Best backup strategy using Acronis True Image Home 11

Jamel Irief wrote:

The best backup strategy/configuration/plan/setup/scheme/schedule/approach. How should I set up my Scheduled Tasks? I'm assuming use of the Backup Location feature for automated management of backup files, however v11.0 only allows Incrementals (optionally followed by a Full) OR Differentials (optionally followed by a Full).

I would set different tasks. Backup1 in "Daily" folder would be daily, incremental, do a full every 6 incrementals, keep 4 chains. Backup2 would be in "Monthly" folder, differential, do a full every 6 differentials, keep 2 chains.

What file/folder naming convention to use to store the .tib backups. e.g. create a separate Backup Location for each backup type (Full system, file/folders, System state, Email, etc.), for each backup period (for each week or month), for each Scheduled Task, nested first by backup type then backup period, or some other convention altogether?

See above. Don't bother changing the default name of the individual TIB files. One folder for each scheduled task.

Questions that I have not been able to find clear answers to:

1. What are the technical differences between creating Acronis System State backups vs. using Windows System Restore? Are there potential conflicts by using both? What are the tradeoffs? According to Acronis forum posts, System State backup in Home 11 version is "limited, incomplete, and mostly redundant to Windows System Restore". How is it limited or incomplete, and what does "mostly" mean?

Don't rely on System State. Don't rely on Windows System Restore. There is nothing wrong with using them. Just be ready not to get your system back in all cases. These file based backups of pre-selected files will not handle low-level or hardware-level system corruption.
The essential backup is a disk and partition backup that contains ALL the partitions of the disk that contains your windows and program folders (typically c:\system partition disk).
Then you can add a file backup for example, if content changes much faster than your systems. Many users backup their system weekly/monthly and their content daily/weekly. You may save space that way. Since space is not an issue and your entire set of data is small, use only a disk and partition backup of the whole thing.
The other essential thing you need is a working recovery CD that you have tested: can you boot your computer and recover a couple of files from your backup?

Are there any issues creating Outlook backups (Backup > My Email > Microsoft Office Outlook) using Acronis? e.g. In the E-Mail Selection dialog, I see multiple cascaded instances (3 deep) of "Archive Folders" and "Personal Folders" under "Microsoft Office Outlook > Profiles > Username > Archive Folders" and "Microsoft Office Outlook > Profiles > Username > Personal Folders".  The actual data folders (Calendar, Tasks, Contacts, etc.) are listed under this third cascaded level.  Seems very strange.

I don't know about v11. There are still issues with 2011. If you have a disk and partition backup, you are OK. Worst case, you can restore the OST and PST files individually and you would just have to recreate your account settings.

How exactly does Automatic consolidation of backup files using the Backup Locations feature work? The explanatory post by CatFan432 is non-intuitive, since it seems to consolidate the most recent Incrementals from the oldest set into the last Full instead of the oldest Incrementals as I would have expected.

If automatic, consolidation folds back the older partiasl backups into the previous full to comply with the retention requirements. The backup chain is renamed and restructured. If manual, you can select which backups to fold and which to keep.
If possible do not use consolidation. Just use normal chains, and select a rule for how many chains you keep (by size, age or number).
Also, limit the number of partials before a new full. There is alway a risk, in particular with incremental, that you chain of partials get compromised because one element of the chain gets compromised. A good rule of thumb is that if your last full is gettting too old for you to go back to, your chain is too long.

If I schedule multiple tasks to run at night consecutively (e.g. 1am: Task1, 2am: Task2, 3am: Task3), does it matter that I scheduled Task2 and Task3 without knowing how long the Task1 will take? Will Acronis simply wait for the previous task to complete before it starts the next or will the subsequent tasks fail?

I am not sure about v11. 2011 does queue the tasks. You can check for yourself by creating a couple of backup and start them manually rapidly in sequence.

How does encryption of files/folders impact backup (image) processes? Will they simply be stored in encrypted form? There is an option to store encrypted data in unencrypted form in the Acronis backup dialog, but what happens if I use a third party encryption tool e.g. TrueCrypt as opposed to Windows built-in encryption?

