Are these issues, or am I missing something?
I just installed 2014 premium. The uninstall of 2011 and the new install of 2014 went fine. Backup and restore of a system image went fine. However, there are some issues that, while minor, are quite annoying, and so I've come here to find out if I could be missing certain settings, as these issues are frustrating.
1. I make a backup, name it what I want it to be, yet TI seems to add additional characters!
Example: I name the file "System_2014_ATIH".
Acronis names it: System_2014_ATIH_1_full_b1_s1_v1
Is there a way to turn this off?
2. Scheduling: Is there a way to turn this off permanently. or do I have to turn it off every single time I create an image?
3. And finally, the prize winner...the "my backup" directory scheme: Are we still there? Is there no way to save my default directory, or do I have to change it every single time I create a new image?
Thanks.
MH,
Once the initial backup task has been created, actual backups can be created via one or even all of the options below.
1. Use the scheduler to run the task and create the backup on a schedule.
2. or, Open TrueImage and click on the "Backup now" opition. This will cause the backup to run and the backup file wil be named as stored as indicated by you in the task creation.
3. or, Initiate the start of the backup by clicking a desktop shortcut. The shortcut is easily created by opening the task "settings" button and clicking the create shortcut option. The result will be an icon on the desktiop with the same name as the backup task.
this shortcut can be depressed at any time a backup creation is desired.
4. or, Use Windows Scheduler or a batch file to run the shortcut which will initiate the backup.
1- No. This is the new default naming scheme.
2- You can turn the schedule off a task. Simply click on the blue link schedule in the list of backup tasks. The scheduler window will open. Choose do not schedule.
3- You have to select the directory every time you create a new backup task. Not everytime you create a new backup.
Hi Pat, thanks for your response. My response is directed to Acronis.
The enforced file-naming scheme is a nice touch, comrades. Why does Acronis think I need to know that my full, single version back up is a full single version backup, the 1st backup of my full single version backup, slice 1 of the 1st backup of my full single version backup, and volume 1 of the 1st backup of my full single version backup? I think for most, it's a given that all of these characteristics are inherent in a **FULL** backup. If they believe this is somehow(??) helpful, it should be OPTIONAL.
Ignorance at its finest on all counts.
The truth is that I like ATIH and would like to stay with it, but now feel that I'll need to start researching other image creation software. It's not that these issues break the software. It's that I have great difficulty abiding foolishness. And principal dictates that I'll not stay with a company that believes they know what's better for me than I do. And refuses to listen to its customers. And makes nonsense decisions.
MH,
Once the initial backup task has been created, actual backups can be created via one or even all of the options below.1. Use the scheduler to run the task and create the backup on a schedule.
2. or, Open TrueImage and click on the "Backup now" opition. This will cause the backup to run and the backup file wil be named as stored as indicated by you in the task creation.
3. or, Initiate the start of the backup by clicking a desktop shortcut. The shortcut is easily created by opening the task "settings" button and clicking the create shortcut option. The result will be an icon on the desktiop with the same name as the backup task.
this shortcut can be depressed at any time a backup creation is desired.
4. or, Use Windows Scheduler or a batch file to run the shortcut which will initiate the backup.
Hi Grover,
Thanks also for your response. The options you mention are not new developments and were possible in previous versions. Forcing me to browse to my default directory every time I create a new task is also not new (and no less irritating for its age), adding 14 or more additional characters to my file-name (and other Acronis file-naming shenanigans), however, is new.
The new file naming came in with TI 2013 as Acronis research and posts on this forum pointed to a very large majority of people who became confused as to what image slice was what in an archive, especially if they had somehow made a wrong selection and become totally confused.
True it would be nice to have that as an optional item, but it would add yet another layer of complication to TI and, I suspect, that is one thing that many users wouldn't want if it caused some unforeseen bug to rear its head - a case of beware what you wish for :)
Hi Colin. I can understand the file-naming scheme as pertains to differentials. What I don't understand is the fact that it is universally (and incorrectly) applied. In example, how does this file-naming scheme apply to a full, single version image? Why am I, someone who *never* does anything other than full backups (overwriting the previous), subjected to an enforced file naming that has absolutely nothing to do with my full backup?
