Acronis True Image Home v Microsoft Backup Utility

[johnoo]

I am looking at back up software and would like to know why Acronis appears to be rated better than the Microsoft utility even though the latter is free within XP?

Also, if it does not confuse, why is Acronis rated over other software such as Comodo or Easeus?

Help & comments would be much appreciated.

[AlanHo]

I use Acronis - simply because it has an unrivalled reputation.

I tried the Microsoft Windows 7 backup programme and found it less intuitive and much slower than Acronis. I didn't really give it a fair trial because I was already wedded to Acronis.

I cannot speak for other programs - never tried any of them.

I suspect that there are many people like me who are loyal to Acronis because it does the job, has proved reliable, is easy to use and has a good reputation. Better the devil you know - so to speak.

[johnoo]

I use Acronis - simply because it has an unrivalled reputation.

I tried the Microsoft Windows 7 backup programme and found it less intuitive and much slower than Acronis. I didn't really give it a fair trial because I was already wedded to Acronis.

I cannot speak for other programs - never tried any of them.

I suspect that there are many people like me who are loyal to Acronis because it does the job, has proved reliable, is easy to use and has a good reputation. Better the devil you know - so to speak.

Thanks, but talking of speed with Acronis how long does it take to transfer 21GB of data to an external drive?

[Boris]

Thanks, but talking of speed with Acronis how long does it take to transfer 21GB of data to an external drive?

That will depend on the speed of your CPU, the amount of memory you have and the mode of transmission - e-sata, USB1, USB2 or USB3.

[AlanHo]

I cannot answer your question directly but I have just used Acronis to take a full image of my C: drive (which holds my OS and all programs - data being on a separate drive).

The C: drive is a 500 GB samsung spinpoint F3 containing 62.3 GB of data. This was copied to a 500 GB Samsung spinpoint F3 drive in an eSATA external enclosure. The total process time was 8.5 minutes and the size of the Acronis file is 34.3 GB.

[johnoo]

Thanks, I was thinking of getting a "Seagate" 250GB drive to save my OS/Programs/Data do yuo think this would be OK?

[-pops-]

The Seagate should be fine.

Assuming it's an external USB/SATA drive, ensure you follow the correct disconnect procedure when removing it - remember it will contain valuable information.

[AlanHo]

Thanks, I was thinking of getting a "Seagate" 250GB drive to save my OS/Programs/Data do yuo think this would be OK?

There is more info about copy speeds in This old thread. You will see from the last post in this thread that there is a significant speed difference between eSATA and USB2. Note that I now use eSATA - the time of 8.5 minutes given in my my post above would more than double if I were to use USB2.

The difference in cost between 500 GB and 250 GB drives is now quite small - I would go for the largest drive you can afford - it's surprising how quickly it fills up with back up files - especially if, like me, you back up all your data as well. I always keep at least 3 successive back up files and delete the oldest after making the most recent back up.

If you do decide to use Acronis - my advice would be to always take a full back up - or even better a disc image. Whilst using the system for taking first a full back up and thereafter just incremental back ups may save disc space - it means that the failure of any incremental file in the chain will stop a full restore. In my experience incremental back ups do not save much time and are troublesome if you have defragged your source hard drive between back ups.

[andsome]

As far as I am concerned ACRONIS is king. I use a 1TB external Toshiba drive to save my back ups on, and keep a copy of the last two taken, on my internal D drive. Belt and braces.

[johnoo]

This is getting a bit confusing to me & I would like to take it slowly!

The Seagate External Drive is described as being "Drag & Drop,USB 2.0, up to 480Mbps Transfer Rate ( I got this figure from 3 sites).

I think I have a eSATA socket on the rear of my M/c but this is not relevant as the drive is stated as being a USB 2.0 connection.

My "C" Drive has 21GB of data, ie 21504 Mbytes.

So at 480Mbps transfer the whole job could/should be completed in 45 secs.

But Alanho said he got a transfer rate using USB of 0.74Mbps, different drive but a lot different from 480Mbps that the Seagate is stated as having.

Using this Transfer figure 21Gb would take 484 minutes ie 8hours to transfer!

Are my figures correct?

What is wrong with my logic?

Regarding the question of " Correct Disconnection Procedure" do you mean clicking on the "Safely Remove Hardware" icon and clicking "stop"?

As I have said I would like to proceed without haste, hope nobody minds.

[Boris]

But Alanho said he got a transfer rate using USB of 0.74Mbps,

That was using a USB Pen Drive ! :) - not comparable

Are my figures correct? No

What is wrong with my logic? See below

The key here is the words up to in "up to 480Mbps Transfer Rate" - a theoretical maximum transfer speed.

USB 2.0 has a max raw data rate of 480Mbps i.e. 480 Mbits/second - however this is not the same as Megabytes.