For Bitlocker or TrueCrypt encrypted disks, ATI is not recommended for system images. You can backup from the recovery CD sector by sector, but it is not practical. You still can do file backups from Windows. If you use Bitlocker, make sure you backup your key separately in a safe place.
For Windows EFS encrypted files and folders, make sure you backup your EFS encryption key in a safe place. In 2011, there is an option to backup encrypted files in a decrypted state. This is the preferred option, even if you have to encrypt the backup through ATI. Test with v11: encrypt a file with EFS, back it up using file backup, restore it somewhere on the same disk and see if it is still encrypted. If yes, look for an option in v11 similar to the one in 2011. If no, well, rely on a full disk and partition backup that contains the C:\system partition.

Aside from containing only a subset of a partition's data, how is a File/folder backup different than an image backup, since both would contain User Data? i.e. is a File/folder backup necessary if a daily image of the full system is already being created? Or should it be used in between image backups? Are they treated the same internally by Acronis, e.g. using sector-based imaging, or is it equivalent to using a file backup utility (i.e. storing copies of the data as opposed to a snapshot)

The file backup process uses the OS API to identify the files, copy them, restore them, etc. The disk and partition backup uses low-level drivers to read the sector-level data and the partition file system metada.

Jamel,
Hello.... Just would like to add my thoughts
1. V-11 is about 3 to 4 times slower than 2010 v7046 (Imaging) on my PC ( HP Pavilion Vista and "7" 32 \64 ) Wouldn't waste any time with 2011. If you can still get it... stick at 2010 V7046 for now.
2. Fooling with "incremental" backups is like "shooting yourself in the foot" (multiple times) Too many chances for something to go wrong.
3. Just do a daily backup, to an External HD ( like the 2TB ) ...Save "em" for a while and delete as needed.
4. Bottom line .....Keep it simple...Think that your over complicating the problem.
Regards Fred

Pat,

First, thank you for your great responses. They are very helpful and informative, and much appreciated. I had a few followup questions below:

Pat L wrote:

I would set different tasks. Backup1 in "Daily" folder would be daily, incremental, do a full every 6 incrementals, keep 4 chains. Backup2 would be in "Monthly" folder, differential, do a full every 6 differentials, keep 2 chains.

I assume by "chain" you mean a Full + all partials (Incr or Diff) created until the next Full. Can you clarify what you mean by "keep N chains"? Does ATI do this automatically, or do I need to manually delete the older chains before the next chain gets generated?

According to your plan, in the Monthly I would have 12 weeks worth of weekly Diff backups with Fulls every 6 weeks, and in the Daily I would have 1 month worth of daily Incr backups, with Fulls every week. Is there a particular reason why you suggested to keep only 12 weeks in the Monthly?

Also, if I am creating a separate Scheduled Task and Backup Location folder for each backup type and schedule, I would need to create the same Monthly and Daily folder schemes in separate Backup Location folders, nested within separate folders for each of System State, File/folders, Email, etc., correct?

Pat L wrote:

Don't rely on System State. Don't rely on Windows System Restore. There is nothing wrong with using them. Just be ready not to get your system back in all cases. These file based backups of pre-selected files will not handle low-level or hardware-level system corruption. The essential backup is a disk and partition backup that contains ALL the partitions of the disk that contains your windows and program folders (typically c:\system partition disk). Then you can add a file backup for example, if content changes much faster than your systems. Many users backup their system weekly/monthly and their content daily/weekly. You may save space that way. Since space is not an issue and your entire set of data is small, use only a disk and partition backup of the whole thing. The other essential thing you need is a working recovery CD that you have tested: can you boot your computer and recover a couple of files from your backup?

Your points are well-taken. Since I'm also creating a series of Full system disk and partition images, I am not "relying" on either System State or Windows System Restore. However, since I have both System State and User Data on the same partition (C:\), when something inevitably goes wrong with Windows it sure is handy to be able to restore the System files independently from User Data (what you refer to as "content") and not lose any changes to the User Data that have occurred since the system issue appeared, since it may not be immediately detected. So in cases where I am able to get back up and running by rolling back only the System files (which I was able to do recently using Windows System Restore), which method is more reliable, Acronis System State backup or Windows System Restore?

