I do incremental backups when I turn on my computer each day (they take about 3 minutes and are about 0.75GB is size). My issue was not related to size of backup or time required to do the backup. While my Acronis backups worked, I was tired of the constant bugs, new bugs created when fixing old bugs, the extended time it took before updates were released to fix bugs or add features, etc. Many of the people on this forum are former Acronis users - myself included. Reflect v6's new Rapid Delta Restore feature has certainly helped in that area of operations. You might be interested in some of the suggestions in the KB article entitled Understanding and resolving backup and restore performance issues. In any case, there are so many other factors involved that it's quite difficult to attribute any differences to a single cause. It's not something to which I attach any high priority as I usually let my backups run unattended. You can adjust the compression, of course, but there must be some other factor involved in your case.Īs for transfer rate performance, you may be right about Reflect being less speedy than ATI in some circumstances.
I see less than 2GB image size difference for a total 70GB+ source. I can confirm that Reflect's backup images are generally a bit bigger than Acronis TI with default compression settings, although a 5GB difference for a backup involving only a 16GB total source is far beyond anything I've ever seen.
0 kommentar(er)
