Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Best unlimited cloud storage solution?
- Thread starter Garamond
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Backblaze imho
----------
Backblaze imho
http://www.backblaze.com/mac-online-backup.html
$4/month upwards.
----------
Backblaze imho
http://www.backblaze.com/mac-online-backup.html
$4/month upwards.
If I find a perfect solution for my needs with the necessary speed, I'll pay what it costs.
----------
Giving it a try now, seems promising.
Backblaze isn't storage, only backup. It only keeps data that is online on your system. Say you backup an external drive to Backblaze. Unless you keep that drive connected and running on your machine, Backblaze will delete it from their server within 30 days or something like that unless you reconnect it in that time. If you delete a file, eventually, so will Backblaze.
I'm currently using CrashPlan and the general consensus seems to be between CrashPlan and Backblaze.
Of course, as was pointed out, they're backup services and not designed as primary cloud storage, in which case you'd want to use Google Drive or Amazon S3, but you're going to pay hundreds of dollars per month for that volume of data.
Obviously CrashPlan and Backblaze aren't making money at $5 a month on somebody storing 10TB, but Backblaze at least acknowledges that and says it evens out in the end, at least for now.
Even though I'm currently uploading about 1.5TB to CrashPlan I still worry about the security, even with 448-bit encryption paired with a randomly generated 4480-bit access key.
Of course, as was pointed out, they're backup services and not designed as primary cloud storage, in which case you'd want to use Google Drive or Amazon S3, but you're going to pay hundreds of dollars per month for that volume of data.
Obviously CrashPlan and Backblaze aren't making money at $5 a month on somebody storing 10TB, but Backblaze at least acknowledges that and says it evens out in the end, at least for now.
Even though I'm currently uploading about 1.5TB to CrashPlan I still worry about the security, even with 448-bit encryption paired with a randomly generated 4480-bit access key.
I took the OP's original post where he quoted "cloud storage for backup" as exactly that, a rolling backup, not an archive.
Cloud storage for archive is a heck of a lot more expensive per Gb.
Yes treat the Backblaze service as a 30 day rolling snapshot, rather than an archive.
Otherwise my advice would be to get a NAS box and host it at a friend's, invest in some deduplication too. Otherwise getting data hosted will have a higher TCO. Also then benefits you can do the initial 10Tb copy locally then move the NAS, rather than have to upload that. Then you're just hopefully doing incrementals after that.
----------
If you're that paranoid you'd never let someone have physical / network access to your data.
If you're uber paranoid start using AES, or hashing use SHA-256 with a *good* salt. Then upload that.
I do wonder how good a dedupe rate the backup vendors get with that level of encryption, I bet it isn't good.
I'd like to point out that many services change their plan after they have enough users. For example Mozy used to offer unlimited storage for $5/month but now they charge $10/month for 125GB. There are always people who don't bother changing the service and they keep paying the higher price.
Try to go with a service that has been up for years at similar rates. Preferably something with limited storage (buy for example 15TB) as those are more unlikely to change price.
Try to go with a service that has been up for years at similar rates. Preferably something with limited storage (buy for example 15TB) as those are more unlikely to change price.
I just built a HTPC for a customer celeron, centos, 2 4TB raid 5 for the min computer, 4 3TB JBOD for the other computers. 2 3TB dives for media to stream to his 2 smart TV's, iPad and iPhone and his and her Sammy ultra books.
Backblaze is considerably a good option in affordable cost. It starts from $3.96/mo. However, there are certain other option which you can try to cater your TB's need. If price is not a hurdle for you to opt-in, then i think you should try SugarSync, YouSendIt or MyPCBackup. They are good to cater large storage needs!
I know this is an old thread, but what's your upload speed like?
I have one of the "fastest" internet packages available in my neighborhood and I still only get 2mbps upload. Doing some "quick" math...
10TB * 8 (bytes to bits) = 80Tb * 1024 (Tb to Gb) = 81920 * 1025 (Gb to Mb) = 83886080 / 3600 (sec to Hr) = 23301.7 / 2 (due to 2mbps rather than 1) = 11650.85 hours or 485 Days.
I will be honest, I was looking to back up about half of that (5TB), but I couldn't imagine completely hosing my internet connection for the next year just to do my backups. In my case I just bought a couple of multiple TB hard drives, zip everything and keep one at my parents house as my "disaster recovery drives". I do this periodically when I know I am heading their way.
Just my .02 worth....
EDIT: Oh and my internet usage cap per month is 350GB so I would litterally use my entire allotment of bandwidth just uploading my backups. I suppose I could have gotten DSL and dedicated that to my backups although then that $5 a month backup becomes $45+ (DSL + Storage fee).
Can incrementally do this with Crashplan also if can place a machine at the remote location that will be periodically visited. The software doesn't "have to" dump data into Crahsplan's cloud storage.
That said there is a new service by Amazon
http://aws.amazon.com/glacier/
$0.01/GB/month.
For 10TB it would be expensive but they have offline import/export available ( for a fee). It wouldn't take a year to upload. Nor another year to get it back down. For 10TB would likely be looking for a service where could "seed" the initial back-up by sending in media. For vast majority of contexts "sneaker net" here is much faster than trying to push this amount of data through internet pipes.
Also may be useful if had earlier discounted Arq (http://www.haystacksoftware.com/arq/) due to "high" S3 storage charges. This is much cheaper.