Acronis developers: [Deleted] Y O U ! ! ! for such a crap
First time I used "try and decide". Try and throw away probasbly covers it better. The software I tested had, as expected, malware on it. When trying to roll back via "try and decide", a bluescreen appeared and now the system does not boot any more, I have a boot sector virus and I can spend half a day fixing it.
For selling such as [Deleted], I would love to come over and kick your [Deleted].
Thomas Runge, your account has been blocked for 2 months for violating Acronis Forum Terms of Use, the following part in particular:
"Not post any material or select a username that is abusive, harassing, threatening, sexual explicit, obscene, racially or ethnically offensive or vulgar."
Try & Decide is not a suitable tool for testing software that bypasses the operating system. Even if it was, it's not something I would try without having a current complete backup.
Apart from your obvious proficiency at profanity towards people you've never met, you haven't really given clear information on your problem.
If the malware was already on your PC then it is expecting too much that running something like T&D would negate the problem.
If you tried to load the software into the T&D environment and now T&D has failed, then it would be helpful to know which malware was installed.
You have also neglected to inform the forum as to what version and build of True Image you are using and what OS - this is important information.
It is probably a 'good idea' (tm) to calm down before writing to a group of people you have never met, or alternatively write your missive, then reread it and amend to something more acceptable before pressing the send button.
You can edit this thread and it's title.
You are the ********************** idiot who experimented with malware on your computer. Sounds like you got what you deserved.
Well first - it was True Image Home 2010, the system was clean before and is clean now and I had a backup (which nicely restored after installing a minimal windows on a separate partition). It took several hours to get everything back in working order and it was not "playing around with malware" but using the Try and Decide functionality for exactly what it was meant for... testing unsafe products and attachments. If it is known to Acronis that they sold and delivered a product that does not work, the minimum I would expect is an update and not silence or a new version that is being sold.
Colin, I would have no problem telling every single developer involved in production and testing of this product what I think about them and their company in regards to selling such a crap. I would even personally fire every one of them if I was in such a position that would allow me to do that. There is no excuse for delivering a buggy product, not providing fixes for it and not even warning the customers about functionality which has been sold but does not work.
I know what should have happened, you should have made a backup using True Image 2010 before you started experimenting. Anybody with experience in risk mitigation knows this to be true.
@Thomas Runge, you stuffed up, you know it so stop blaming your tools which is what bad tradesman tend to do.
I am not blaming anybody or anything for data loss - there is none and if you read the posts, I had a good backup and was able to restore. I am blaming Acronis for selling a tool that is not working and am pissed that I had to spend that many hours restoring my system because of my (stupid) trust into Acronis selling working solutions.
Dear James, Torston, Colin, tomasjk, Richard and Thomas,
For reasons of clarity, accuracy and truth, let me state that Thomas is entirely correct. But it doesn’t really matter.
The Acronis Business model over the past four or five years has been to push out an entirely new version every year. This new version will have a new interface and new features. They will put out one update to this version sometime past mid-year. The update will fix some but not all of the bugs. Overall the new version may be somewhat superior to the prior version, slightly inferior, or disastrous. Sometimes in trying to gussy up the new version, they actually break some of the core components.
There is of course no need for any of this. Because their core components do what backups are supposed to do and do them very well, all they have to do is make one version actually work. We, their customers would gladly pay them every year to stop screwing around and just do that.
I assume they pursue this particular business model because it is making them all rich. By traditional standards this business model is implicitly dishonest. It's basically a hostage situation. After one has invested a great deal of time in mastering a product, it’s extremely difficult and expensive to switch to another product. Companies of course know this. They depend on it. If software developers could be sued for the crap they turn out, this business model would not be available to them.
By modern business standards – well actually there are no modern business standards. It’s basically rape, loot, pillage and let the victims beware. But to put it in proper perspective, what Acronis does with its software is not right, but it’s certainly better than what China is doing to Tibet.
Good Night and Good Luck and to all a Good Year,
Stan
Thanks, Stan.
I'm in the software / IT consulting business. I certainly don't fault a company for advancing its product on an annual release basis. I have found the functionality / features of Acronis True Image has generally improved (disregarding the bugs, of course) and is basically a good program. If it does what it is supposed to do and does it reliably, I have no issue whatsoever spending $30 a year for the latest version. Like most users, I suppose I need maybe 25-30% of the functionality it provides, but that 25-30% better be bullet proof. The 2011 release is the first where I've run into major issues with the core functionality I use. In the future, I do not plan on being an early adopter of new releases. I'll spend a lot of time on the forum reading before I take the plunge.
James,
If 2011 is the first disaster for you then you didn't have the displeasure of running into TI11. Or maybe your part wasn't the part they broke. Backup software is so critical, you'd think someone could get it right, completely airtight right. I wouldn't mind paying for a new release every year either. But they beta test new releases on their customers and never ever get it quite right, not even with the next release.
Best regards,
Stan
Let's understand this.
Acronis has developed a program to allow another program to run in a sand box.
This technology which has been around for years called "virtual" meaning NOT REAL and will run in a "CLOSED MEMORY ENVIRONMENT" and CANNOT, repeat CANNOT access a single bit outside the defined memory block.
Acronis then allows access to a real network site (clean or contaminated) across a real WAN (the Internet - Wide Area Network) and seemingly has not figured out how to prevent a REAL VIRUS from escaping the sand box and ....?!?!?!?!?!?!?!
Software companies need to TEST, let me repeat that TEST, TEST,TEST ,TEST ... and then before they sell a product they need to TEST, let me repeat that TEST, TEST,TEST ,TEST and MAKE DAMN SURE that the product will perform, not just what the "cute, smart, programmers have developed" but is extensively VETTED to make sure IT CAuSES NO HARM.
A good business model would include:
1. Visionaries, to chase tommorrow and become a leader
2. Very sharp programmers who understand the O/S (operating system) and figure a way to implement 1.
3. A group of programmers to MAKE SURE that code developed by 2. causes NO HARM.
4. A second group to make sure that 2. and 3. (a great idea that actually works as designedwill operate safely.
5. A Senior management team that will decide if the product is ready to be offered to the public (A review of all of the above.
The principle of allowing "SAND BOX" operation for many programs DOES NOT ALLOW a connection to the outside world.
I would think that if you implement a solution such as Acronis offers it MUST INCLUDE an ANTI-VIRUS program or only offer the feature if you include a fee for service feature that includes an anti-virus program from Acronis OR "sign a waiver to use your own anti-virus software".
1. The onus is on the user since NO ANTI-VIRUS software is 100%.
2. Acronis SEEMS TO BE SELLING SMOKE!!!!!!!!!!! Acronis MUST UNDERSTAND that the consumer relies on manufacturers, developers and distributers to make sure that they truthfully explain the value of the product and its limitations.
Experience beginning with TIH 2010 leads me to conclude that Acronis is putting profits ahead of Great Software which is why most of us bought one of their products in the first place.
A MESSAGE TO ACRONIS:
You have many good products. DON'T LET THE MARKETING TYPES, PROSTITUTE THE COMPANY into selling features that need significantly more work before being offered. You run a very big RISK of chasing some of your best fans (customers) away.
Rick S