perpetual license
Having just purchased and installed a 3-PC perpetual license version of ATI 2021, are you all saying that the Cyber Protection portion is going to disable itself at some point as it requires a subscription?
If so, that sounds perfect. :-)
John, no! the Cyber Protection feature of ATI 2021 remains active regardless of using the option to 'Turn Protection off permanently!' - all the background services and processes still are active and are scanning Windows system files plus checking for protection updates!
If you elect to take the trial of Cyber Protection with your perpetual version, then be prepared to be nagged by Acronis when that trial ends with no obvious mechanism to stop the nagging!
In my testing with TI 2021 I have not had a direct attack from malware no however, I do have several older application files (not installed currently) that because of how they work will get flagged by malware apps. I know what these files are and why they trigger these detection's. TI 2021 pickup each one of them plus a new one that I had not seen detected before. I did figure out why this new file was flagged. It is because it scans and extracts information from the Windows registry and the methods it uses to do so are similar to certain malwares.
What I like best about TI 2021 protection is that it does active updates about every 5 minutes from Acronis servers on a a worldwide basis to update any newly detected malware that has been detected on this worldwide network. In other words all of Acronis servers that support the Cyber Protect product used by Service providers and end user customers constantly update any new threat that appears across the globe. TI 2021 checks this status every 5 minutes and updates itself accordingly. This uses a small amount of PC resources yes but is worth it to me. I know of no other offering out there currently that does this sort of thing. Maybe there are but I have no knowledge of them.
As for backup, I am not one tho rely on a single solution. I use ATI and native Windows DISM tools to create backups of system disks and other methods for user data including Windows File History.
Enchantech wrote:What I like best about TI 2021 protection is that it does active updates about every 5 minutes from Acronis servers on a a worldwide basis to update any newly detected malware that has been detected on this worldwide network. In other words all of Acronis servers that support the Cyber Protect product used by Service providers and end user customers constantly update any new threat that appears across the globe. TI 2021 checks this status every 5 minutes and updates itself accordingly. This uses a small amount of PC resources yes but is worth it to me. I know of no other offering out there currently that does this sort of thing. Maybe there are but I have no knowledge of them.
Bob, my main gripe about TI 2021 is that it still performs these 5 minute updates even when all protection is turned off permanently in the Protection Settings, and I am using my preferred security solution not ACP.
Steve,
I think it may be running the log portion of the update process but not actually making the update. It's hard to tell as if there is nothing to update then obviously nothing is downloaded. I look at it like a lot of Windows processes, they run for this or that reason and end up doing nothing but they still run. I doubt stuff like that will ever change. In fact, I'd say stuff like that will only increase across all apps as software developers do more to try to be more to the user whether the user likes or wants it or not. A symptom of our time if you will.
My previous solution would only run updates when instructed. That was flawed in that If I forgot to run it or did not run it for some reason then it would get way out of date, With the way malware works these days I'd much rather have one that keeps watch on an ongoing basis and updates in autopilot so I do not have to remember or be concerned about it. To me that is a more secure feeling than oh, did I do that today, or was it done today, no thanks, I will stick with ATI until something better comes along.
Steve Smith wrote:Ian, did you identify the source of your cyber attack that started encrypting your files? Was this from an email attachment, web page visited etc?
I think it was related to email. I was using outlook at the time, just hovering over email from CitiBank when the warning popped up.
Ian
Steve Smith wrote:Enchantech wrote:What I like best about TI 2021 protection is that it does active updates about every 5 minutes from Acronis servers on a a worldwide basis to update any newly detected malware that has been detected on this worldwide network. In other words all of Acronis servers that support the Cyber Protect product used by Service providers and end user customers constantly update any new threat that appears across the globe. TI 2021 checks this status every 5 minutes and updates itself accordingly. This uses a small amount of PC resources yes but is worth it to me. I know of no other offering out there currently that does this sort of thing. Maybe there are but I have no knowledge of them.
Bob, my main gripe about TI 2021 is that it still performs these 5 minute updates even when all protection is turned off permanently in the Protection Settings, and I am using my preferred security solution not ACP.
Steve, you can use the Acronis Scheduler Manager to change the TimeInterval of the 5 minute task to something longer. Yes I know, this is not the way it should be, and after the next update you'd need to change it again. But at least it could quiet the system down for a bit.
Looking at other software update tasks, I think every 5 minutes may be a bit overkill. What always bothered me about that task is that if there was a problem with the connection to the servers it would do 10 retries 30 seconds apart. End result was that the task could run every 30 seconds forever.
I have to agree with Steve though, if protection is off checking the servers for updates which are not then downloaded is a rather meaningless exercise and waste of resources.
BrunoC said:
I have to agree with Steve though, if protection is off checking the servers for updates which are not then downloaded is a rather meaningless exercise and waste of resources.
That depends if other services are not affected by it or not. I think we have no real idea of what processes and services are linked together or use bits a pieces of each other to carry out their objectives. I do not believe there is any way to figure that out. We know that logs are created on this interval and that updates of some form are involved but who's to say what updates they are?
The updates that I speak of are not the traditional definition update rather, they are behavior and intelligence updates for the malware. If these updates warrant further definition update then those will come at a later time via the definition update schedule found in the Protections Settings. That's the big difference here between what ATI is doing and the competitors.
Enchantech wrote:That depends if other services are not affected by it or not. I think we have no real idea of what processes and services are linked together or use bits a pieces of each other to carry out their objectives. I do not believe there is any way to figure that out. We know that logs are created on this interval and that updates of some form are involved but who's to say what updates they are?
The updates that I speak of are not the traditional definition update rather, they are behavior and intelligence updates for the malware. If these updates warrant further definition update then those will come at a later time via the definition update schedule found in the Protections Settings. That's the big difference here between what ATI is doing and the competitors.
Bob, if all Protection is turned off permanently - as offered in the settings, then there is no good reason why Acronis should even be running all these protection related services & processes! This is at the heart of my support case with Acronis that I have had open since last August, and for which they have said that they "have already forwarded to the team concern, We will surely work on it and implement in the future build of Acronis True image 2021 application."
For users with Protection turned off, then there is no need to look for any updates, and in the perpetual versions of ATI 2021 there is no malware protection without either running the limited trial or else subscribing, so again, no reason or purpose to these activities!
Note: It is not only protection updates being done but also active scanning of Windows system files by a feature that is supposedly turned off permanently! I have submitted multiple ProcMon traces showing exactly this activity for my support case!
Steve,
So your core objection then is that these services although disabled remain in the application, show up in Task Manager, and periodically show minute bits of activity correct? Oh, and I forgot, you object to the fact that protection is even a part of the product as well.
