Updated TI Home 2011 -> 2012 and no no longer to backup to NAS - what gives?

Hmmm... Seems like TI Home 2012 doesn't like the \\SERVER\SHARE\DIRECTORY path and instead uses \\IP-ADDRESS\SHARE\DIRECTORY....
Sadly I lost access my old backups in the process of changing the Backup Job, but at least I can now run backups again...

I have several machines backing-up to 3 seperate NAS units -- disk, partition and file backups. All OK. The only issue is that 2012 sometimes repeats a script for some unknown reason (same scripts worked AOK in 2010, 2011). All machines and NAS units are on the same subnet, workgroup, etc.

So what NAS make/model are you using? I have a Synology DS 1010+ (which I LOVE), it works great with 2011, but 2012 won't see it (except via FTP - and that is a whole other story)

I've got a QNAP TS-439 Pro that I access using SMB (standard Windows Filesharing) and it is mapped to various drive letters.
The NAS does not show up in the NAS section when selecting the backup destination, but that was never expected.
YMMV but if you try accessing it using \\IP-ADDRESS\SHARE\ when setting up a backup I'd say that you should be able to use it.

Someone else mentioned using the IP (and I appreciate the information), but I still would rather use the DNS Name as it makes life a whole lot easier (trying to explain IP address's to my wife or daughters would test my bounds of sensability). I also don't really like (personal preference) mapping drive letters...

I have about 14 more days before the 30 days are up (for a refund) and hope they get it fixed before then.

Don't think the brand of NAS matters -- but I use BuffTech. I just browse on the output side to a network share that is exposed to the subnet by the NAS's file system. I create the network share on the NAS and enable windows shares.

Hi,
I have exactly the same problem with my QNAP NAS (TS-210) after I changed from ATIH2011 to 2012. I can’t imagine that the problem is in my PC-System. I used before version ATIH2011 and it runs properly. Additionally I sent a message to the ATI-Support. But since one week I’m waiting for an answer. If I will get one I will post it.

-------------------------------------
Win7 professional (32-bit)

How did you specify the path to the backup destination, or did you use a mapped drive? I noticed that TIH 2012 translates a mapped drive to the server and then fails. For example, I have the mapped drive W:\ pointing to \\SERVER\BACKUPS. This has worked in 2011, but when 2012 tries to access this it fails. I then tried enter the path directly in TIH but failed as well. I then found out that if I entered the backup destination as \\192.168.1.1\BACKUPS TIH 2012 started working! This led me to change the drive mapping from \\SERVER\BACKUPS to \\192.168.1.1\BACKUPS and viola - TIH 2012 started working.

What I find strange is that TIH 2011 works and all other applications accept \\SERVER as the path... On another machine in the same network still running TIH 2011 all is fine and as my computer was running fine this morning using TIH 2011, one would think that TIH 2012 is to blame here...

browse, select the network host, then the network share, then OK. Point is, I use the browse and let windows resolve the network share.

Hi msa
Thanks for your answer. I’m totally agreed with your statements. Of course I set the path like you \\server\backup\directory. It’s the normal way. In MS-Windows it works proper in this kind of notation. Now I will try it with the IP-address. But give me a little bit time I have to find out first how and where I can change to the new notation.

Now, I tried to set the path with the IP-address and the Backup runs.
Thank you very much for your answer. But I’m looking forward to hear the answer of Acronis about my support message.

Man - what did they DO?

This is totally screwed up. How could such a basic function be broken?

QNAP-T659 Pro II +.

Same problem here using NAS Synology DS211+.

Used to work with TI Home 2011 and earlier. But using 2012 it won't let me access my NAS :-(

Cannot even see it using NAS-connections in the ATI file browser.

This version is totally useless if this essential function is not working properly.

As we can see, a lot of people are using ATI to backup their data onto a NAS, or at least they are trying!

Anyone of the Acronis staff to answer some of these questions or issues?

Very disappointed!

Michael

> This version is totally useless if this essential function is not working properly.
I don't agree with you - I have it up and running after solving the initial confusion, backing up to my NAS (QNAP brand) in the same way as before with ATI 2011.