Why do my filenames suddenly have up to 25 extra characters that provide no confusion-diminishing benefits? The only correct addition to the scheme is "full", and I already know that.
Full single versions do not have a backup number, full versions don't have slices or versions, yet according to the mandatory file naming, my single full version backup, is now named:
System_1_full_b1_s1_v1
For well over a decade, I have had rotating backups...System 1, System 2, Data 1, etc. I now have the pleasure and great benefit of knowing that it is also the 1st backup, the 1st slice of that backup and the 1st version (Even though no slices or versions exist). The only part of the file name that really applies is the term "full", and that is a case of telling me what I already know.
I don't buy that the software MUST apply this scheme universally and heavy-handedly, even to files for which it doesn't even apply. Can I change the file name? Yes, but must changing the file name be added to my routine when common sense would have eliminated it?
And if I change the file name to something totally different after I create the image, the original file name still shows up in the backup list. I.E., if I change System 1 to System_Pre- MSOffice Install, it still shows up as System_1 in the file list. This is after browsing to the file and adding it to the list. Old, original file name. Not what I changed it to.
I respect the opinions of you Acronis Volunteers and appreciate the information you offer here, but does no one see the problems with this enforced scheme? Does anyone really believe that it applies to full version images? Does anyone believe that it cannot be selectively applied only to the type of backup the name designates? Can anyone really believe that this scheme is properly applied? Or that it MUST be applied to all files, even when it is incorrect?
Can anyone really tell me that this file-naming scheme applies to full versions, or that it is beneficial or reduces confusion for full file-names?
If Acronis can't see the flawed logic in this "feature", how may other aspect of the software "benefits" from this type of logic?
Hi Colin. I can understand the file-naming scheme as pertains to differentials. What I don't understand is the fact that it is universally (and incorrectly) applied. In example, how does this file-naming scheme apply to a full, single version image? Why am I, someone who *never* does anything other than full backups (overwriting the previous), subjected to an enforced file naming that has absolutely nothing to do with my full backup?
Why do my filenames suddenly have up to 25 extra characters that provide no confusion-diminishing benefits? The only correct addition to the scheme is "full", and I already know that.
Full single versions do not have a backup number, full versions don't have slices or versions, yet according to the mandatory file naming, my single full version backup, is now named:
System_1_full_b1_s1_v1
For well over a decade, I have had rotating backups...System 1, System 2, Data 1, etc. I now have the pleasure and great benefit of knowing that it is also the 1st backup, the 1st slice of that backup and the 1st version (Even though no slices or versions exist). The only part of the file name that really applies is the term "full", and that is a case of telling me what I already know.
I don't buy that the software MUST apply this scheme universally and heavy-handedly, even to files for which it doesn't even apply. Can I change the file name? Yes, but must changing the file name be added to my routine when common sense would have eliminated it?
And if I change the file name to something totally different after I create the image, the original file name still shows up in the backup list. I.E., if I change System 1 to System_Pre- MSOffice Install, it still shows up as System_1 in the file list. This is after browsing to the file and adding it to the list. Old, original file name. Not what I changed it to.
I respect the opinions of you Acronis Volunteers and appreciate the information you offer here, but does no one see the problems with this enforced scheme? Does anyone really believe that it applies to full version images? Does anyone believe that it cannot be selectively applied only to the type of backup the name designates? Can anyone really believe that this scheme is properly applied? Or that it MUST be applied to all files, even when it is incorrect?
Can anyone really tell me that this file-naming scheme applies to full versions, or that it is beneficial or reduces confusion for full file-names?
If Acronis can't see the flawed logic in this "feature", how may other aspect of the software "benefits" from this type of logic?
I respect the opinions of you Acronis Volunteers and appreciate the information you offer here, but does no one see the problems with this enforced scheme? Does anyone really believe that it applies to full version images? Does anyone believe that it cannot be selectively applied only to the type of backup the name designates? Can anyone really believe that this scheme is properly applied? Or that it MUST be applied to all files, even when it is incorrect?
Can anyone really tell me that this file-naming scheme applies to full versions, or that it is beneficial or reduces confusion for full file-names?