Are you aware that even if you have Protection disabled that the Vulnerability scan still runs on a daily basis?
It is obvious that the Protection components of the application remain installed even though Protection as a service is disabled. So when behaviors and processes occur on the system and the Protection components respond briefly to these occurrences you object to those happening?
So your solution here would be to uninstall the protection components to eliminate these processes which intern defeats the purpose of the products goal of a complete data protection package?
If the above are correct then is it fair to say that you object to integrated products that offer more than one feature or serve more than one purpose?
So your core objection then is that these services although disabled remain in the application, show up in Task Manager, and periodically show minute bits of activity correct? Oh, and I forgot, you object to the fact that protection is even a part of the product as well.
Bob, not so! My core objection is that 'turned off permanently' for Protection means anything but what it implies! This is not about 'minute bits of activity' but a constant flow of activity for a feature that the user has elected to turn off.
With ATI 2020 going back to 2018 with Active Protection, you could turn it off in the application and it no longer prevented access to Acronis files such as the Script .tib.tis files. That is no longer the case with 2021!
Having these Protection features in ATI 2021 is not my objection - only that the user decision on whether to use these features be respected and honoured, not ignored!
Are you aware that even if you have Protection disabled that the Vulnerability scan still runs on a daily basis?
No - Vulnerability scans only run when the Protection Settings for this are enabled. Strangely this is one option that Acronis does seem to respect! I have this and all Protection turned off and see no evidence to support your statement in this respect.
So when behaviors and processes occur on the system and the Protection components respond briefly to these occurrences you object to those happening?
So your solution here would be to uninstall the protection components to eliminate these processes which intern defeats the purpose of the products goal of a complete data protection package?
For your first point above - why should any Protection components respond briefly to any behaviours and processes that occur on my (or any user) system when Protection is 'turned off permanently' and another antivirus / security solution is being employed?
My 'solution' is that Acronis should respect the user choice in turning off all Protection features, as per the option given to users, and not ignore the user choice to do whatever they deem should be done. Ideally, the user should have a choice during installation whether to include the Protection features or not, but in the absence of this choice, then at least do what the setting says and allow 'Turn off protection permanently' to mean it is off!
If 'the purpose of the product goal of a complete data protection package' is correct, as you state, then Acronis should insist on all third-party security applications being uninstalled too and not allow users to have this choice of not using Cyber Protection! The documentation for ATI 2021 does not state this requirement and users can choose a different protection solution and Acronis should 'step aside' and leave the user's chosen application to be in control!
Bob, not so! My core objection is that 'turned off permanently' for Protection means anything but what it implies! This is not about 'minute bits of activity' but a constant flow of activity for a feature that the user has elected to turn off.
You have made this statement before yet I have never witnessed such activity on the 3 PC's I have the product installed on which includes a now vintage laptop dating back to 2014. All I see in Task Manager is minor infrequent activity by Acronis processes that mostly register below the 1.0% mark unless a malware scan or backup task is running of course. This qualifies as "minute bits of activity" in my book. If you see more than this then I would think it deserves further investigation to attempt to understand why?
With ATI 2020 going back to 2018 with Active Protection, you could turn it off in the application and it no longer prevented access to Acronis files such as the Script .tib.tis files. That is no longer the case with 2021!
The reason that you cannot access such files as Script.tib.tis is because the application has a Self Protection feature active to prevent outside threats from compromising the protection afforded by Acronis Protection in the first place. I would say that is a plus in my book. None of the other solutions out there to my knowledge can or do provide this however, I am sure that they soon will!
No - Vulnerability scans only run when the Protection Settings for this are enabled. Strangely this is one option that Acronis does seem to respect! I have this and all Protection turned off and see no evidence to support your statement in this respect.
I have had protection turned off and on. I can tell you that on one of my machines running the latest version 39216 and even with previous versions when protection is turned off vulnerability scans still run on a daily basis. I am providing screenshot below to evidence this:
For your first point above - why should any Protection components respond briefly to any behaviours and processes that occur on my (or any user) system when Protection is 'turned off permanently' and another antivirus / security solution is being employed?
In response here I ask why should they not respond? At the level at which these processes operate I do not see how you could expect anything less. Any process working at the kernel level will probably exhibit the same behavior. I can say for certain that on the machine from which the screenshot above was taken, I still have my old third party solution installed. That third party solution exhibits this same behavior that I see in Acronis Protection this tells me there is no difference here.
My 'solution' is that Acronis should respect the user choice in turning off all Protection features, as per the option given to users, and not ignore the user choice to do whatever they deem should be done. Ideally, the user should have a choice during installation whether to include the Protection features or not, but in the absence of this choice, then at least do what the setting says and allow 'Turn off protection permanently' to mean it is off!
I believe Acronis has done as you suggest in allowing the user choice to turn off protection. Just because there are processes remaining after the user turns off protection that show activity periodically does not mean that protection is still active. I have said this before, there are countless processes that run on any machine on a continual basis that show activity for seemingly no reason. I see nothing to suggest that this is any different in this case with Acronis.
If 'the purpose of the product goal of a complete data protection package' is correct, as you state, then Acronis should insist on all third-party security applications being uninstalled too and not allow users to have this choice of not using Cyber Protection! The documentation for ATI 2021 does not state this requirement and users can choose a different protection solution and Acronis should 'step aside' and leave the user's chosen application to be in control!
It appears to me that on the introduction of the TI 2021 product this "not allow users to have a choice of not using Cyber Protection" was exactly the case. After the outcry of users including yourself that this was against what users wanted, Acronis obliged and provided the option to turn off protection.
I do not understand your reference of "The documentation for ATI 2021 does not state this requirement and users can choose a different protection solution". What requirement do you speak of here? By providing an option to turn off protection Acronis is not requiring the user to do anything here. In fact, that option by defaullt is turned off. My third party app in this example here is in control. Windows Security shows it is in control so how can you say it is not?
So simple logic here tells us that if the user chooses to opt in and turn on protection then the user will enjoy the benefits of a complete data protection package. How you can construe this as otherwise is beyond me.
Bob, we are going to have to agree to disagree on the subject of Acronis Cyber Protection! You are very obviously in favour of this change whereas I am not.
I have spent many hours since last August on my support case with Acronis capturing hundreds of megabytes of trace data showing exactly how much activity is still taking place when protection is supposedly turned off. They have accepted that this is by design and have suggested that they will address this in a later build of 2021. My confidence in seeing such a design change is very low.
On the Vulnerability scan question, see the activity detail from my PC! There are no daily scans being listed.
Regarding the ATI 2021 documentation, it states the following in the Antivirus and antimalware protection section:
Stop the entire protection for a predefined period of time (30 minutes, 1 hour, 4 hours, until restart). To do this, click Turn off protection and choose the period.