Is it safe to use the ATI Home 11 installation CD as the working recovery CD? I believe it is bootable and contains the recovery operating environment (I will test on my new system to confirm). Or do I need to use the "Create Bootable Rescue Media" tool?

Pat L wrote:

If automatic, consolidation folds back the older partiasl backups into the previous full to comply with the retention requirements. The backup chain is renamed and restructured. If manual, you can select which backups to fold and which to keep. If possible do not use consolidation. Just use normal chains, and select a rule for how many chains you keep (by size, age or number). Also, limit the number of partials before a new full. There is alway a risk, in particular with incremental, that you chain of partials get compromised because one element of the chain gets compromised. A good rule of thumb is that if your last full is gettting too old for you to go back to, your chain is too long.

How is manual consolidation possible? I'm not aware of the availability of that option in ATI Home 11. Per your suggestion, where do I set the rule for the number of chains to keep? And how do I set the rule without ATI automatically consolidating backup sets? The only option I see is to select the rule via the Edit Backup Locations > Backup Rules dialog, to limit backups by size, number of backups, or storage period. My understanding is that once any of these rules are selected, ATI will automatically use consolidation to manage the Backup Location according to the specified rule. I do not see a separate independent option for consolidation.

Pat L wrote:

For Bitlocker or TrueCrypt encrypted disks, ATI is not recommended for system images. You can backup from the recovery CD sector by sector, but it is not practical. You still can do file backups from Windows. If you use Bitlocker, make sure you backup your key separately in a safe place. For Windows EFS encrypted files and folders, make sure you backup your EFS encryption key in a safe place. In 2011, there is an option to backup encrypted files in a decrypted state. This is the preferred option, even if you have to encrypt the backup through ATI. Test with v11: encrypt a file with EFS, back it up using file backup, restore it somewhere on the same disk and see if it is still encrypted. If yes, look for an option in v11 similar to the one in 2011. If no, well, rely on a full disk and partition backup that contains the C:\system partition.

Can you clarify "You still can do file backups from Windows"? Are you referring to running ATI in File/folder mode within the Windows environment, or using the built-in Windows Backup utility for file backups?

Where is the Windows EFS encryption key stored?

I'm fairly sure the option exists in v11 to backup encrypted files in a decrypted state (that is the option I was referring to in my original question). But I'm a little confused by your seemingly conflicting first and last statements: "ATI is not recommended for system images", and "rely on a full disk and partition backup"

Pat L wrote:

The file backup process uses the OS API to identify the files, copy them, restore them, etc. The disk and partition backup uses low-level drivers to read the sector-level data and the partition file system metada.

My understanding is that both File/folder backups and image backups are "explorable" in ATI, via either the Explore Backup Archive or Mount Image options, even though they're using different techniques in the backend. So what are the usage cases for the File/folder method?

Fred,

Thanks for your input!

1. I'm using v11.0, NOT v2011.  It is the version that came out before v2009.  Confusing nomenclature, I know, but just want to be clear here.  If ever I upgrade, I will keep your advice in mind and look for a 2010 version instead of jumping all the way to 2011.

2.  I will limit my use of Incrementals to about one weeks' worth (6 Incremental backups before a new Full is created), per your and Pat's advice.

I agree with your principle of keeping it simple, however I do need to have both a month's worth of daily restore points available, as well as older restore points available (although less frequently than daily, e.g. weekly or monthly), and since my version of ATI is not flexible enough to handle that, I do need to implement two different backup schedules.  Pat's method does introduce about one month of redundant backups, but it seems like the only way to accommodate the requirements given ATI's scheduling limitations.

I cannot simply do Full daily backups as you seem to suggest, as that would only give me restore points from the last ~40 days.  So I will have to rely on some form of Incremental or Differential backups to help extend my retention period.