The equivalent maximum transfer speed in Megabytes is 60 MB/s.

You should appreciate that a Bit is a binary digit, the smallest unit of measurement of data.

Binary digits are put into groups of 8.

This group is called a Byte - a group of 8 bits.

In practice you would never achieve a speed of 60 MB/s for the whole data transfer, but a lesser figure.

Think of a train accelerating from one station up to its maximum speed and then decelerating to its next stop.

Its maximum speed may reach 100mph, but the actual average speed for the trip will be far less.

[johnoo]

But Alanho said he got a transfer rate using USB of 0.74Mbps,

That was using a USB Pen Drive ! :) - not comparable

Are my figures correct? No

What is wrong with my logic? See below

The key here is the words up to in "up to 480Mbps Transfer Rate" - a theoretical maximum transfer speed.

USB 2.0 has a max raw data rate of 480Mbps i.e. 480 Mbits/second - however this is not the same as Megabytes.

The equivalent maximum transfer speed in Megabytes is 60 MB/s.

You should appreciate that a Bit is a binary digit, the smallest unit of measurement of data.

Binary digits are put into groups of 8.

This group is called a Byte - a group of 8 bits.

In practice you would never achieve a speed of 60 MB/s for the whole data transfer, but a lesser figure.

Think of a train accelerating from one station up to its maximum speed and then decelerating to its next stop.

Its maximum speed may reach 100mph, but the actual average speed for the trip will be far less.

OK thanks for correcting me.

So if the average transfer was a third of the maximum, an efficiency I would expect the time to download 21Gb would be about 18minutes using USB2.0 which would be acceptable.

Could somebody confirm please on the subject of disconnection if the correct procedure is to select the "Safely Remove Hardware" icon and then click stop

[AlanHo]

Could somebody confirm please on the subject of disconnection if the correct procedure is to select the "Safely Remove Hardware" icon and then click stop

You must always do this with any USB device - otherwise you can damage it.

[-pops-]

The disconnection procedure also applies to eSATA.

[AlanHo]

The disconnection procedure also applies to eSATA.

Pops

I have two external eSATA drives used for back-ups - but they do not show in the "Safely Remove Hardware" thingy. Hence it is not possible to disconnect them via this route. I would only unplug them when the computer is off.

[-pops-]

All of my W7 machines come up the the safely disconnect thingy with eSATA drives. I'm not certain if it applies in the same way as USB but, as the warning is there, I'm wouldn't be happy to ignore it.

[AlanHo]

All of my W7 machines come up the the safely disconnect thingy with eSATA drives. I'm not certain if it applies in the same way as USB but, as the warning is there, I'm wouldn't be happy to ignore it.

How do you get them to show.

One of my eSATA drives is plugged into a mobo socket - the second via a plate adapter. Yet neither of the drives are shown in the Safely Disconnect facility.

It doesn't matter, because I never disconnect them, but I am curious why we both have such radically different results with Win7.

[-pops-]

I don't know why we get different results. On the laptops the eSATA is connected via a PCMCIA adapter and one of the desktops via a PCI adapter - this may account for some on the difference.

[D4\/!d]

Your discussion is causing a little bell to ring in the back of my head.

I am sure there is/was a setting - that I now cannot find in Win7 - that used to give you the choice of using Safely Remove or not. It was something to do with Cache Write Back settings - but for the life of me I cannot now locate it in Win7. I thought it was in Properties. That is, right click the drive in Explorer and it was one of the Properties tabs - cannot see it now though.

Or was it in Device Manager...

[-pops-]

D4\/!d - you're right, I've seen that as well, somewhere!

[mark2]

In XP you can enable safely remove by going to

my computer> properties > hardware> device manager, select the drive > properties > policies and put a dot in the button "optimize for performance"

[D4\/!d]

In XP ...

Yeah iKnow - and in Win7..?? B)

[AlanHo]

If I use Win 7 search and enter "Safely remove hardware" - the help file refers only to USB devices. There is no mention of eSATA.

If I right click on the Safely Remove icon in the system tray - then select Open Devices and Printers - a window opens. Under the "Devices" heading it shows :-

My PC

Optical Mouse

Cruzer USB Micro

MS wireless Transceiver

Wireless Lazer mouse

An External USB drive which I just connected as an experiment.

I have two eSATA drives connected - neither are shown. Nor are shown any of my internal SATA hard drives (I have 3)

As I stated previously - one of my eSATA drives is plugged into a mobo socket - the second is plugged into a plate adapter socket which is connected to a spare SATA socket on the mobo. Hence the system will surely see this drive as just another SATA hard drive. Presumably this also applies to the eSATA drive plugged into the mobo socket.

I therefore conclude that on my computer Win 7 64 bit disregards eSATA drives and leaves the user to practice safe practice and avoid premature ejection.