Note By turning the protection off, you deactivate Active Protection (Real-time protection, Antiransomware protection, Vulnerability assessment, and Web filtering). Scheduled on-demand scans will not start.
I am simply arguing that Acronis should do what they state above! (deactivate the selected features). The help text is actually incomplete because it does not cover the further option provided which is to turn off protection permanently.
So simple logic here tells us that if the user chooses to opt in and turn on protection then the user will enjoy the benefits of a complete data protection package.
Only if they have a subscription that allows for this yet all the same background services and processes are just as active on systems with a perpetual / Standard license version of ATI 2021 without such Cyber Protection enabled.
One of the things that I find hard to accept here Bob, is that Acronis has positioned itself as the only Cyber Protection provider despite being total newcomers to this arena with no proven track record versus long established antivirus / security vendors with long years of proven capability. I expect your comments will be regarding the ever changing cyber threat vista but I cannot believe that Acronis alone are responding to this!
The other aspect here is simply one of personal experience. I am not an enterprise customer nor working in any business environment. I am a home user who has not had any virus infection or experienced any malware attack, ransomware etc in very many years, plus as the main support person for a large number of friends and family, have not been called to deal with any of the same for many years either. I am not complacent about the threat of malware and practise / recommend safe practises that include use of security software, making multiple backups etc. Finally, returning to the subject of this topic, I do not buy subscription applications by preference and have no interest in buying an Acronis subscription!
Steve,
I agree to disagree on this topic. I understand you spent hours on proving that services where running even with protection disabled and I likewise understand Acronis reply that it is by design because it is.
As to vulnerability protection not showing as running on your install, I can only wonder if your poking prodding and tinkering has not resulted in none of it working as designed. You certainly posses the talents to do so.
I admit that I like you have and do practice safe computing. Having said that I am of the opinion that in our current time safe practices are not and will not be enough going forward. Advancements in threat technology have reached a level where higher levels of protection are warranted even by the lowly home user. For me, I learned as a very young person to not allow myself to become a victim of anything and that will remain with me till the end of my days on this earth. I have investigated both cyber threat and cyber protection. I have investigated all the offerings available to the consumer and from that I have determined that Acronis True Image Cyber Protection is the best out there.
You should take a good hard look at widely available test results on the net of the product. Likewise you should take a good hard look at what threats exist today and how such threats are propagated as well as how they are being dealt with currently and then look at what available products offer in the way of protection. I am going to tell you this, Windows Defender is the only currently available consumer level protection that is even near the same level as Acronis is but, at the end of the day Acronis has the gold star. Sorry you see it otherwise.
As to vulnerability protection not showing as running on your install, I can only wonder if your poking prodding and tinkering has not resulted in none of it working as designed. You certainly posses the talents to do so.
Absolutely not! Vulnerability scan is turned off and is doing as it should do - nothing when off!
I am going to tell you this, Windows Defender is the only currently available consumer level protection that is even near the same level as Acronis is
I use Windows Defender because I trust it and can see no good reason why Acronis should automatically seek to supplant it - it is integrated closely with the OS and for me, works silently and well!
Absolutely not! Vulnerability scan is turned off and is doing as it should do - nothing when off!
Hmm!
I use Windows Defender because I trust it and can see no good reason why Acronis should automatically seek to supplant it - it is integrated closely with the OS and for me, works silently and well!
I know that you use Windows Defender (now part of Windows Security solution) and it is a polished offering as I have previously eluded to, no argument there. How is it that you think Acronis seeks to supplant it? Merely because of the additional processes that are added? As for Defender working silently and well, there are a good number of processes that Windows Security runs all the time just like Acronis Protection does. Unlike Acronis Protection though Windows Security does not use any self defense mechanism to protect itself from alteration by a well written exploit should one happen onto your PC.
I understand that you are probably not interested but for others who may visit this thread who might be I am posting links to 3 independent reviews of the True Image 2021 product. These reviews are unbiased articles. There also have been 2 AV testing service sites that have performed their tests on TI 2021 and in both the Protection offered ranks at the top of their testing.
https://www.pcworld.com/article/3571419/acronis-true-image-2021-premium…
https://www.itpro.com/server-storage/backup/358644/acronis-true-image-2…
https://www.pcmag.com/reviews/acronis-true-image
Steve, Bob... go to your corners.
You guys seem to be arguing two separate issues.
Bob... your point is that Acronis Protection is a good solution and is well worth using. This is a reasonable point and I know you've done a lot of research to arrive at this view. I don't see Steve disagreeing with that. I have not done as much research but I have no reason to dispute your assessment. As a matter of fact, I appreciate it.
Steve... your point is that if you choose not to use Acronis Protection, but rather something else, then Acronis Protection should not operate on your running system. It should not be running any tasks or services or background processes whatsoever. This too is a valid point and I'm in full agreement.
To me, the crux of the issue is that if you want True Image backup only, you can't have it without some modicum of Protection running on your system. From my experience with other software (including Windows itself), I would like to see two choices given... 1. Do not install the Protection package, in which case ATI 2021 would look a lot like ATI 2020; or 2. Install the Protection package, but be able to really turn it off completely (as Steve is saying), in which case the result would look like choice 1, but with a switch to easily turn it on or run a manual scan.
Ding!
Bruno, fully agree with your analysis here!
Bob, you said:
I know that you use Windows Defender (now part of Windows Security solution) and it is a polished offering as I have previously eluded to, no argument there. How is it that you think Acronis seeks to supplant it?
The answer to your last sentence / question is that installing ATI 2021 automatically disables Windows Defender in favour of using Acronis Protection without seeking any confirmation from the user that this is what they want!
I have no argument as to how good Acronis Protection may be other than that it requires an Advanced or Premium subscription to be fully effective / active. I choose not to use subscription products and prefer to use Windows Defender. I accept that there may be some risks associated with any such choices.
Bruno,
Points are well taken, I just wonder if some of these processes that have been added are tied to other program feature/functions that would break if these processes are not running.
Steve,
I have installed TI 2021 on a good number of machines and I have yet to find that it automatically turns itself on. Each time I have installed it I have found it turned off and I must choose to turn it on. Why your experience is different than mine I have no idea. A few days ago I started fresh with my test machine and True Image has not been installed. I will do that and report back on this.
I think you are going to be seeing some licensing changes with the next release. Not sure what that will look like but time will tell.
Bob, I think the behaviour on initial installation has evolved - it is now much better behaved (at least in for third party solutions such as Norton 360). Bruno has got to the essential point - users should be given a clear choice, and if it is no, then they should end up with the protections offered by ATI 2020 and the other stuff is not installed.
