Acronis True Image

  • Thread starter Thread starter Nathan
  • Start date Start date
N

Nathan

I have Acronis True Image version 7. Are there any convincing reasons to
uipgrade to Ver 8?

TIA, Nat
 
Nathan said:
I have Acronis True Image version 7. Are there any convincing reasons to
uipgrade to Ver 8?
Click to expand...

Not really. The differences between 7 and 8 are nearly trivial. The
only thing that might be useful is that 8 excludes the pagefile and
hibernation file from backups, which can help with keeping incremental
size down.
 
Will Dormann said:
Not really. The differences between 7 and 8 are nearly trivial. The
only thing that might be useful is that 8 excludes the pagefile and
hibernation file from backups, which can help with keeping incremental
size down.
Click to expand...

Hi Will, thanks for the response. One problem I'm having with ver 7 is that
it mis-reports the projected image size. The image is always quite a bit
larger than projected. I.E. TI projects that the image size for C:\ will be
3.6 GB, but outputs an image 4.3 GB.

Another problem is that the compression level in TI does not produce as
small a file as Ghost (2000) or DI (2002). I assume you've used version 7.
If so, have you experienced these problems, and are they corrected in
version 8?

Nat
 
Nathan said:
Hi Will, thanks for the response. One problem I'm having with ver 7 is that
it mis-reports the projected image size. The image is always quite a bit
larger than projected. I.E. TI projects that the image size for C:\ will be
3.6 GB, but outputs an image 4.3 GB.
Click to expand...

Estimations for the image size will never be exactly on target. This is
because it depends on the data that you're backing up, and it won't know
this until the backup has completed. For example, if you're backing up
2GB of MP3s, it's going to take up significantly more than 2GB of Word
documents.

Another problem is that the compression level in TI does not produce as
small a file as Ghost (2000) or DI (2002). I assume you've used version 7.
If so, have you experienced these problems, and are they corrected in
version 8?
Click to expand...

I haven't imaged my system with DI before, and it's been quite a while
since I've used Ghost. But since ATI8 doesn't include the data from
the pagefile or hibernation file, I suppose that the images should be
smaller. You could also try setting the compression ratio the maximum.
 
Will Dormann said:
Estimations for the image size will never be exactly on target. This is
because it depends on the data that you're backing up, and it won't know
this until the backup has completed. For example, if you're backing up
2GB of MP3s, it's going to take up significantly more than 2GB of Word
documents.
Click to expand...

There were (with DI 2002) always inconsistent file size predictions with my
other partitions, but never the C: partition. Oh, well. I guess I can live
with it.
I haven't imaged my system with DI before, and it's been quite a while
since I've used Ghost. But since ATI8 doesn't include the data from the
pagefile or hibernation file, I suppose that the images should be smaller.
Click to expand...

A good idea. Thanks.
 
Will said:
Estimations for the image size will never be exactly on target. This
is because it depends on the data that you're backing up, and it
won't know this until the backup has completed. For example, if
you're backing up 2GB of MP3s, it's going to take up significantly
more than 2GB of Word documents.



I haven't imaged my system with DI before, and it's been quite a while
since I've used Ghost. But since ATI8 doesn't include the data from
the pagefile or hibernation file, I suppose that the images should be
smaller. You could also try setting the compression ratio the
maximum.
Click to expand...

Both Drive Image, Ghost 2003/9.0 exclude the hibernate and pagefile from the
image file as they are explictely marked in both the File Allocation Table
(FAT) and in the Master File Table (NTFS)

--
M.f.G.
Michael Kimmer

"Ein Tag an dem Du nicht lächelst ist ein verlorener Tag"
"Eine Nacht in der Du nicht schläfst ist eine verschlafene Nacht"
 
Michael said:
Both Drive Image, Ghost 2003/9.0 exclude the hibernate and pagefile from the
image file as they are explictely marked in both the File Allocation Table
(FAT) and in the Master File Table (NTFS)
Click to expand...

I should have been more explicit in my reply...
"I suppose that the images should be smaller *than ATI7's*"
 
Back
Top