorry don't have link to hand, showed one of my RAM modules to have a fault. Replacing this solved my problem with Acronis crashing, as their support suggested.

To sum up both are capable programs, and both have recued me in the past. Acronis 8 is in my opinion a better and more featured program than the version of DI that I have (DI 2002) Also Acronis support is excellent. I can't comment on DI support as I've not used it since Powerquest was taken over by Norton.

Hope these findings help
MIke

This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

What is Amazon Go and will it come to the UK? The store without checkouts or queues

1995-2015: How technology has changed the world in 20 years

Hands-on with the Star Wars fighting drones you can fly yourself

15 macOS Sierra tips | How to use macOS Sierra: Secret tricks and best new features in Apple's new…