Ian
Aside: If this thread was in one of the Forums I moderate, I would have shifted much of the discussion to a separate thread. We have strayed too far form perpetual v subscription issue.
Ian,
Yes, I agree with your position here. I have no grip or complaint about there being differing product levels to suit a users needs. I also agree that the installation of ATI has gotten much better in the last 3 releases.
Likewise I also agree completely with you Aside. :-)
I have no big problem with subscription only, as long as restore is possible forever (if you want to make more backups, renew or get another product you like better). Presumably the rescue media created by the builder do not expire, which is minimal standard for OK, but it would be better if the media builders were freely downloadable (with info about what versions of ATI they work for). Perpetual ability to browse previous backups conveniently from Win10 would also be good (the idea here being to avoid conveying the idea that the customer is being held captive).
Whatever is going on with the 2021 Protection updates etc, they have no discernable effect on Battlefield V performance (on AMD Ryzen 7 3700X).
Avery, all Acronis rescue media should remain able to perform recovery operations regardless of whether from perpetual or subscription versions. The key difference is that with subscription versions, once that has expired, then all other functionality is lost apart from recovery as far as the installed application is concerned, but, if I remember correctly, the rescue media could still be used for backup & recovery (especially if the PC is offline).
To have the ability to browse .tib / .tibx files in Explorer requires a valid ATI installation as this is what provides the integration with the Windows shell.
I see that Amazon has a listing for Acronis TIH 2021 1 PC/Mac Perpetual License with 3 Month Free Antivirus for $47.97 today 04/30/21 at 3PM Central time, US. I wonder, does that mean, after 3 months one will NOT have to turn off the Anti Virus, it will be automatically disabled never to return unless the user turns it back on after paying for an antivirus subscription ??
From reading posts from other users who have tried the 3 month trial of Acronis Cyber Protection, they have complained loudly about all the nagging that follows after the trial period ends which IIRC cannot be stopped!
See forum topic: protection trial notification - ref the above nagging!
Might be a case here where it would be better value to take a 1 year subscription for ATI 2021 Advanced or Premium that includes full protection then decide if it is worth renewing when the subscription is due for renewal, else stick with perpetual and existing antivirus.
Steve, Thanks for the comments.
Some months ago, I decided to uninstall my TIH2021 and go with an alternative product until such time that a newer version of TIH feels more comfortable on my computer. I already have an antivirus system that works for me and I didn't want a forced alternative to compete with it. I'll just wait until the 2022 version arrives and see if there is a better functionality and fit. Since backup and restore functions are so important, It never hurts to keep looking at all the alternatives.
Regards,
Steve F.
Steve F, the main issue with waiting for 2022 is that Acronis have stated they are going for subscription only and look very unlikely to provide a version without all the bundled Cyber Protection bulk! I too have been using an alternative product in preparation as have other users - see forum topic: Reflecting on a Post-ATI World
As a long time, user of ATI, super disappointed by the decision to morph what was a feature rich backup/cloning solution to a "cyber protection" solution that by the way has backup/cloning features. From the perspective of a 30+ year IT professional with extensive experience with cyber-security and endpoint protection strategies serving multiple Fortune 500 companies (not bragging just trying to provide perspective), merging the two service forces a subscription and, in the end, seems like a money grab by Acronis in the end.
Any cyber security service/product requires regular updates to stay on top of the ever-changing protection landscape. Most services/tools/products have auto-update features that automatically check for updates on an hourly basis. These are good features and thus lend themselves very well to a subscription-based model.
IMHO, a backup/cloning app/tool/service (alone) from a user perspective does not lend itself to a subscription-based model and also does not provide new annual revenue for the company. If cloud or external storage were an optional as part of the app/tool/service, then that requires an annual subscription.
Acronis could added all these great new features as OPT-IN rather than forcing their entire ATI customer base into a subscription pricing model. Backup/cloning could still be perpetual while the other cyber-security features could be opt-in subscription based. While one can never tell, I am not sure how many existing ATI customers would opt-in for the cyber security services, since most people already have these services covered by other products….but again, that is IMHO
Options and features are great and offer customers flexibility BUT they should not lock customers into pricing models that don't fit their needs and cost him more money without adding value to their specific situation. I respect the fact that Acronis is trying to expand their service offerings but I do not agree with their choice to force customers that were interested in ATI 2021 into subscription-based pricing.
I for one have been using ATI 2018 for years and for the most part don’t need more. I went looking for the new ATI version to add the ability to remove old version chains to free up disk space. I will NOT be upgrading to ATI2021 or a subscription-based model for my backup/cloning needs. I already have coverage for my cyber security needs and therefore am not looking to replace that nor am I looking to pay twice for the same service.
Steve Smith wrote:*****Avery, all Acronis rescue media should remain able to perform recovery operations regardless of whether from perpetual or subscription versions. The key difference is that with subscription versions, once that has expired, then all other functionality is lost apart from recovery as far as the installed application is concerned, but, if I remember correctly, the rescue media could still be used for backup & recovery (especially if the PC is offline).To have the ability to browse .tib / .tibx files in Explorer requires a valid ATI installation as this is what provides the integration with the Windows shell.
*****
Good - what I expected while hoping not to have to test it ... the other thing that a subscription model requires (whether or not subscription is a good or terrible idea in the first place, I'll be agnostic about for now) is that there be zero retraction of functionality, as happened with the tib -> tibx shift. According to the faq, there are still a number of lost functionalities, although one of them, mounting, appears to have been restored (I was also annoyed at the loss of cleanup versions, but that also seems to have been restored, and is no longer in the limitations faq. I definitely like having the original and the incrementals packed into one file, since I've had problems with large numbers of inc files lying around, and they sometimes seem to go missing.
Retraction of functions really really needs not to happen again if they stick with the subscription-only option (which could have been avoided in this case by providing an option to start a backup as .tib).
I have been purchasing new versions of Acronis about every 3-4 years for the last 16 years or more and have not needed to stick with an annual licensing. I am an individual and the cost per PC is extremly high. The only way I can afford and justify to purchase is when the technology changes drastically and I have to get the new version to back up a new machine
I am an experience user and use the boot up method all the time storing backups on USB drives. It has been a life saver for times when windows messes up the upgrade or hard drive failures. But upselling with all the new bells and whisles that they are offering is not something I need nor want.
Much less become a "slave" of a subscription. If I am forced to move to subscription, then I will have to look at some of the other alternatives in the market and there are a number of them
I have stayed with Acronis because it is reliable and has the basic functionality I need
So in Summary: I prefer perpetual licenses and if possible a plain version without antivirus, disk utilities, etc
Maria Belinskaya wrote:Hello Andrew,
thank you for posting this question on Acronis forums!
Acronis discontinues perpetual license sales.