Jamel,
Another option would be to use Chain2Gen to help TrueImage achieve your goals. TrueImage does the backups and the scheduling and C2G handles the file retention based on the user parameters provided to C2G.

oracledba wrote:

I and many others use chain2gen for its GFS (grandfather/father/son generation) capabiilites..
There are many advantages to GFS, a minor one is it eliminates the need to deal with consolidation routines.

Here is typical example of a GFS backup:
its sunday so we perform a full backup, followed by 6 daily incremental files.
When the next sunday rolls around chain2gen takes the prior backup set of files and rotates them into a history folder(s)
This presents an empty target folder to acronis so when it performs the backup it has no choice but to perform the desired full backup.
Daily incrementas continue until we reach the next sunday and chain2gen again rotates the existing set of '.tib' files into the history folder(s) which again presents an empty target folder to acronis.

The above weekly cycle can repeat forever.
You can configure chain2gen to keep a max number of generations.
the oldest generation will automatically be deleted to make room for the new generation.
Besides eliminating the need for consolidation you gain the ability to have several weeks of history from which to restore. This obviously lets you go back in time several weeks if needed, it also gives multiple backups to perform a restore if one happens to be corrupt.

http://forum.acronis.com/forum/5940

More info can be found by clicking my red signature link below and looking at the references listed in index item #5.

Jamel,
Hello... I understood that you were using V-11... My point is that V-11 Is very slow Imaging (3 to 4 times) as compared to 2009 (total looser) and Version2010 \7046...Still think that your making this way too complex..you will end up with an unintelligible mess... One other thing Backup to an actual 3.5 inch Hard Drive (in a docking cradle)... have heard many problems with all these "goofy" my book things Regards Fred

Jamel Irief wrote:

Pat,
Can you clarify what you mean by "keep N chains"? Does ATI do this automatically, or do I need to manually delete the older chains before the next chain gets generated?

A chain is a full + attached partials. With v11, I don't thing you can use this notion for the cleanup, but you can use age to get the same results.

According to your plan, in the Monthly I would have 12 weeks worth of weekly Diff backups with Fulls every 6 weeks, and in the Daily I would have 1 month worth of daily Incr backups, with Fulls every week. Is there a particular reason why you suggested to keep only 12 weeks in the Monthly?

Sorry, I got mistaken. I was meaning to have you keep 12 months or 56 weeks

Also, if I am creating a separate Scheduled Task and Backup Location folder for each backup type and schedule, I would need to create the same Monthly and Daily folder schemes in separate Backup Location folders, nested within separate folders for each of System State, File/folders, Email, etc., correct?

You can organize the other backup tasks with different tasks and folders, if you want.

Your points are well-taken. Since I'm also creating a series of Full system disk and partition images, I am not "relying" on either System State or Windows System Restore. However, since I have both System State and User Data on the same partition (C:\), when something inevitably goes wrong with Windows it sure is handy to be able to restore the System files independently from User Data (what you refer to as "content") and not lose any changes to the User Data that have occurred since the system issue appeared, since it may not be immediately detected.

Don't forget your can create file backups for your content as often as you want. You can do it even more often than the highest frequency provided by the ATI scheduler if you use Windows Tasks Manager to schedule your backups.
By the way, using Windows Task Manager is a good way to achieve more sophisticated backup schedules. Eg: do a full every Saturday night, or every 2 weeks...
If you have a file backup, you can restore first your disk and partition backup (that will erase everything and put all data back), and then restore the content.
Many users use a partition for their system, and a nother partition for their data just because of the problem you describe.

So in cases where I am able to get back up and running by rolling back only the System files (which I was able to do recently using Windows System Restore), which method is more reliable, Acronis System State backup or Windows System Restore?

I don't know the answer to this question.

Is it safe to use the ATI Home 11 installation CD as the working recovery CD? I believe it is bootable and contains the recovery operating environment (I will test on my new system to confirm). Or do I need to use the "Create Bootable Rescue Media" tool?

As long as it works on your system, it is perfectly safe. Just make sure it does work by booting on it and restoring a couple of files.

