.tib-files (Acronis True Image)

Discussion & Support for xplorer² professional

Moderators: fgagnon, nikos, Site Mods

MKairys
Bronze Member
Bronze Member
Posts: 142
Joined: 2003 Apr 15, 15:39
Location: Ann Arbor, Michigan

Re: .tib-files (Acronis True Image)

Post by MKairys » 2013 Aug 14, 15:50

Two good ideas, thanks. I'll get back to you ;)

BRX
Silver Member
Silver Member
Posts: 281
Joined: 2002 Feb 08, 12:12

Re: .tib-files (Acronis True Image)

Post by BRX » 2013 Aug 15, 11:56

I'm steering a bit OT, but for anybody getting fed up with Acronis and is looking for good alternatives I'd like to recommend a not-so-well-known application, I've been using for years now, which never failed me and I more or less consider the x2 of backup programs. It doesn't advertise much, usually even doesn't announce it updates, but it does exactly what it should.

http://www.drivesnapshot.de/

It's a < 400k executable only. No installation needed. Images can be mounted naturally. I'm astonished how this works with just so few kilobytes when the contenders need hundreds of MB. It can be tested for 30 days for free. It's worth a try and consideration.

(No, I'm not affiliated with the vendor, just a very satisfied customer who keeps smiling when people on the internet complain about problems with acronis)

MKairys
Bronze Member
Bronze Member
Posts: 142
Joined: 2003 Apr 15, 15:39
Location: Ann Arbor, Michigan

Re: .tib-files (Acronis True Image)

Post by MKairys » 2013 Aug 15, 12:34

Thanks, but ;)
Seems it has no incremental or differential option, no scheduler, no indexed search, no image verification, no support for rotating backup sets, yet it costs about the same as Acronis or Macrium.

As I recall from discussions among the disaffected in the Acronis forums, Macrium is the best thing out there.

MKairys
Bronze Member
Bronze Member
Posts: 142
Joined: 2003 Apr 15, 15:39
Location: Ann Arbor, Michigan

Re: .tib-files (Acronis True Image)

Post by MKairys » 2013 Aug 15, 14:31

Neither disabling ATI shell extensions nor browsing in raw mode made a difference. I think the issue is that ATI does its work with a filter driver and upperfilter/lowerfilter references.

Kilmatead
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Posts: 4569
Joined: 2008 Sep 30, 06:52
Location: Dublin

Re: .tib-files (Acronis True Image)

Post by Kilmatead » 2013 Aug 15, 14:57

MKairys wrote:Seems it has no incremental or differential option, no scheduler, no indexed search, no image verification, no support for rotating backup sets, yet it costs about the same as Acronis or Macrium.
To be fair, it does have differentials, but it does come across as a little-bare-bones (for the price). Given the audience it's aiming at (this is not for regular punters), doing everything via CLI means that they are assuming their users are bright enough to be able to "pick up the slack" and thus there's no need for the hand-holding which seems endemic these days (most options in these programmes really are fluff - very nice fluff - but fluff nonetheless). And if it cost €9.95, that would be dandy. But in the same bracket as Macrium, it's not a serious alternative (for the general public).
MKairys wrote:Neither disabling ATI shell extensions nor browsing in raw mode made a difference. I think the issue is that ATI does its work with a filter driver and upperfilter/lowerfilter references.
Misbehaving service, perhaps? I'm out of ideas. :shrug:

Ordinarily in these circumstances I would install the software to see if I could recreate the user's complaint and find a way to work with it, but as I see ATI as a dysfunctional entity which should be removed from reality to begin with, and thus question the sanity of those who use it, we won't be doing that today. :D No offence - but even you seem to question the reliability of the company and the competence of the dev's- are you continuing to use it because these backups from 2010 must be maintained? Just curious. :wink:

MKairys
Bronze Member
Bronze Member
Posts: 142
Joined: 2003 Apr 15, 15:39
Location: Ann Arbor, Michigan

Re: .tib-files (Acronis True Image)

Post by MKairys » 2013 Aug 15, 16:15

It's a fair question ;) The core functionality of ATI, making and restoring incremental and image backups, works perfectly for me. Besides that, the only feature I use is their task scheduler, which has the feature of taking a set number of incrementals and then automatically starting with a new full image. I've had all this in place and working well for five years or so. If at some point I were forced to upgrade (Windows 9 perhaps) I would bite the cost and effort bullets and go with another solution entirely.

What apparently happened at Acronis is that the original group of engineers who developed the core backup functionality left the company, and subsequent development focused on adding bells and whistles and layers and UI, much of which turned out to be both ill-conceived and ill-executed. But I don't use any of that stuff so I don't care.