The majority of our customers now overwhelmingly prefer subscriptions for procuring critical technologies – particularly since subscriptions ensure they have up-to-the-minute protection against the latest cyberthreats. Many also report benefiting from a lower total cost of ownership and the ability to manage their environments more effectively. Given this clear customer preference, Acronis has decided to only sell our solutions by subscription, allowing us to concentrate on delivering superior cyber protection in near real-time.
If you still wish to purchase a perpetual license we advise searching on resellers platforms online.
The core of this message is best read by stripping out the mid section.
Acronis discontinues perpetual license sales.
[...]
If you still wish to purchase a perpetual license we advise searching on resellers platforms online.
The blab about what's inside the head of majority of its users is irrelevant nonsense and is best ignored. The main factual and relevant points are made in the first and last sentence.
What are reseller platforms?... I wonder. You mean online stores? A website selling products online is not exactly what I would call a platform. They don't even have automated deliveries of license keys, it's all manually handled, and you get a piece of paper without a CD-ROM or DVD-ROM for the boxed product (as reported by John).
For those of you looking to buy a perpetual license of True Image 2021 from one of these "reseller platforms", I have procured following product numbers. I believe these are SKU numbers or something similar that should help you with your google-fu.
TH7AL1LOS
ESD, 1 user
TH8AL1LOS
ESD, 3 user
TH9AL1LOS
ESD, 5 user
TIH4B2DES
BOX, 1 user
TI34B2DES
BOX, 3 user
TI54B2DES
BOX, 5 user
As reported by John, these boxed versions are really just a piece of paper with a serial number (license key). So don't go for these if you want a physical copy of the software on CD-ROM or DVD-ROM. Heh... CD-ROM?... it would most definitely be delivered on a DVD-ROM since True Image is too large to fit on a CD-ROM. How could it not be?.... how else are they going to pack in all those fantastic extra features like "personal cyber protection" so you can feel well protected and cared for. As I recall, DVD-ROM "backup" copy of the software costs extra when you purchase True Image the normal way, via Acronis website (technically order is processed and product is delivered by CleverBridge). If you can find the ESD (Electronic Software Delivery) version I would say rather go for that one. Why waste paper and cost of transportation on a piece of text, right?
Enchantech wrote:With the discontinuation of the Perpetual license leaving only the subscription license in place users have lost a choice in product offering for certain. Does that mean the user should abandon the product? I think not on that basis alone, no.
The True Image product has undergone some significant changes over the past several years. Most of these changes have been meet with resistance from a percentage of the users. This is unfortunate but expected simply because we humans hate change simply because it is uncomfortable.
I am happy I do not fit into that category. Rather than resist these changes in the product I have embarked on a learning curve to achieve a better understanding of these changes and more importantly how to change my use of the product so that I still get the expected benefit and results from it.
So this latest change in licensing I find expected as the software industry as a whole has been moving in this direction for sometime now. So if you insist on sticking with a perpetual licensed product then obviously Acornis True Image is not for you. If however, you can embrace change then this change is a nothing event.
I will go on record by saying I don't embrace change with open arms. But I don't exactly rebel against every new idea. Change is like death, it's inevitable. It's for good and for worse. For some of us, some change is for good while for others it's a course for worse. For others still, all change is for good, unconditionally. For some people this ever-increasing rate of change is signaling the end of the world as we know it. Everything is relative you know. I personally prefer to find a middle ground.
I do think this "living in the second" society as I like to call it, is unhealthy for us. It is turning man into a machine in more ways than I care to count here. It leaves me wishing to be able to push the brakes on the so called "progress", if ever so slightly. One way of doing so is to resist the influence of big corporations, and Acronis does not escape this category. To resist their influence on our ways of life, our values and beliefs. To paraphrase Descartes, I prefer perpetual license model, therefore I am?...
I totally agree that software industry as a whole has been moving in this direction for some time, and with that in mind it's not unexpected that Acronis is taking the same steps and moving to a subscription license model. This move however should raise at least a few questions. Is it wise? If other companies have done the same, does it make the move any wiser or the decision any easier? Also, what does this say about the rest of us that refuse to conform to this new software industry order (exchangeble with "world order")? Are we to be considered outcast/irrelevant/expired? What does it say about the companies that are enforcing these new business models?
I will say that a lot of the time, these companies are making irrational decisions and have little to no respect for you as a user/customer (I'm not sure which one is more true more often). You know, if I scream "WOLF!!!" loud enough, maybe you too will start to see a pack of wolves coming your way. This is in reference to the "safety accessibility privacy authenticity security" slogan that Acronis has been using lately, with depiction of what I previously described as "five headed robotic monster" in the linked topic above. This whole "personal cyber protection" is nothing but FUD (fear, uncertainty, and doubt) tactics and a marketing ploy. You should see all the marketing emails that Acronis has been bombarding me with since the question of perpetual licenses became a big topic. It sure felt like they have been targeting me specifically, because I was the first to quesiton the lack of availability of perpetual licenses on this forum.
Dare I say that majority is not always right? If humanity as a whole was headed toward the cliff, and only one "idiot" among the billions of people saw what is coming, why should they listen to him to turn the ship around? More often than not it's the odd ones that think differently that have saved the day and allowed humanity to prosper and persevere in times of hardship.
IanL-S wrote:I avoid subscriptions when I cannot see any benefits. I can se benefits in my Dropbox subscription, am ambivalent about subscribing to Microsoft 365. I refuse to subscribe to Adobe product or those from it’s major competitors. If I did not see benefits in cloud backup, I would avoid a subscription to Acronis. I suspect there are many in the community who only update ever 3 or 4 version, and they will look elsewhere.
Ian
Likewise, the only reason I would reconsider getting Acronis as a subscription plan now would be for the benefit of cloud backup. It would not be because of its superior "personal cyber protection" fancy pants features.
Sadly, Acronis was late to this party. I recall seeing 100 GB of cloud storage on offer with Acronis, and only with certain subscription plans like "Premium" I think. This was a laughable amount when compared to the likes of Carbonite/Mozy and Backlazer. This was a few years back. But even now, with True Image 2021, the amount of cloud storage starts with 250 GB for the basic plan and ends with 1 TB if I recall it correctly. That's nowhere near the 4 TB I would need to feel safe and "cyber protected".
John Gayman wrote:I just picked up a 3-PC ATI 2021 with perpetual license from B&H. As some have stated, authorized resellers are able to continue to sell the products they have in stock.
I tried to buy the 5 PC download product of True Image 2021 from B&H two days ago. It only costs 49.99 USD. Sadly, my order has been put on hold by "Verification Department" because my MasterCard is issued outside USA. They requested that I provide a link to a Facebook profile or a LinkedIn profile to verify my street address. They think that they can ascertain my identity and/or ownership of said MasterCard through Facebook. That's so lame! I have never experienced such scrutiny for the past 20 years I've done my shopping online. Viewing the world through the prism of Facebook is a very limited perspective.
