Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's kind of another problem though. No way to predict costs in advance. All you can do is know the upper bound. I have approx 2.5tb on CrashPlan, so that gives me an upper bound of $625 per month. Maybe it might be 50% lower when deduped, maybe more, maybe less. Who knows. Not really a pricing model I can make a decision on. Tarsnap looks great for certain use cases. But it doesn't really make sense for home users…
The Tarsnap client has a "dry-run" mode, which will dedup your data and tell you how much GB will it take up. Based on that, you can then make a calculation of how much will it cost.
CrashPlan is exiting the consumer market
341–348 of 348 posts
Re: CrashPlan is exiting the consumer market
#342Earlier quoted context omitted.
x0x0 not quite. $6 to $10 a month would be acceptable to me, but its now $10 a month per device , where before it was $6 a month for a "family" of up to 10 devices. That's the real cost increase problem. I'm still only one customer, with almost no support burden, but the price to go to office version is substantially different for multiple machines.
Exactly. The short list for my family was: me, my wife, my mother, father, sister, and mother-in-law. 6 users under one plan, also using each other's computers as targets, because the connection speed at my parents' is atrocious. So now, instead of 6$ total, which I could just sweep under a rug and call it a day, I'd have to pay 10x that - or bother getting money from them, because none of them want to bother managin…
Re: CrashPlan is exiting the consumer market
#343Earlier quoted context omitted.
Brian from Backblaze here. > I guess it's tough luck if you are in a different country, or different continent altogether. Backblaze sends USB hard drive restores to other continents every day! Today we have one restore shipping to Finland and one to Great Britain. And to be clear, we absorb 100% of the cost: it is $189 USD deposit and we absolutely absorb 100% of the shipping cost whether it is Texas or Finland. Als…
Hey Brian, so nice of you to be commenting here. Thank you. I am sorry if I am sounding like an obstinate whiner but no, I don't want that. I mean I am glad if you offer that but I want: 1. A way to restore that is from the app and that can withstand disconnection, gap of hours, or maybe days - right inside your really awesome app (I mean it) with partial download and shit. 2. (I didn't know about international shipp…
> I may just want 5GB out of my 3TB, even for that "the browser restore interface" is just sad.
I'm slightly confused by this one. I assumed that pixel-for-pixel the interface of local restore would match the pixels in "the browser restore interface"? Is there an assumption that if it is a local application, then there would not be a "tree view" you see in the web and instead you would get something that looks like a Macintosh Finder or a Windows native "Explorer" interface?
If that is the case, what if we built something that looks IDENTICAL to the local Finder or Explorer but in a web page would that make some people more happy?
> And data retention! You didn't even touch upon it.
Just an oversight. :-)
> Kind of shows your/BB's stand is clear on it, right?
No, I can ALMOST guarantee you the Backblaze data retention policy is about to change, and possibly within a week. We heard all of you loud and clear and we're just struggling to figure out exactly how much this is going to cost Backblaze, or exactly how much of that cost we plan on passing on to customers and what that looks like.
Re: CrashPlan is exiting the consumer market
#344Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thanks for sharing that fascinating insider insight regarding non-zero-sum competition and advertising! This whole CrashPlan Home episode deepens my skepticism about services that claim to offer an unlimited amount of a physical resource (atoms on a hard drive, in this case) for a fixed price. Code42 has mentioned certain reasons for exiting the home user market, but I wonder if an unmentioned reason is the cost of p…
> Is the cost of disk space the reason why BackBlaze expunges files deleted on a backed-up computer fromthe backup on your servers after 30 days? The original reason was to prevent customers who owned a single 1 TByte hard drive from filling it with content, backing it up to Backblaze, writing down the date, then emptying the hard drive and filling it with DIFFERENT content, backing up to Backblaze, writing down the…
Over a period of time one of the drives failed; slowly. It would lock up sometimes; and I would restart it. Months later I realized it was losing files when it did this. And when I tried to restore those files from BackBlaze I discovered that they had been purged; and that this was considered normal behavior.
BackBlaze had lulled me into a false sense of security regarding my data by claiming to back up my files but actually mirroring a hardware failure on my local system.
I had an unhappy email exchange with BackBlaze tech support, and also Brian, and came to realize how flawed the system was.
I switched to CrashPlan at that point.
I will not consider using a product that lacks proper file versioning; and a much longer lifetime for deleted files.
