Skip to main content

problems with 2016 version true image

Posts: 2
Comments: 3

i have just upgraded true image 2011 to 2016.

well now when i try to restore files from the backup the operation is very slow (abut 10 minutes for a sinsle file!!)

with the previous version (2011) the same operation takes only some seconds.

the backup file (TIB) is very large (about 300 GB) but with 2011 version i had no problem.

can you help me.

Forum Star
Posts: 124
Comments: 2672


Hi Maurizio,
Acronis True Image 2016 doesn't officially support backup archives created by version earlier than 2014:
That is why we cannot guarantee any performance level in this case.

I would recommend creating a new backup archive with new program version and check the recovery speed. If it is still slow, please contact our support team for investigation:

In this article you can find the list of information usually required for performance problems investigation:

Thank you,

Forum Member
Posts: 10
Comments: 84


What. You mean that my pre 2014 backups can't necessarily be restored! You mean that my tax records that I'm required to keep for 3 years may not be accessible? This is unexcusable!

Posts: 0
Comments: 3


Hi Ray

Backup and archiving are two different functions.  True Image - and its competitors - are out there to restore files/folders from current backups.  They are not there to restore historical data deleted ages ago.  If you want that, you should have developed an archiving strategy that survives hardware and software upgrades and technology changes.

Its a problem all businesses face - the easy answer is to retain the data on spinning disk - or else print it and put it in storage so an auditor can tick a box that data has been retained.


Forum Member
Posts: 7
Comments: 42


I mostly agree with these sentiments - but I think it is reasonable that more than two versions of past backups should be backwards supported.

Forum Member
Posts: 24
Comments: 67


Absolutely the backup package should be able to restore images created by it's own prior versions.  If it won't do that, then why upgrade it?

Having new features or a different user interface is one thing, but the whole reason for it's existence as a user is to generate backups (however that's done - schedule, manually etc) and in the worst case, be able restore them.  Sometimes that may mean using an old archive copy.  And almost always in the latter case, its a harware failure thats the reason for going back so far - an HDD stores a lot but it's all history if the HDD fails and there's no off-machine store.  Product incompatibility is another reason.

And there was nothing I found in the version information for TI that says anything about 'only restoring for 2 prior versions'.  The market might be a lot smaller if that little fact was more widely known.

Acronis needs to be a bit more "forward looking" and defines its file structures so that they don't obsolete with version progression.



Posts: 172
Comments: 11125


The version recovery CD is the prime source for recovery. Keeping a copy or several copes of the Recovery CD is easy,

or keeping iso file copies of the CD is easy.

I keep several copies of each of my recovery CD for each version I have used since verson 7 many years ago.

I have the copies on a spindle as a "just in case' scenerio.

While it may not the solution your prefer, it is one solution.



Forum Hero
Posts: 81
Comments: 9158


The performance issue of the OP cannot be deemed a lack of compatibility as hardware/file system/OS issues might be in the way.

Although Acronis doesn't test older archive compatibility, the product has been historically very good with backward compatibility, although thIrreplaceable files (ie that you cannot purchase or reproduce, like work of art, family pictures or documents) should not be backed up only in proprietary containers, and in fact, should be converted to archive standards like PDF to avoid file format support issues in the future.

Forum Member
Posts: 24
Comments: 67


I haven't had an issue with recovering using a tib file generated by a past version, so I don't doubt the good record of backward compatibility, it's just the policy statement that the product would not, as outlined by Anna above, really grates.

I keep copies of the version recovery disks, either created by the app (many prior versions of TI) or from the download file created by Acronis (2015 and 2016).  And when disaster has struck, inevitably I have to use those disks and the only available backup archive files.  And in some cases, you do have to match new version of TI with old archive, and its essential to expect that it would work. Otherwise, why do backups with this product?  It happens so easily and I cite personal experience of that only 3 months old below.

Until last July, I ran TI2012 on 3 PC's - a master desktop and 2 laptops.  They ran fine, and for years generated backup files in the version format, copies kept both on-machine and on network store attached to a local LAN.  Why not upgrade yearly? Frankly, there was no compelling reason to do so, and thus no reason to invest additional funds.  It worked, why fix it.  I mention an after effect of this below.

Then the desktop motherboard failed - and fixing that led to new motherboard, and all the flow on effects (new 64bit cpu, RAM, a new C drive HDD - because altho the old one worked, the IDE4 interface it used wasn't supported on new motherboards any more) that causes.  When it was finally live, recovery using the TI2012 recovery disk consistently failed on the new hardware altho it worked fine on both the laptops.  It turned out that TI2012 worked just fine on legacy BIOS machines, but was incompatible with the new UEFI BIOS motherboard (and there's a thread on this forum about that), so an upgrade to TI2015 occurred.  Logical?  No other description fits.  But now I had a new version TI needing to recover a disk from an archive that  was several 'format' versions older than the policy of 2, but whose generation predated the failure event by only 2 weeks.

Fortunately,  the recovery did work.  But the upgrade after effect I mentioned - a feature I used extensively to identify particular backup archives (the drive name - especially the C drive as opposed to 'my partitions' - and date in the generated backup file name) using TI2012 has been removed from the later versions.  In that respect the newer versions of TI are less usable.  I've bitched about this on other threads in this forum and posted some detailed feedback for the developers.  But this is a case of don't upgrade unless you really have to.  I had to, but didn't like the management effects that brought.

I emphasize the point I made about official support of older archives in new version of TI.