Here is what they wrote to me.
We thank you for your recent order.
However, due to the fact that this order was paid with a card issued outside the USA, we are missing some important security information, such as address verification and so we have to take additional steps to protect the cardholder, thus your order is on hold. Therefore, we kindly ask; that if you or a colleague of yours has previously shopped at B&H Photo, whether it was online, over the phone or at our Superstore in NYC, we ask if you can provide us with the details associated with that order.
However, if this is your first time shopping with us; we ask respectfully that you provide us with some additional information such as a link to your online profile at Facebook or LinkedIn or a similar page; Alternatively, if you have a work email address or university email address with a valid domain replying from it will help expedite the processing of your order. Your credentials will not be stored or used for marketing purposes.
Please make sure your order number is in the subject line of all your email correspondence. Sorry for the inconvenience and thanks in advance for your understanding in this matter.
I have asked if they would not rather see a photocopy of my passport. I'm awaiting their response.
But imagine the length to which one would go to get a copy of True Image that guarantees perpetual usage of said software...
But also, this is yet another company that does not want to make friends with its customers. This is the very first order I have placed with this company, and it's not off to a good start. It is most definitely going to be my last.
That's "reseller platforms" for you (reference to Marias post).
What the B&H management needs to realize is that they need to implement "MasterCard Secure Code" if they want to do friction free business with customers outside USA. Maybe they realize it, but they are just too lazy to implement it? If they are anything like Acronis, they probably know best what the customer wants. I live in Europe and we have been using MasterCard Secure Code and Verified by VISA as a second factor for at least a decade. That's all the more reason for this company to trust my non-US MasterCard (if they knew how to implement MasterCard Secure Code). This is all US technology after all, I find it strange that it's not used where it's coming from and is distrusted when used outside the US (that tells its own story).
Amazon UK has options to purchase ATI 2021 perpetual licenses along with 2020 and 2019 but I have only seen 1 or 3 PC options offered.
Personally, if I can no longer buy perpetual licenses (when needed) for ATI then I will switch to a different solution which does offer this option. I already have a 4-PC perpetual license for MR Home that includes free upgrade to their next version (8) when it is released that I bought during their online Easter sale! I have no need or interest in Acronis Cloud backup storage or Cyber Protection.
I have been using Ashampoo Backup during my time of absence from this forum. It is a solid option I think, but it needs more polish in my opinion. There are a few GUI bugs that are quite apparent when using English as the language, and I am not fond of the (garbage) collection of files that each backup produces (although I much prefer the VMDK files over proprietary TIB and TIBX).
I wanted to secure a 5 PC license of True Image 2021 because it was so cheap over at B&H, and because I still have True Image 2021 running in the background and doing its scheduled backups, it's just not allowing me in to see anything.
Also, I have made the mistake of relying on this proprietary software with proprietary file format and made a few one-off TIB and TIBX disk images for archival purposes that will now be locked in unless I have a software that can read them.
When did Acronis introduce TIBX? As I recall it was introduced quitely as a file name extension in True Image 2020. I have the installers for True Image 2020 but after a review I can see that I used them with a subscription plan and don't have a perpetual license key to go along with it. And since I no longer have a subscription plan, I will not be able to open these files. Does Acronis have any solution for this situation that does not involve me getting on the subscription bandwagon? I think not. They should make a "True Image Reader" edition now that they are parting with the "minority" of us that don't like the subscription model and the push for "cyber" bla bla.
Enchantech wrote:What I like best about TI 2021 protection is that it does active updates about every 5 minutes from Acronis servers on a a worldwide basis to update any newly detected malware that has been detected on this worldwide network. In other words all of Acronis servers that support the Cyber Protect product used by Service providers and end user customers constantly update any new threat that appears across the globe. TI 2021 checks this status every 5 minutes and updates itself accordingly. This uses a small amount of PC resources yes but is worth it to me. I know of no other offering out there currently that does this sort of thing. Maybe there are but I have no knowledge of them.
That may only be possible because it's taxing my resources to offer protection to you, and vice verse. The value is then not really provided by Acronis, but by you and me, with our own computers doing the heavy lifting of detecting, reporting and distributing updates. Acronis is then merely connecting the dots and cashing in. It would be much wiser to turn to a open source solution that does the same, but for free and benefit of all of mankind. Sadly we still live in a world where cash is king so that will never happen.
BrunoC wrote:Steve, you can use the Acronis Scheduler Manager to change the TimeInterval of the 5 minute task to something longer. Yes I know, this is not the way it should be, and after the next update you'd need to change it again. But at least it could quiet the system down for a bit.
Looking at other software update tasks, I think every 5 minutes may be a bit overkill. What always bothered me about that task is that if there was a problem with the connection to the servers it would do 10 retries 30 seconds apart. End result was that the task could run every 30 seconds forever.
I have to agree with Steve though, if protection is off checking the servers for updates which are not then downloaded is a rather meaningless exercise and waste of resources.
In other words, you have no total control over it. You're either "all in" or you're "a little bit in". You have no power to say "NO!"
It's not completely meaningless, because they are using your computer resources to provide value to other customers. It's just that you have opted not to receive the same benefits from other users. It's a distributed system, where they use each users computer to pull the "cyber protection" trick. That's why the software is so bloated and heavy. It does way more than just backup and local data processing.
Enchantech wrote:I think it may be running the log portion of the update process but not actually making the update. It's hard to tell as if there is nothing to update then obviously nothing is downloaded. I look at it like a lot of Windows processes, they run for this or that reason and end up doing nothing but they still run. I doubt stuff like that will ever change. In fact, I'd say stuff like that will only increase across all apps as software developers do more to try to be more to the user whether the user likes or wants it or not. A symptom of our time if you will.
My previous solution would only run updates when instructed. That was flawed in that If I forgot to run it or did not run it for some reason then it would get way out of date, With the way malware works these days I'd much rather have one that keeps watch on an ongoing basis and updates in autopilot so I do not have to remember or be concerned about it. To me that is a more secure feeling than oh, did I do that today, or was it done today, no thanks, I will stick with ATI until something better comes along.
I don't know what you have been using, but anti-virus software has been doing automatic checking and updating since at least 2005.
Developers trying to be more what?... user friendly? I have no illusions of what the developers are trying to be and do. Correction! What they are succeeding at being and doing. Personal computing devices have long since turned into zombies that wake up from sleep whenever someone at a distant company across the continents sends a command, and then they carry out their telemetry and gather data for their masters, only to go back to sleep and you as user never notice anything when you get back to your device.