> Cannot even see it using NAS-connections in the ATI file browser.
As stated in the Data Sheet of ATI 2012 only certain NDAS are supported for the ATI NDAS functionality but ATI supports backing up to a SMB on a normal NAS share so you should be able to put backups on the NAS using the normal ways of accessing the NAS (i.e Windows File Sharing).

@msa - there IS a problem.

The browser with which to navigate to the NAS using it via SMB is broken. Looking for the NAS might lead you there, only to wait forever while it tries to show the NAS first level directory structure. Then, if it does show something, you might wait forever for the second level.

MAYBE:
I have a feeling it is a UI problem as I have the impression the waiting forever ended when I started bashing the dialog with other UI events. Could it be there is a stall in the event handler of the UI?

Eventually I was able to locate my correct destination via specifying \\IP\path manually. Browsing did not work.

This has nothing to do with ATI NDAS functions - at least for me anyway. I couldn't even locate NAS directories using them like Windows Network entities.

These are fundamental functions which are fundamentally broken. It speaks HORRIBLY about Acronis test procedures.

1. Think someone from support needs to clarify expected use (similar to what was done for sync functionality)
2. Believe NAS is accessable if it support windows file shares (how I use it).
3. Believe the NAS device must support some other protocol(LPX?, NDAS?) for the 'NAS browser' to function

Since most NAS devices suport windows shares, everyone [probably] can get use their NAS as a storage sync
Believe this lack of clarity on the 'NAS' function is the fault of Acronis and needs to be fixed in their help files and docs

On a side note, there are several week-old threads with legit issues that have no response from Acronis. I realize that things are busy with a new release, but it would not take much time at all to monitor the forum once a day and answer some basic questions. Looks bad from a sales/support viewpoint.

@perry does have a point -- 2011 takes far longer to enumerate the NAS file structure then previous versions. Believe ATI is quering the file system at every level prior to display and for some reason there is a delay in processing the information. Again, the knowledge as to what is going on is known withing Acronis -- it is bad for users to be speculating on this for over a week.

Another strange issue is the fact that no matter what login credentials I use to test the connection to my NAS, ATI always claims connection established!

i set my NAS shares to ignore credentials, so no matter who connects with what, you get in. it is an open subnet protected at the switch. if you can get to the subnet, you can get anything you want on it.

See above, I sent the problem to Acronis (message from 2011-09-09). Today I got an answer and I had to send more information for example PC-log and Net-Log. Now, we will see what the find out. If I have news I will post it.

Having the same problem. I can see the NAS, but not any folders on the NAS. Also, the browsing list includes duplicates for some devices (see screenshot).

EDIT: As well, if I edit the credentials for the connection and enter a bogus username/password then press the "Test Connection" button, the response is always "connection established". Inspecting the NAS logs shows that ATI 2012 did not actually try to make a connection.

Seems to me that we all have problem putting backup on NAS servers (almost). My own temporary solution was to make a Truecrypt container (www.truecrypt.org) 500gb large on my QNAP 659, mounted the containerfile as driveletter x (or what you prefer) and backed up to this on the NAS..

Worked for me, but of course this has to be fixed by Acronis.. shouldn't be neccessary..

The creation of the truecrypt container will take time too..

From a private message conversation with Acronis support:

"You are right, there are some issues with NAS devices in ATIH2012 however our Testing team is closely monitoring those NAS issues threads and we are planning to release an update very soon."

Very Soon? I hope they are not on Jamacan / beach time, we need it now...

==> From a private message conversation with Acronis support:

==> "You are right, there are some issues with NAS devices in ATIH2012 however our Testing team is closely monitoring ==> those NAS issues threads and we are planning to release an update very soon."

From my vantage point, this is a very concerning post – and I hope the same would hold true for the Acronis Management Team. To be closely monitoring the NAS threads, but not comment/feedback, solicit further information nor provide assistance is very concerning. The only feedback that this problem is acknowledged at all from Acronis is from a private conversation. Again, very concerning.

In this economy, organizations need to provide top-shelf customer support to keep the annual update fees rolling in. If this sort of situation continues, I for one, will think longer before pulling the trigger on TIH 2013.

Is it just me (loosing my mind cause this product doesn't work and no one updates us from support) or on the main support page does alot of differnt pictures and people in support?