It could easily apply to a full backup. If the backup were split into several files, as occurs automatically when backing up onto a FAT16 or FAT32 formatted drive, or optionally by the user such as to burn to DVDs. In such a case, the suffixes would include v1, v2, etc. to indicate the various pieces of the backup.
Users were often confused about what type of backup they created. When diagnosing a problem or assisting with restore, that was a problem as one cannot rely on the user's vague recollection of what options he may have used in the backup. The enforced suffixes were intended to provide consistent information to all backups, which provide important information no matter what the user remembered or forgot.
The scheme cannot be removed, so there's little point railing against it. You may prefer to choose a different backup tool without such file naming.
It could easily apply to a full backup. If the backup were split into several files, as occurs automatically when backing up onto a FAT16 or FAT32 formatted drive, or optionally by the user such as to burn to DVDs. In such a case, the suffixes would include v1, v2, etc. to indicate the various pieces of the backup.
In such cases, yes. This is not one of those, and I find it unlikely that I'm the only user who handles their backups this way (a factual nicety).
Users were often confused about what type of backup they created. When diagnosing a problem or assisting with restore, that was a problem as one cannot rely on the user's vague recollection of what options he may have used in the backup. The enforced suffixes were intended to provide consistent information to all backups, which provide important information no matter what the user remembered or forgot.
Are you really contending that this enforced file-naming policy is valid for all users? Enforcing such policies on all users and assuming that all users are dull witted and cannot recall how they backup their files is a bit insulting, isn't it? And in which category do you place yourself? Whoops, only one category for all Acronis users. Don't answer that.
The scheme cannot be removed, so there's little point railing against it. You may prefer to choose a different backup tool without such file naming.
Defensiveness is a sure sign that objectivity has been kicked to the curb. Perhaps this is Acronis's policy as well? "you don't like, buy other software". I doubt that, judging from the continuous promotional emails I receive, but their policies certainly do make a strong argument in that direction.
And here you are, stating them.
Regardless, had you actually read the content of the thread, you'll discover that I mentioned exactly that in the last paragraph in post #3. But indeed, it is an excellent phrase to use as a club on those whose opinions don't agree with yours. Even those who have been a paying customer for more than a decade. Has Acronis decided that they wish to thin the ranks of that unsavory sort of customer?
And perhaps as well, Acronis has decided that dumbing down the software so that any idiot (and perhaps only idiots) can or will use their software is the direction they wish to take their company. Follow the nation's lead, so to speak.
But any objective opinion will not invalidate what is clearly a valid complaint.
Behaving as though my point is unreasonable states more than I wish to know (and perhaps more than you wish to say...).
I have yet to see if Acronis will weigh in on this issue. Perhaps they won't, and consider you their proper representative.
Your message is aggressive and condescending.
I neither design the software nor make company policy. I do not work for Acronis. I merely explain why the feature was added and how it works. I'm neither defend nor criticize it, just explain it. Some features I agree with, some I don't. Here in the forums it's most important that users understand how ATI features work rather than how I might prefer them to work.
Your message is aggressive and condescending.
Your point?
I neither design the software nor make company policy. I do not work for Acronis.
I merely explain why the feature was added and how it works. I'm neither defend nor criticize it, just explain it. Some features I agree with, some I don't.
Perhaps in other threads. In this one, your refusal to acknowledge that the file renaming "feature" (interesting that you call it a "feature') is not valid for all users in all circumstances makes you seem defensive and without objectivity. [/quote]
Here in the forums it's most important that users understand how ATI features work rather than how I might prefer them to work.
I don't recall this thread being about your preferences, nor do I need you to explain the inner workings of this or any other software. I submitted a valid complaint, you exhibit an inability to comprehend that an issue even exists.
That and the fact that Acronis hasn't even bothered to weigh in (although I think it likely that you are spouting the party line, so they feel no need to) tells me all I need to know. Add to that the goofy "features" year after year and the use of this ridiculous forum software for years and the deal is sealed. Gotta kick y'all to the curb.
No worries, though. These type of situations generally end well. I'll likely find a company with common sense who actually designs their software to work for all in a logical way that doesn't alienate their largest user base: advanced users.
Common sense rules the day.