This is a legitimate way of doing business now. In a different time this would be considered a data breach and hacking, and someone may have been sent to jail for doing it. Now people just don't give a damn, because it's the new normal and the majority don't have interest for how things work, they just want to carry out their business using a device and then move on.
Microsoft has often been criticized over many years for releasing unfinished and buggy Windows versions. Now just about every company is doing the same, and no one turns their head, because it has now been normalized and legitimized under slogans such as "agile development".
Steve Smith wrote:Bob, if all Protection is turned off permanently - as offered in the settings, then there is no good reason why Acronis should even be running all these protection related services & processes! This is at the heart of my support case with Acronis that I have had open since last August, and for which they have said that they "have already forwarded to the team concern, We will surely work on it and implement in the future build of Acronis True image 2021 application."
For users with Protection turned off, then there is no need to look for any updates, and in the perpetual versions of ATI 2021 there is no malware protection without either running the limited trial or else subscribing, so again, no reason or purpose to these activities!
Note: It is not only protection updates being done but also active scanning of Windows system files by a feature that is supposedly turned off permanently! I have submitted multiple ProcMon traces showing exactly this activity for my support case!
I have said more than enough to make myself clear on what I think and where I stand in terms of subscription license vs. perpetual license, and enforced features like cyber protection. But I will add this. I think there may be one good (rogue) reason why Acronis is not allowing you to permanently disable these features that you may have overlooked. Namely, if they allow users to disable it completely (not just make it appear disabled) then that would break this feature for the rest of users that do want it enabled (and functional) or just don't care enough to be bothered by looking into this. Protection of other users depends on your computer providing that protection.
I think there may be one good (rogue) reason why Acronis is not allowing you to permanently disable these features that you may have overlooked. Namely, if they allow users to disable it completely (not just make it appear disabled) then that would break this feature for the rest of users that do want it enabled (and functional) or just don't care enough to be bothered by looking into this. Protection of other users depends on your computer providing that protection.
Samir, sorry but I will never accept any software doing as you describe above! There should never be any linkage between systems belonging to any other users unless explicitly enabled!
If Acronis wants to allow users to not use the new Cyber Protect features, then the simplest method is to allow a selective install where the users control what features are installed, i.e. as you can with many other applications including MS Office!
Both the Perpetual (Standard) and Essential versions of ATI 2021 have Cyber Protect installed by default with zero added benefit for the users of these editions, but with all the overheads of the extra background services and checks for updates!
Like many other users, I want a Backup & Recovery application first & foremost, not a compound application with unwanted extra features such as Cyber Protect! I would happily forego the 'pleasure' of having Active Protection (against ransomware) if this was the only way to keep the essential core features that brought me to use Acronis True Image in the first place!
When did Acronis introduce TIBX? As I recall it was introduced quitely as a file name extension in True Image 2020. I have the installers for True Image 2020 but after a review I can see that I used them with a subscription plan and don't have a perpetual license key to go along with it. And since I no longer have a subscription plan, I will not be able to open these files. Does Acronis have any solution for this situation that does not involve me getting on the subscription bandwagon? I think not.
TIBX files (for Disks & Partitions backups only) were introduced with ATI 2020 with support continuing for both the new .tibx and the older / original .tib files.
If you have make the Acronis Rescue Media for either 2020 or 2021, then this will continue to work to allow you to recover any files created by those or older versions. The key proviso for this statement is that you must create that media from a valid, activated version if you want to have access to all the full Backup & Recovery features.
If you do not have a perpetual or active subscription license for either 2020 or 2021, then you would need to purchase at least a single PC perpetual license of either of these to have access to recovering your existing .tibx files, where the preference should be 2021 for best backward compatibility!
Samir, sorry but I will never accept any software doing as you describe above! There should never be any linkage between systems belonging to any other users unless explicitly enabled!
I feel the same way Steve, yet here I am using True Image. I didn't know better than to lock myself in with this software.
I know... extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. The statement I made is based on my own experience and insight into how software in general works and software trends. This is becoming a more common practice in the software industry than one would like to believe. Sorry, I mean the "app industry" (because "software industry" sounds so archaic).
I don't mean to convince people into one thing or another, I simply ask that they question the reality that's being presented to them. Reality seldomly meets our expectations. How else am I to understand this odd behavior on part of True Image? If you say you want to disable something, some feature, then you expect that to be disabled, not to just give you an impression or illusion of being disabled.
Besides, I did not see Acronis present evidence for their claim that their customers are favoring subscription based licensing model over the perpetual license model. This goes to show that anyone can claim anything. But to give you a well documented example of what I described, you can have a look at Microsoft Windows 10. There is an entire section in the Settings app called "Delivery Optimization" with the option to "allow downloads from other PCs" and "PCs on my local network, and PCs on the Internet". This way all users on the Internet can fetch Windows update from your home PCs, and likewise your PCs can grab Windows updates from other Windows users rather than from Microsoft directly.
In a way, this is a legitimized form of a botnet. The difference is that you pay to be part of it by purchasing the product, and if you install it yourself then it's not illegal. That's how they avoid legal prosecution. Add to this telemetry and you can begin to understand the scale of it. In another time and age it would be considered wiretapping. The methods are even more devious now, because you are no longer paying for Windows upgrades.
If Acronis wants to allow users to not use the new Cyber Protect features, then the simplest method is to allow a selective install where the users control what features are installed, i.e. as you can with many other applications including MS Office!
That's the thing. They are not only allowing it, they are mandating the use of Cyber Protect. Why would they make it a selective install when they don't allow it to be disabled? With the Microsoft Office suite, you can select what application to run, so it's only natural that Microsoft has made them optional during installation. There is more to it of course, it is so for historical reason when hard disk drives were no larger than 5 GB, but Microsoft has not chosen to limit user choice going forward. Given the current size of storage devices they could have just turned the installer into one bit "INSTALL" button, one click and simple installation.
Both the Perpetual (Standard) and Essential versions of ATI 2021 have Cyber Protect installed by default with zero added benefit for the users of these editions, but with all the overheads of the extra background services and checks for updates!
Again, I believe this is by design, it's not a mistake or a bug and it will not be corrected because there is nothing to correct. I would like to be proven wrong, but when the app is calling home and talking to its mothership when there is no good reason for this is highly suspicious behavior, one that's most commonly found in malware. Given its proprietary nature and lack of source code, it's difficult to understand what exactly it's doing.
This is not much different from what Microsoft is doing with Windows, along with a number of big corporations. It's no longer enough to just pay for something and expect to be left alone, the money is not enough. They need our data too, even if "only" diagnostic data that is collected so that they can improve their products or services. If anything, they should be paying us for allowing them to run these sophisticated "protection networks" on our computers.