Andrey Zevakhin
Director of Customer Service and Support

Artem Danilov
Director of Customer Service and Support

Ed Benack
Chief Customer
Officer

Aliya Rakimgulova
Director of Customer Service and Support

Don't know if it's just you or not. I have two open issues with 2012 that have yet to receive any direct response from Acronis. Both are product bugs, but neither has feedback from the staff. Maybe other folks are having more luck -- I don't review threads around issues that I do not encounter.

I am quite displeased. I have used Acronis True Image for a very long time.

VERSION 12 IS UNUSABLE. I WILL BEGIN TELLING ANYONE WHO WILL LISTEN TO AVOID THIS PRODUCT IF THESE ISSUES ARE NOT ADDRESSED IMMEDIATELY.

Perry Kivolowitz wrote:

@msa - there IS a problem.

These are fundamental functions which are fundamentally broken. It speaks HORRIBLY about Acronis test procedures.

Well, I have now tested with the QNAP using SMB with and without credentials and it works. I have tested to place the backup on a Windows 2008 server share in our Active Directory and it works.

I grant you the UI is broken and that ATI 2012 seems to have problems with using mapped network shares, but I got it to work using the IP-address using the following steps:

1) Create a new backup job (I have tested with both File and Image backups)
2) In Destination, select Browse...
3) Ignore the left-hand broken network navigator and instead type the IP-address "\\192.168.1.1\Share" in the File name field. Press ENTER
4) If you are challenged with login credentials, enter them
5) The location is now showing in the right list and you can enter a filename for the backup

Using these steps I have setup ATI 2012 for three customers in different network environments and they are running backups just fine, both to NAS and Windows server shares.

One reason why Acronis products have problems with mapped drives is because they are able to log on to a user or system account - in other words if you start a Windows session but never log in Acronis imaging products will run the task (hopefully). The problem is that mapped drives are only valid whilst a user is logged in and are not available to the Windows system account.

msa wrote:

Using these steps I have setup ATI 2012 for three customers in different network environments and they are running backups just fine, both to NAS and Windows server shares.

No, it is not running "just fine". It is running using a kludge to get around a fundamental problem. Having to use a static IP in a world that is moving to dynamic IPs is just asking for trouble later on.

You should not have to do this. The program should not require you to modify your network configuration to ensure it works. I want UNCs to work with ATIH just like they work for every other program.

The simple fact is that I have had Acronis now for four months. ATIH 2011 never worked properly with NAS storage, either QNAP nor Synology. I was asked to wait for the 2012 release, and that is now more broken than the 2011 release. Frankly, I have spent too much time and effort getting a backup solution working than I should have. Unless there is some movement to resolve the serious issues in this product, I will be asking for my money back, regardless of how long it has been.

I think I have been very patient. That patience is reaching it's end.

==> One reason why Acronis products have problems with mapped drives is because they are able to log on to a user or system account - in other words if you start a Windows session but never log in Acronis imaging products will run the task (hopefully). The problem is that mapped drives are only valid whilst a user is logged in and are not available to the Windows system account.

Agreed, but the fundamental issue is that we are not talking about mapped drives here (some folks are attempting to use them as a work-around for a fundamental flaw in the software). The basic issue is that neither the 'NAS features' of 2012 nor the use of exposed network shares on NAS volumes is working as well in 2012 as it did in 2011, 2010, etc. While the NAS-browser is new, the fundamental issue of network storage has been broken. Acronis has recently acknowledged that they did break the software when they rewrote some of the code, but --- and this is a BIG BUT:

1. These issues would have been exposed in even the most rudimentary unit-level or system level testing while still in development, much less turned over to QA or Beta testing.
2. Acronis has taken weeks to even acknowledge an obvious problem
3. Acronis has yet to provide any hint of a schedule for a fix

My only conclusion is that Acronis needed to hit some revenue target through an annual upgrade licensing release and basically pushed a package out the door with the understanding that the issues would be fixed post-release. Now that can be OK – IF the issues are full disclosed in the release notes and provided to users prior to purchase. This issue (and the 4 others that I have discovered) are so obvious that they would have been known prior to release, but do not appear in the Known Issue list – why – because folks would not have upgraded.