Re: CrashPlan is exiting the consumer market
#345Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hey Brian, so nice of you to be commenting here. Thank you. I am sorry if I am sounding like an obstinate whiner but no, I don't want that. I mean I am glad if you offer that but I want: 1. A way to restore that is from the app and that can withstand disconnection, gap of hours, or maybe days - right inside your really awesome app (I mean it) with partial download and shit. 2. (I didn't know about international shipp…
It is a lot of valid feedback, we're doing a lot of emergency planning this week, but when the smoke clears we'll definitely start figuring out a "local restore". > I may just want 5GB out of my 3TB, even for that "the browser restore interface" is just sad. I'm slightly confused by this one. I assumed that pixel-for-pixel the interface of local restore would match the pixels in "the browser restore interface"? Is th…
No, what I meant by:
>> "I may just want 5GB out of my 3TB, even for that "the browser restore interface" is just sad"
Browsers are usually (or maybe never) good for downloading very large files. For example I am downloading a 6GB file or ZIP from BB using my browser and it crashed when I was done downloading 5.6GB. In most cases those 5.6 GBs would be gone and I will have to start over. Where as in a desktop or some kind of download manager/helper (which will have my login state/credentials just like Backblaze app has) it can be done over a period of time and will withstand machine going to sleep, shutdown, network disconnection etc.
But since you mention:
> what if we built something that looks IDENTICAL to the local Finder or Explorer but in a web page would that make some people more happy?
As I've mentioned above - it was about the functionality and not the look and feel.
And, imho, it will really be good if you could move the "restore" functionality to the main BackBlaze app:
- where I can see my files and hopefully available versions too and select version > file at that version or version > then files at that version (some apps first let a time to be selected and then files at that time are available for restore - and some apps do the opposite)
- or, at the least I can do all that on the web and the BackBlaze app starts restoring when it connects to the Internet again in a folder designated by me (
- restores retain the same folder structure. e.g., I am restoring a.png which was at ~/MyFolder/A/B/C/Z/B/A/CoolPics/a.png and restore function dumps it like this ~//a.png. Ideally it should give me option to either dump just the file or give me the restore like this: ~//MyFolder/A/B/C/Z/B/A/CoolPics/a.png or at least recreate it where it was and if another copy with the same name exists, rename the other file but this (latter) option will be a mess in case of many files
> I can ALMOST guarantee you the Backblaze data retention policy is about to change
That's very good to hear. Probably the best thing I head since yesterday :-)
PS. Please make sure this retention is something really cool and preferably not something like "well, let's make it 2 or maybe 3 months from 1" :-)
Because, as you must be knowing, the point of backup is that if I am looking for an important Excel sheet file after 7 months and somehow it was corrupted or deleted I'll turn to my backup and with a short retention it would have been gone forever defeating the purpose of my backup.
While we are at it, here's another feedback: Maybe start warning users when Backblaze sees some files (it was backing up previously) deleted before actually deleting them from archive (mark for deletion in a month or so). Maybe let the user do some action like "yeah, go ahead get rid of them", or "Uhuh, didn't mean to delete them - please restore it or put it where it should have been".
Re: CrashPlan is exiting the consumer market
#346Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agreed, it's not a backup if it only exists in one form, or one space. After purchasing the eventual death and exit of your 10th or 15th laptop, you kind of want to spend less time doing those transfers, especially with complex installs that can't be trivialized to the cloud. For Mac users, I like the backup practice of using two drives in two locations, Time Machine for incremental backups, and Carbon Copy Cloner fo…
I don't have bootable backups at the moment but it does sound like a good idea. I'll look into that, thanks.
Re: CrashPlan is exiting the consumer market
#347Earlier quoted context omitted.
That was a great feature. Mind if I ask why you don't want encrypted data in the cloud?
Because it costs me money to do so. Crashplan has always been free to backup data between machines and was/is very good at it. I don't mind paying for a 1tb hard drive to back up my mother's few photos, but trying to sell her on the idea of paying a monthly fee to do so is not going to get me far :)
Re: CrashPlan is exiting the consumer market
#348Earlier quoted context omitted.
The issue with these for me is that with the common cloud storage providers, even just backing up my Documents folder raises it above the price of BackBlaze or a similar offering.
Anyone have any experience with Sia? $2 per Terabyte-month sounds really attractive.