MKairys
Bronze Member
Bronze Member
Posts: 142
Joined: 2003 Apr 15, 15:39
Location: Ann Arbor, Michigan

Re: .tib-files (Acronis True Image)

Post by MKairys » 2013 Aug 15, 16:18

To be clear about my original point: something is undoubtedly screwy somewhere and Acronis is probably to blame, but I think Xplorer2 is misbehaving when it fills in the tree long before the file pane, and then allows mouse clicks to go to the pane it hasn't drawn yet.

MKairys
Bronze Member
Bronze Member
Posts: 142
Joined: 2003 Apr 15, 15:39
Location: Ann Arbor, Michigan

Re: .tib-files (Acronis True Image)

Post by MKairys » 2013 Aug 17, 16:54

Looks like nobody's gonna touch that one :)

Kilmatead
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Posts: 4569
Joined: 2008 Sep 30, 06:52
Location: Dublin

Re: .tib-files (Acronis True Image)

Post by Kilmatead » 2013 Aug 17, 18:13

Well, if you think about it, it's a little difficult for anyone to do anything about it... to begin with you're using what is ecumenically derided software (well past its sell-by-date) which was banjaxed even when it was new (at the time, I recall, ATI couldn't even handle Win7 properly). Short of downloading a cracked copy of ATI 2010, it's a little difficult to recreate the problem - and if the problem can't be recreated, then it's not a problem (to coin a phrase).

If this were with the current version of ATI, and its shell extension was shown to work perfectly with other 3rd-party managers, then Nikos might look a little closer - but as it is, what can be done?

For example - your thought that x2 should somehow block user-input until the bed has been made, the teeth brushed, and the orange-juice consumed is a little against the ethos - x2 is (as I recall) specifically designed so that users need not wait while column-information is collated, folder-sizes computed, and so on before searching for those sacred porn images. Never mind the practical end of that request - for x2 to "know" it's being held up due to something beyond its control it would have to set an internal timer for every single API/Shell request it makes, decide on what's considered a reasonable time delay based on the user's hardware, then decide if it should just "give up" or not... all based on a set of conditions (the state of the shell) over which it has no control.

I'm not insensitive to your predicament (well, in fact I am, considering I have already dismissed ATI as malware :wink:) but you can at least see the problem here. Short of the forum being inundated by a hundred-and-one vociferous ATI 2010 users all claiming the same thing (while showing it works in Dopus, et al), compatibility with 3.5-year old malware is probably not to be expected.

Besides, if you read the original posts in this thread (from 2009), I already did some contemporary testing with whatever the current version of ATI was then, and found it to be less than overflowing with effervescent bliss. :D How much mud do you want me to slosh through? Didn't you see the end of the Shawshank Redemption?
Andy crawled to freedom through five hundred yards of s#it smelling foulness I can't even imagine, or maybe I just don't want to. Five hundred yards... that's the length of five football fields, just shy of half a mile.
Maybe we'll initiate a kickstarter (I hear they're all the rage these days) to donate Macrium licenses to all the poor and afflicted ATI users out there. We could probably get tax-exemption status as being a much-needed charity. :wink:

Again, I know you would prefer more "real help" and less smart-arse remarks - but Nikos rarely gets interested in bad shell extensions (for obvious reasons), and even you admitted that your complaint was a wee bit tenuous in the best of light ("And here is my thin excuse for unburdening myself here...").

At least you're not being ignored, like those poor lonesome lads illogically asking year-in year-out why new tabs can't open next to their elder brethren. :D

MKairys
Bronze Member
Bronze Member
Posts: 142
Joined: 2003 Apr 15, 15:39
Location: Ann Arbor, Michigan

Re: .tib-files (Acronis True Image)

Post by MKairys » 2013 Aug 17, 19:30

if the problem can't be recreated, then it's not a problem (to coin a phrase)
I hoped to move the conversation away from ATI as the cause to the effect in X2, but of course you are correct -- unless someone else can report a similar effect without ATI in the picture?

Kilmatead
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Posts: 4569
Joined: 2008 Sep 30, 06:52
Location: Dublin

Re: .tib-files (Acronis True Image)

Post by Kilmatead » 2013 Aug 17, 20:07

MKairys wrote:I hoped to move the conversation away from ATI as the cause to the effect in X2...
Then stop using phrases suggestive of a causal nexus like "If I remove all the .tib files the effects go away"! :D

Philosophically speaking, I'm not entirely sure if it's even possible (outside of the above described timer-wrapping-convention) for a file-manager to be "aware" of what may be interfering with its normal operation, or indeed if it even could be aware of such hanging in the first place. Never mind the inherent contradiction that the programme can't be aware of being delayed until well after the event itself. I would imagine the sheer overhead of implementation (via debug timers) would negate it as a practical development feature as for all intents and purposes it's no different from a variation on the usual "debug mode" which is always intentionally removed, post-beta.

Does such a feature exist in other file-managers? (Maybe some kind of "selfish-mode" where it simply ignores all shell extensions - since, as ShellExView shows, it is possible to deactivate them "on the fly" as it were. Seems impractical on first thought... but one never knows.)

Post Reply