How is manual consolidation possible? I'm not aware of the availability of that option in ATI Home 11. Per your suggestion, where do I set the rule for the number of chains to keep? And how do I set the rule without ATI automatically consolidating backup sets? The only option I see is to select the rule via the Edit Backup Locations > Backup Rules dialog, to limit backups by size, number of backups, or storage period. My understanding is that once any of these rules are selected, ATI will automatically use consolidation to manage the Backup Location according to the specified rule.

I am not that familiar with v11. You might be right. Just make sure that there is no consolidation option turned on. It would be suprising that there is not an option to just erase older backups.

Can you clarify "You still can do file backups from Windows"? Are you referring to running ATI in File/folder mode within the Windows environment, or using the built-in Windows Backup utility for file backups?

I am referring to running a file backup with ATI from Windows. When Windows runs, since the file backup is using the OS APIs, you can backup the files.

Where is the Windows EFS encryption key stored?

http://windows.microsoft.com/en-US/windows-vista/Back-up-Encrypting-Fil…

in ATI, via either the Explore Backup Archive or Mount Image options, even though they're using different techniques in the backend. So what are the usage cases for the File/folder method?

As I was explaining above, a file backup can complement a disk and partition backup when you want to backup your content separately from your disk and partition images (which tend to be done less often that content backup). You know that when you restore a system, all the restored partitions will be erase then restored. A file backup can come handy to then restore the latest content.
Also, the file backup allows you to have more granular level of backup frequency, versioning and retention rules depending on the content. Maybe you add new movies less often that you add new emails. Maybe you want to keep your photos forever, but you want to keep only the most recent movies. You want to keep versions of your office documents, but not of your movies...

By the way, if you have a lot of compressed files that don't need to be versioned (pictures, mp3, mp4, etc.) you might want to use a file replication system to just copy the most recent version to your backup disk (this is what I do). Check out Karen's replicator, SyncBack, GoodSync, et.

Grover,

I've seen many of your posts advocating Chain2Gen and I appreciate the suggestion, as well as the hard work by oracledba to develop the tool.  But I hesitate to use an unsupported third party tool that adds yet another moving part and potential point of failure and/or troubleshooting to an application that is as critical to me as backup.

I'm sure C2G is a great tool that works well for others.  If I had an experimental machine to play with I'd be happy to try it out.  But my personal preference is to do without a feature rather than deal with potential future troubleshooting.  The C2G description post is a bit complicated to wade through, and recent posts of bugs do not give me confidence that "it just works", making me averse to implementing it on a system that I critically rely on.

Basically, my top priorities are reliability and ease-of-use even if it's at the expense of additional features.  If you feel strongly that Chain2Gen is at a mature, stable release point (say, less than 1 bug/issue per month), and is easy for the average user to implement without having to muck around extensively with batch and configuration files, I will gladly give it more consideration.  But until I've run ATI v11 reliably for some time and worked out its own issues, it seems like I'd be asking for trouble.  Please let me know if I'm mistaken and I should still consider using it.  I did find a post in the C2G description thread with a proposal that is similar to what I'm trying to accomplish, but don't know if it was ever implemented.

On a side note, thank you for compiling your index of guides and solutions... it's already answered several questions I had... a very useful resource!

Fred,

So in your opinion is 2010 Build 7046 the best version to use?

Do you have any suggestions on how to simplify my backup plan while still making up to 12 months of recovery points available? It's fine if the restore point frequency of older backups is lower.

The WD MyBook external drive I have is indeed a 3.5" disk in an enclosure. A local tech support company indicated that even though WD are among the most reliable of external hard drives, they are often populated with lower quality drives from the factory as compared with internal drives.

Pat,

Indeed, I should have setup my System and User Data in separate partitions, however I was ill-advised by my local tech support to keep everything in the same partition.

It doesn't seem that the option exists to simply erase older backups in v11. Automatic consolidation seems to be required if ATI is set to manage Backup Locations.

Thanks for that great explanation of file backups, that makes sense. That gives me a better idea of how they should be implemented. I'm keeping my compressed files (i.e. all media files) on a separate RAID 1 NAS system to serve to any client on my network. I believe that should serve the same purpose as the sync utilities you suggested.