I already have a 4-PC perpetual license for MR Home that includes free upgrade to their next version (8) when it is released that I bought during their online Easter sale!
MR 8 has been released. I recently purchased it and it has already allowed me to recover from a nasty file corruption caused by the 20H2 Windows upgrade that was forced upon me last night.
GUI of Macrium Reflect
I tested Macrium Reflect for the past three days, and it was the latest version 8.0. I uninstalled it today. The GUI is just too distasteful and confusing. It's all just too busy, too verbose, with far too many options and informational details all displayed at once for nearly every action you would want to take. I prefer clean interfaces where I can drill down to the atom level details when and if I want to, but not having to look at them for a second if I don't want to.
So for this reason alone, I must reject Macrium Reflect. I can't force myself to use something I don't like when I see it. I even tried the new dark dark theme (I prefer dark interfaces, something that True Image lacks), but that didn't help persuade me.
Also, there appears to be some aliasing effect around text elements on mouse click. I would rather use a command line interface than the GUI if one was made available. When a program only offers a GUI to look at it needs to be pixel perfect for me to like it and prefer it over competitors. For practical reasons, at least the text elements need to look sharp, and use a nice typeface with good weight, for readability (when forced to read so many details).
But if I wasn't this picky about the visuals and level of detail, I think I would fall for Macrium Reflect. It has just about everything True Image has. Including ability to mount disk images it makes, and it's quite responsive and speedy. I can usually go put on the coffee and come back before True Image is able to mount my TIBX files. The difference is noticeable.
viBoot feature
In addition, it has a feature called "viBoot" which allows you to create virtual machines (VM) using the VirtualBox software and then boot it up if it's a OS image. However this was not very impressive. I tried to boot the image of my host computer using this tool and while the VM was created successfully the boot up process dropped me at a GRUB command line, boot failed for whatever reason.
Also, I could not delete the image backup because of it. You normally can't just go on and delete the image straight from the storage location, this is because it's protected from deletions by Macrium Reflect so you will get a notification with a warning from Macrium Reflect. But you can't even delete it from within Macrium Reflect itself (where you should be able to), not when you have used it in a VM. You need to first unmount it from viBoot, which I did, but I could still not delete the image!
I'm not sure how this works, if Macrium Reflect "viBoot" is a bundled version of Virtual Box, or if it relies on you having installed Virtual Box beforehand, but I already have and use Virtual Box on this computer (installed long before Macrium Reflect) and when I launched it I found a VM there that was not made by me, with a cryptic GUID based name (this was made by viBoot or whatever). Once I removed it from my VirtualBox I was then able to delete the image from Macrium Reflect. Quite strange design choice I must say, completely unintuitive, and prone to user frustration and error when you make it depend on VirtualBox and just spit out error codes when trying to delete the image instead of "you need to unmount the image from viBoot and delete the temp VM from your VirtualBox" or something along those lines (maybe it's in the documentation somewhere, I don't care, it's still a bad design choice). Ideally, it should be enough to unmount it in "viBoot" (Macrium Reflect's own feature) and the program should be the one doing the cleaning of the mess it makes in my VirtualBox.
When something is too good to be true, it most often is false. I believe viBoot was an optional feature I could have skipped during installation of Macrium Reflect. But I was curious to see what it is. I have not spent hours examining it, but it seems to me like it's an alternate GUI front-end for VirtualBox hypervisor. I suspect it serves as a bridge between Macrium Reflect and VirtualBox because the MRMIG file format that Macrium Reflect is likely to be proprietary and unreadable by VirtualBox if deployed directly in VirtualBox. But again, it is optional to install this... I wish Acronis had the same mindset and made Cyber bla bla optional.
This reminds me of other noisy interfaces, such as that of the "Bulk Rename Utility". Have a look (laugh)...
Absolutely gorgeous looking nuclear power plant interface? They just need to make it go dark... with neon diagrams.
It's just a file renaming utility for Windows that I've used in the past. It's quite useful and powerful. Just look at all those controls and options! But my God is it ugly!
Sorry for going a bit off topic here. I have a passion for interfaces. This is one area where True Image excels among the competitors that may be overlooked when doing feature comparisons. It's one of those things that makes it user friendly so that many can use it without a lot of technical know-how. But for power users like myself it is not without its limits.
One thing I complained about previously about True Image GUI is the inability to direct my focus immediately on the tab that allows me to view and restore disk level objects rather than file level objects (if I recall it correctly), meaning I have to sit and wait for True Image to display something first, some view, one that I did not request (but it defaults to) before I can point it at what I do want to display. Given how slow it is with large data sets it's a nightmare going through this each time I want to restore something. I ended up splitting up the data set into multiple backup plans and it has served me well (an advice I got from Steve).
J K wrote:MR 8 has been released. I recently purchased it and it has already allowed me to recover from a nasty file corruption caused by the 20H2 Windows upgrade that was forced upon me last night.
Thanks J K, just updated to MR 8!
Samir wrote:This reminds me of other noisy interfaces, such as that of the "Bulk Rename Utility". Have a look (laugh)...
<snip>
Absolutely gorgeous looking nuclear power plant interface? They just need to make it go dark... with neon diagrams.
It's just a file renaming utility for Windows that I've used in the past. It's quite useful and powerful. Just look at all those controls and options! But my God is it ugly!
<snip>
Samir, as one who has programmed user interfaces in Windows since version 1 (1984, I think), I look at this interface with nostalgia.
UIs were written with the controls that Microsoft (and later, third parties) provided. It was never necessary for application developers to write their own controls unless there was a specific need, so whenever possible we used the ones available. Development time was more focused on application functionality.
This Bulk Rename Utility looks like it may have been written in the late 1990s. At the time, it may have been considered "userful and powerful", but not ugly.
Thanks for sharing Bruno! I am not categorically for or against one or the other, i.e. function over design vs. design over function. I may be leaning slightly more toward function over design, but I don't mind having a nice looking and simple to use interface to go along with it. You know how the saying goes, to the user/customer the interface is the product. Was it uncle Bob who coined that saying? I don't remember now. But I will say there is definitely more focus on UI design than on functionality these days. Actually, pure UI design may be fading as a term now and is overtaken by the whole "UX" philosophy. I personally like to have just a few core functions properly implemented and bug-free (as far as possible) and packaged in a nice interface (elegance).
Version 2.7.1.2 of this software was announced on "Sun Jun 20, 2010 8:07 am" on the product forum. Copyright notice says "2001 - 2010". So it looks like it dates back to late 1990s, early 2000s. It's worth noting that there is a version 3.4.3.0 now from Mar 16, 2021 (good longevity record).