Talk:Acronis Cyber Protect Home Office

message: Does every product on the market get its own Wikipedia page?
Poor poor
--195.243.17.212 (talk) 12:42, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Relevance

message: Sorry I am 75.185.172.86. Billyoneal 02:56, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Edited page to make less biased

message: This article seems to cover a non-notable piece of software. An editor has expressed the opinion it looks like a commercial.
Could someone provide cites to support the case that this article is notable in software terms, in order to prevent its deletion being considered? FT2 (Talk | email) 20:06, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Look at the previous AFD.  It's a product carried by major retailers such as J&R Music and Computer World , CompUSA in their brick & mortar stores,  and has been reviewed by CNET, PCWorld, etc.  --Aude (talk) 20:39, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

text: PC Pro (a major UK PC magazine aimed at the professional rather than home market) has had it in its 'A List' (the 'best' available in a number of categories) for a long time. The review of version 10 is : ".. it's so popular here that we nominated it in the Software of the Year category at last month's PC Pro Awards. Alas, backup remains a little too unfashionable for it to walk away with the prize, but if every PC had a copy of Acronis True Image 10 installed, the vital process would surely become second nature to all. .. there's just nothing else that comes close to matching it for power, speed and its do-it-all nature. True Image 10 offers extensive options plus the ability to image your entire PC, and this powerful combination puts it head and shoulders above the competition." Lovingboth 09:25, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notability 

message: I am going to start making a number of changes to most of the sections. I am going to try and seperate to some degree Acronis True Image Home from the Enterprise range, such as Workstation and Enterprise Server.  I will try and keep a list in this section of the changes i have made, so if anyone disagrees we fix it. Cheers. Oh, I also added a screenshot. Random110 23:47, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  General Revision 

message: Everything in this article might be true (and probably is; I have read a ton of positive comments about True Image) but it does not have the feel of an encyclopedia article. It reads more like an advertisement. I don't think one lavishes praise on anyone or anything in an encyclopedia, no matter how wonderful a particular person, place or thing may happen to be. "Just the facts, m'am."  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dratman (talk • contribs) 21:56, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reads like a product brochure 

message: I've proposed that the article TIB (file format) be merged into this article. I had previously PRODed the article as it does not appear to have sufficient notability for its own article. While this was apparently premature on my part, I still feel the subject lacks sufficient notability independent of this program to merit its own article. —/Mendaliv/2¢/Δ's/ 16:23, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure what you mean; there's almost no content in the article on .tib that isn't really a discussion of this article's subject. The section "Compatibility" is actually a discussion of True Image, while the one-liner on compatibility with VMware is the only tidbit of information that could be viewed as being specific to the file format, though really it could be easily and simply added to this article, likely in the "Limitations" section. A blurb saying "True Image's proprietary file format, .tib, is not well supported, with the only third-party application providing support being VMware". —/Mendaliv/2¢/Δ's/ 04:09, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

text: Well what can be easily done is put the info from .tib and put it in a section of this article, then make a redirect so that whenever someone searches for .tib they'll be pointed to the section on the file format. I think that's entirely reasonable considering the notability of the file format independent of the program can be summed up in one or two sentences. —/Mendaliv/2¢/Δ's/ 21:43, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I still think having separated articles would be much more "cleaner"... I just don't see the point of merging articles based on "notability issues"... it would make a better wikipedia, isn't that what matters? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.241.113.32 (talk) 22:10, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger proposal 

message: It is a good idea ti add TIB file format with this article  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.126.120.42 (talk) 19:08, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure what you mean; there's almost no content in the article on .tib that isn't really a discussion of this article's subject. The section "Compatibility" is actually a discussion of True Image, while the one-liner on compatibility with VMware is the only tidbit of information that could be viewed as being specific to the file format, though really it could be easily and simply added to this article, likely in the "Limitations" section. A blurb saying "True Image's proprietary file format, .tib, is not well supported, with the only third-party application providing support being VMware". —/Mendaliv/2¢/Δ's/ 04:09, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

text: Well what can be easily done is put the info from .tib and put it in a section of this article, then make a redirect so that whenever someone searches for .tib they'll be pointed to the section on the file format. I think that's entirely reasonable considering the notability of the file format independent of the program can be summed up in one or two sentences. —/Mendaliv/2¢/Δ's/ 21:43, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I still think having separated articles would be much more "cleaner"... I just don't see the point of merging articles based on "notability issues"... it would make a better wikipedia, isn't that what matters? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.241.113.32 (talk) 22:10, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discussion 

message: Have ATI 12 come to support dynamic disks? How buggy is it compared to the previous version? It's worth adding some world 'bout that — Vano 17:26, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  ATI 2009 new/fixed features 

message: What makes the 2010 edition of Acronis special enough to deserve two sections (Acronis True Image 2010 and Compatibility) dedicated to it? It doesn't appear to be more significant than the other versions listed. Soren121 (talk) 19:35, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Good question! Fleet Command (talk) 04:48, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

text: Perhaps it can be renamed to prominent features? Looks like the section is probably more of an advertisement than anything so it can probably be clobbered though. snaphat (talk) 00:12, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reasons for 2010-focused sections?