Jamel,
Hello..I use 2010 V-7046 and stopped "updating". It works with my Vista and "7" 32 and 64 ... For me there is no point to go further, unless Acronis developers a "faster engine" for Imaging... i have used V-11, 2009, and 2010, is the best of the lot, 2011...just read this forum...another looser. I am confused at your statement "recovery points" and "restore point frequency" is lower? As far as a "My Book" thing i have read about peoples problems with devices like that ...Seems that they use some software that at times makes it impossible to get windows to read the data.... I use and have 5 or6 Hitachi Deskstar's (500GB's and 1TB's) 3.5 inch some internal and some external on my Pavilion Desktop ( home made mountings) Regards Fred

PS: Windows "Restore Points" Have nothing to do with your "Data", And basically are useless when it comes to recovering your PC from disaster. I and many others have long since turned off windows "Restore" and have never looked back .

One other thing to consider...Is V-11 Imaging time.... @50GB i can venture a guess that it would take almost 2 hrs if not more (with verification)...Not worth fooling with... After a few months, you would likely end up "trashing" your HD trying to protect the "Data" (It's a mechanical device) and running endless images you would be stressing it beyond measure.

If i had "Data" so important that i had to have it backed up every day, i would just get two 2TB Hitachi 3.5 inch HD's and a docking cradle..and do full backups every day (Just Data not OS ) and "switch em out" as needed

It looks like disabling the Virtual CD software from the MyBooks resolve some detection or access problems.

Some expert users like JusPlainFred prefer to take out some residual risk by doing only full backups, not compressing, restoring to spare drives, etc.

ATI is very reliable with simple backup chains: a full, a few partials, etc. Always use validation from times to times. Limit the number of partials so that your last full is never too old for you to go back to. Diversify your backup locations (one disk at home, one disk at the office, some onlinestorage), and backup software and technologies (certainly for irreplaceable content). Refrain from purging old backups as long as you have enough space. Some online backup solutions (like iDrive) let you keep unlimited number of versions of files without reducing your quota. If you copy TIB files manually for safekeeping, make sure you validate after copying or use software solutions that verify the integrity of the copy.

Jamel,
I can understand your concern and hesitance of use. If you were to reconsider, you might want to use C2G as a supplement to your existing plan until such time as C2G proved itself.

Understanding what C2G does and does not do is key to understanding how it works.

The purpose of C2G was to provide the user with more controls over how many backup chains are retained. C2G does not increase or decrease the number of tasks that you might use.

All scheduling of backups and creation of backups is performed as a result of the TrueImage backup task. The function that C2G supplies is to run as the beginning part of the TI Pre/Post Pre function. Its only real purpose is to ask and answer this question:
"Is now the time to "empty" the contents of the backup folder so a new full backup will be the next creation." If the answer is no, C2G closes with no further action and the TI begins the backup. If Yes, is the answer, the term "empty" means to rotate the contents into history as described in post #5. All TI backups are made into the set0 folder with C2G controlling when the contents of the set0 folder is rotated into history. The user sets the C2G parameter file as to when the set0 folder is emptied via rotation upward.

If you examine the postings in the initial release folder, you will find that most elate to improper setup or a snag with Windows--which is why there is so many postings. Very few postings actual relate to problems with the program. I have used the program with XP Pro without issues. I have never used it with Windows 7. Be aware that the new MetaFile Data base is causing some issues of backup name changes but C2G is still functioning correctly as it does not get involved with backup names. C2G will have fewer issues with version 11 as compared to version 2011 or 2012 which have the Metafile data base. If you set your task to have the backup validated as part of the backup creation, then you have the same security as if C2G was not involved.

The easiest implementation is to follow the my guide listed in signature index item 5-B. You will need to change the illustrated parameter to match your needs. Remember, the function of C2G is to help you control how many chains you wish to retain. I just want you to understand the options available to you in choosing your backup strategy.

Fred,

I will consider an upgrade to 2010 once my current version is stable, if I can get a copy of the older version somehow.

Recovery/restore points = points in time when any backup (image or file) was created.
Restore point frequency = how often those restore points occur (daily, weekly, monthly, etc.), the "resolution", if you will, to within which a particular data or system state can be recovered to. Monthly would be a lower frequency or resolution than e.g. weekly.

