Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Buying Tips and Advice' started by patent10021, Feb 10, 2014.
Which ones do you like and why?
I like Crashplan. One thing I don't like is that Crashplan relies on Java but I'm satisfied with every other aspect. CP has allowed us to recover from 2 crashes. Once when I was putting Lion on my wife's Mac mini and somehow wiped her Macintosh HD, Crashplan worked when Time Machine failed ("corrupted TM volume"). Then again when her Mac mini finally gave up the ghost, CP worked when TM again complained about a "corrupted TM volume."
I've decided to give up on/ ignore Time Machine and stick with Crashplan.
I also use Carbon Copy Cloner. I use it when upgrading HDD. I've heard it can be used for backup but I haven't tried it. I also manually copy certain critical files to a NAS drive and some get copied to dropbox.
hope this helps...
I also use Crashplan. There are a lot of very good services out there, but I like how Crashplan allows backups from external drives and how it doesn't throttle you if you have an extremely large backup.
The only other service I've used is Carbonite, which was also very good, but didn't support external drives.
Currently I can't recommend any online backup service.
Or they're not encrypted
Or they rely on US-based servers
Or their client is clumsy
Or their clients don't have energy-saving features such as halting backup when using battery power.
Or they fail unexpectedly and become a nightmare to debug for the originating company (SpiderOak, I'm looking at you)
Sad but true, the only online backup service I'd trust is a minimal NAS like the MyCloud, installed somewhere else like a friend's home, or the office.
I use Arq. It sweats the details about really getting every bit of metadata on files (many other apps/systems don't, or didn't), is very reliable, is encrypted (on the client end - the server never sees unencrypted data), and uses Amazon S3 for storage.
I like that it has a clear funding model - you buy the app, set up an S3 account, do backups, and Amazon bills you monthly for whatever storage you use (which you can limit). I'm leery of "all you can eat for $X" models, where it's in their interest to have a lot of strings attached.
I back up everything to a local Time Capsule, and then back up selected directories to S3 via Arq, giving me off-site backups of the irreplaceable bits.
I sure crashplan and I love it. No issues at all, and works great.
I use a Synology NAS with a backup to Amazon Glacier. Glacier does not have its own interface, so you have to use something like the Synology plugin or other 3rd-party apps. But the cost is rather attractive: around US$0.01 per GB for storage, additional cost for uploading and retrieving.
Edit: I saw Arq can use Glacier as well. That looks like an interesting option.
Another vote for Crashplan. It's served me well.
I went with Crashplan because of the multiple user plan. I can keep everyone in the family covered.
I'm an advocate of Bitcasa, sometimes buggy but it's a pretty simple. I've got 3TB stored so far.
I typed my last response quickly, and didn't have time to elaborate more.
One thing that I really like is that CrashPlan can be a single interface for multiple backup destinations. My Air backs up to my networked file server, the CrashPlan cloud and an external hard drive. My wife's MBP backs up to the file server & the cloud. The network file server backs up media, photos and old projects to the cloud and an external hard drive. Plus, I have it set up to back my mom's computer to my file server.
I like Backblaze because it's affordable ($5/mo) and was working well a few years back when Mozy would take 100% CPU.
But the particular service isn't important. There are several good options. The recommendation is to have some sort of automatic, off-site backup system in case of home catastrophe (flood, fire, theft).