I had a look at it today and apart from the feature you mention to check saved image files I see very little difference really. Maybe I am expecting too much. As an ex Acronis True Image user I know exactly how limited Clonezilla is, but I am not really complaining because I don't expect Clonezilla to be as good as Acronis - for one thing Acronis costs money and Clonezilla doesn't (although Linux imaging software that was as good as Acronis is something I would happily pay for - it is just so important).
The one thing about Clonezilla that always has me beating my head against a wall is the way it deals with multiple partition imaging (which is all I ever do). It offers the ability to select several partitions to image but it only creates one image file from all of them - this drives me insane! If I want to image 4 distros I want 4 image files, not one!! If I break Mint 10, I want to replace Mint 10, not Mint 10 + 3 other perfectly serviceable distros. (Not that I could do so anyway since I don't have a partition big enough to restore 4 distros onto unless I delete something first). So I am forced to image them one at a time. This wouldn't be so bad if you didn't have to start from scratch every time (I know about the 'use existing /home/partimage' option - but have you ever tried using it? It doesn't work, end of story).
So I actually use the command line since it is quicker than starting the gui every time. The downside is that I have to remember the exceedingly long command to start the first image going (after that it is just a question of altering the partition number and the name of the image, you can recall the command from the bash memory with the up key, which is why it is quicker. Unfortunately the bash memory is not persistent over a reboot, even on a usb key, I wish it was).
Fujitsu Lifebook AH532. Intel i5 processor, 6Gb ram, Intel HD3000 graphics, Intel Audio/wifi. Realtek RTL8111/8168B Ethernet.Lubuntu 13.10,Ubuntu12.10 (Unity), Mint16 (Cinnamon), Manjaro (Xfce).