This is indeed very disappointing. I had worked with CS ~2 weeks ago; where after I have provided everything they asked for; they wanted full access to my PC (Which I could not give due to confidential documents). I was under the impression that they will fix the issue in a timely manner but that didn't happen yet either and I am debating it is worth waiting any longer. What other backup software would you recommend?

Certainly I am having considerable trouble with Version 12 and am extremely displeased with the support, product and company. However, I believe it would be in bad taste to recommend a competitor's product on the manufacturer's web site.

The important thing is that a once trusted software provider should get their act together and regain our confidence and our trust.

I agree that it would be inappropriate to mention competitors products here. A google search will turn up a number of good alternate solutions. Pick one and try it out to see if it fits your needs. Most offer trial versions.

ATIH offers a number of facilities I find useful, but with the basic backup functions so badly broken I am now losing confidence that even when it appears to work correctly there may be issues that will bite at the worst time, such as during disaster recovery.

==> I agree that it would be inappropriate to mention competitors products here
but after someone does a bit of research, PM is a wonderful thing. Maybe someone could collect a list and organize a couple of tests.

Unfortunately the same issue here...

I had exact the same problem with a QNAP NAS after a (fine working) ATI 2011 upgrade to 2012 :-/
I try the workaround with IP-Address and it works for the moment...but: ATI would like to know the credentials for my QNAP NAS user account. After that, the ATI GUI connected successful and all seems fine. A minute later the security function on the QNAP locked my IP Address (from my Desktop) out because of false quick logon trials (?):

Server Name: QNAPNAS
IP Address: 192.168.0.21
Date/Time: 29.09.2011 20:54:02
Level: Warning
[Security] Access Violation from 192.168.0.20 with UDP (port=1900)
...
[Security] Access Violation from 192.168.0.20 with TCP (port=49152)

(Port 1900 UDP: Microsoft SSDP enables discovery of UPnP devices)
Now I have to close the ATI GUI (that ends the violations) and wait 10 Minutes (QNAP config is: "lock out 10 minutes after 5 false logon trials in 1 minute").
That means - at the moment I can't make backups. :-((
Any hint for this from one of the QNAP-users here...?

BTW: it is the same situation with every new version of ATI. Every time Acronis pulls out a new major release, the product has VERY big bugs. It takes month until they fix them (seen for V2009...V2012). In the past there where bugs like failed upgrades, non-readable TIB-files, usesless tasks and so on...
It's a shame, that no ATI 2012 developer/tester reveals such a big network issue.
At the moment I don't know what other products are good in this market segment. All I know (as IT-Admin) are professional products like HP Data Protector. But that is not an option for home users. I will try at next O&O DiscImage Pro V6.

[Edit] The lockout-problem is gone. I have to disable the UPnP Feature in the QNAP. But another Problem comes up!: The Acronis setup destroyed the upper (or lower?) filter of all USB storage devices in the Registry, so no USB storage device can be detected! (Win7 x64 SP1).

[Edit 2] After using the ATI2012 Cleanup Tool again and again and after a failed new setup trial (filter driver fails to install) I manually edit the upper/lower Filter Entries in the Registry and remove all relevant Acronis strings. Now all is fine - but the network-bug described above is not gone (what wonder!). I use the workaround and wait for next update... :-/

Hi

After numerous e-mail exchanges with Acronis; they have asked me to test a beta build which they claimed solved all the NAS problems. That particular build cannot even browse my computer! I am tired of trying to debug an inferior product and will actually switch to one of the many other tools on the market that don't have this laughable networking issues.

I hope everyone else on this thread who were were trying to make this crap work, will find their efforts more rewarding than I did.

Unbelievable. Really, from a perspective of curiosity - how could a product and company drop so far so far so fast?

The new UI is atrocious and the damn thing doesn't work. Technical support is non-existent. What happened at this company?

Is that a joke...?: http://kb.acronis.com/content/25427
"25427: Acronis True Image Home 2012: Failed to Back Up Data to NAS Which Is Normally Seen Under Windows"

Must be a joke.

I left feedback indicating the problem exists even if the NAS is mounted as a Windows share.

Also, my 3 licenses for Acronis has cost me the time and effort of purchasing and installing three large internal drives on which to perform the actual backup and then perform scheduled copies to the NAS.

I must schedule tests of the system restore function from CD as I no longer have any faith that that function will even work.