I understand that Windows Restore only recovers system data, not user data. But I need to use on or the other, either Windows System Restore or the System State backup feature in Acronis in order to be able to recover the OS independently of my own data. I am creating a series of weekly Full system backup images, so I am not relying on either Windows System Restore or Acronis System State backup for disaster recovery. I'm using them as a matter of convenience to be able to recover from many types of system errors without losing changes to my data.

My Full system images are taking less than an hour, and are run at night while I'm asleep, so the imaging time is not a concern at this point. Reliability and ease of use (set it and forget it) are more important criteria for me. I didn't quite catch your point regarding "trashing" the HD. What is the alternative or best practice you'd suggest?

Maybe you can elaborate on your Hitachi docking strategy. Doing a Full backup every other day on a drive would seem only half as intensive as performing the backups on a single target drive.

Pat,

I don't believe I have Virtual CD software on my WD external HD.

Thanks for the tips. I'm implementing many of those suggestions (validation, location diversity, retaining backups as far back as capacity allows), however some of them point out the shortcomings of the options currently available to me. I'm trying to balance complexity vs. robustness, and trying to lean towards the simplest and most reliable option available. Truthfully, I wish there was a solution as good as Apple's Time Machine, so I'm trying to replicate that with my existing resources to whatever extent I can.

Grover,

I really appreciate your insight and advice. In my experience, there is always some "snag" or another with Windows, or with software interacting with Windows, which is why I am trying to reduce the number of "moving parts" in my backup solution as much as possible, since that will exponentially increase the amount of time I will have to spend troubleshooting later on down the road. I make no distinction between the software and the OS it is operating under; the entire solution is either easy to use and works well or it doesn't.

I recognize C2G's purpose as simply a retention policy implementation. I'm encouraged by your positive experience under XP and that C2G will work more reliably with ATI v11, but since you stopped short of saying "Yes, it just works and is completely reliable, you won't have any problems", I am going to hold off for now and manually implement the retention policy. My guess is that I'll revisit C2G once everything is stable and I get tired of manually moving backup chains around.

Do you know of any effort to submit C2G features to Acronis so they can natively implement, test, and support it in the newer versions? If a retention policy has been implemented in newer versions, is it working reliably enough to make it worth upgrading from v11? It sounds like there are still issues that need to be worked out.

Jamel,
Hello... "Windows system restore" has nothing to do with "Windows Backup" And your confusing terms...Restore Points refer to "Windows Restore" (Backs up Registry and OS things) When your referring to backups.. either Windows or 3rd party, they are called Images (Complete OS or File) You would be better served just doing a backup (full system Image) of you OS and one of your Data. Forget "Windows Backup" ...it is both "clumsy" and "clunky", "Window system Restore" ...isn't worth the time or effort...As far as docking strategy .... You could get two external drives@2TB each and have enough space to cover you for a year or more....As your Data is more important than the OS..you only need to Image your OS once a week or so ... I feel that I'm beating an already dead horse ...so this is my last comment... Regards Fred

Fred,

I never mentioned Windows Backup, and I'm well aware of the difference between Windows Backup (file-based backup) and Windows Restore (OS backup), so I'm not sure where the miscommunication came from.

Your suggestion is exactly what I am trying to do: have separate backups for Data content (my personal files and settings) and System content (OS + registry, etc.). The problem is that both "Windows System Restore" and the "System State" backup feature in ATI both have their shortcomings, according to several users of these forums. So I am only relying on my Full image backups to recover the system completely. But since I have both Data and System content on a single partition, in the event of some system corruption I will first try Windows System Restore or restoring from an ATI System State backup, because they more conveniently allow me to revert the cause of the system issue and continue working without having to lose any of the changes to my data. If those do not work (and as you suggest, they may not) then I will use ATI to restore to my last system image point (what I refer to as a restore point), which will include a Full backup and its associated partials. Hopefully that clears things up. Thanks for all your help.

Jamel,

For what it's worth, your strategy makes sense to me. Personally, I gave up on system restore altogether.