If Acronis cannot even deign to post a comment here SOON I will be swearing off their products.

For ever.

I also advised the purchase license via another company for Acronis Server (big bucks) and will advise them to drop Acronis when their support lapses.

Can't trust them anymore.

Well, it seems there has been some progress. Oleg sent me a new test version to try. Here is what I sent back to him after performing some testing. To summarise:
1. The "NAS connections" branch on the browsing tree does not work at all, anywhere.
2. However, browsing from the "Network" branch shows the NAS devices, and they seem to work for backups.

Here is the message I sent back:

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Installed the version. I get a "Too many activations" message along the bottom. Guess this is understandable with a test version.

NAS being used:
QNAP TS-409 running version 3.3.2 build 0917T
Synology DS411j running version DSM 3.2-1922

Browsing under the "NAS connections" part of the tree shows no devices (see first screenshot). This happens regardless of where I try to use the "NAS connections" branch of the browsing tree. The example screen shot is from the "Browse for backup" function. It also happens if I try to browse for a location for a new backup. It appears that browsing using "NAS connection" does not work at all.

However, browsing in the "Network" branch of the tree shows the two devices (see second screenshot). Browsing within the NAS device shows the existing backups (see third screenshot). This appears to work correctly. This did not work in the previous version of ATIH 2012 that I tried.

Authentication against both NAS devices also appears to work (see screenshot four). This did not work for me in ATIH 2011, and 2012 would not even try to connect. It would just lock up. Examining the logs of both devices shows a successful connection with the correct credentials.

Browsing for a new backup location using the destination dropdown (before choosing "Browse" at the bottom of the list shows many duplicate entries (see screen shot 5). However, once "Browse" is selected, selecting the correct NAS from the "Network" branch, creating a new folder, and setting credentials appears to work correctly. Note that the "NAS connections" branch of the tree shows no devices, and appear not to work at all.

Creating and starting a test backup appears to work correctly, though I cannot do extensive testing on this (see screen shot 6). I note that the "Time left" display comes up almost immediately. This is another thing that never worked in ATIH 2011, or in the previous version of 2012 I tried.

I can see the backup being created on the NAS in Windows explorer (see screen shot 7). Also, the NAS file browser shows that it has the correct permissions for the location (see screen shot 8).

Hello John,

Thank you for your response. I am really glad to hear that some of the issues have been resolved. 

Actually, QNAP and Synology shouldn't be listed under the "NAS connections" item. Currently, we do not support them "directly". We are planning to expand the list for the future releases.

Here is the he list of supported vendors:

- LaCie Backup NAS

- Promise

- SeaGate

- NetGear

As you know, you can browse devices of other vendors under the "Network" branch or using the full UNC path.

John,

I have a question about the issue when the default destination has been duplicated. Have you partitioned your hard drive after the ATIH installation? Or have you attached a flash drive to the system?

We are looking forward to hearing back  from you.

Thank you.

Oleg wrote:

I have a question about the issue when the default destination has been duplicated. Have you partitioned your hard drive after the ATIH installation? Or have you attached a flash drive to the system?

Partitions have not changed since the installation, and there is no flash drive attached.

However, disconnecting all external drives, including card readers and my iPad and iPhone removed the duplicate entries in the list.

I've been running a first backup to a NAS using the 2012 build provided, and it seems very slow. It has been running for 10.5 hours, and says that it has another 3 hours to go.

The same backup to an external drive take about 3 hours.

I had to unmap my network share to get the \\IP\Drive\folder\ address to work as a destination for my backup. I had so many lockups I just kept task manager running to kill the process again and again.
Do you get the feeling we are pseudo beta testers of this product? What do we get for our many hours of finding work arounds besides a warm fuzzy feeling?

The backup ended up taking 11.5 hours. This seems very long. Does anyone else have speed issues?

FlashmanAB wrote:

Do you get the feeling we are pseudo beta testers of this product? What do we get for our many hours of finding work arounds besides a warm fuzzy feeling?

I'm a professional software test manager in the medical area. If I was looking at this software as part of my job, I would have stopped all UA testing and sent it back for unit and integration assessment and testing. There are just to many low-level issues. I would certainly never expose clients or customers to software like this.