Comments on: BackBlaze: Why Do You Make It So Hard To Like You?

By: Mark

Mark — Mon, 19 Sep 2011 16:00:32 +0000

The last comment from “MAX” is the correct point!! Inclusion/Exclusion should just be a matter of what the Application selects as it’s default. If It starts with everything selected but systems folders then it’s Exclusion based. Uncheck a folder (with easy Tree View Check Box) and it back in your hands to exclude what you want. Then all the issues and talking point go ways.

By: Max

Max — Mon, 15 Aug 2011 22:05:33 +0000

I’m currently trying out Backblaze, and have been taken aback by the exclusion method. However, I would suggest that the method is not at all the problem, but rather the interface for managing it. A file tree with checkboxes seems to work for just about every other backup tool I have used. If Backblaze wants to do a full backup, fine, check all folders (except system folders, etc.) by default. Exclusion should be as simple as opening the Inclusion/Exclusion folder view and unchecking boxes. The Add Folder>>Find Folder>>Select Folder>>Repeat process can take forever if you wish to intelligently manage your backups. To further simplify things, the folder view could include the amount of data each folder contains, to assist in finding rogue folders. (For example, a local backup of a media folder that you forgot you made two years ago, or a huge video game you had installed on a second hard drive.)
While I understand the argument that this “feature” may be in place to counter-intuitively scare away power users with lots of data, in my case it will result in much more data being uploaded than necessary.

By: Barry

Barry — Sat, 06 Aug 2011 05:09:35 +0000

April’s comment that she “wished she knew” about backup before she lost pictures, is why this program is made exactly right for its market. The haters out there are the guys with RAID backup arrays in their (our) basements … I am a consultant specializing in backup, and have used every possible type of backup and service from Carbonite to ZFS. Of course there are features unavailable in the very least expensive off-site backup service available … it’s $50/yr! And even though it is so inexpensive, it is the best solution I have seen for people who really are too afraid or busy to backup. The fear comes from the complexity … take that away, and the problem is solved. The user who is in that position doesn’t have networked drives (how would they have gotten set up?), or a Domain Controller. They have a digital camera or 2, a PC (probably a laptop with no extra bays), and maybe a camera phone or iPad. They take pictures, and often leave them on the camera until they are forced to take the scary step of exporting to the camera, and OMG, deleting them from the camera. They almost never make it off the smartphone, unless they send them somewhere. So no, this isn’t for everybody … just the majority, if they understood. And J. Stone, YOU are the one with no clue about social engineering … it is EXACTLY the person who has files scattered about, who this will protect the most. That person doesn’t know where they are to SELECT them … but when he gets everything back, he can probably sift through (or remember a search term) and find it. It takes no longer to organize your files than it would to go through them one by one to select the ones you want to keep. If this developer were charging by the MB or GB, then I would agree that a better include/exclude model would be required … but he has chosen to “cover the cost” of the extra space to have the ADVANTAGE of not requiring the user to select files.
I do not recommend this service or any other, for everybody. It’s great for most, especially the busy or technologically disinterested. It has stopped the loss of important mementos for several customers. Most of my users need features like deduplication and compression, and know exactly where their data is, so they need exotic SANs with ZFS file systems, but for the home user … road warrior, or student, this is a great alternative …. especially teamed up with Windows Home Server, but that’s another story.

By: April

April — Mon, 21 Feb 2011 22:44:57 +0000

If I could I would have paid be happy to pay $190 to get back my sons baby pictures and videos. So backblaze having the option to put it all one a HD for you I would definitely pay $190 for that service. I wish I know about backing up when I first starting using a digial camera.

By: April

April — Mon, 21 Feb 2011 22:35:46 +0000

I’m trying out the service. At first I just wanted to back up my hard drive but because I could not just choose the hard drive I don’t know maybe backing up everything and my hard drive would be better. I really don’t wanted it to take months for the initial back up but I really need to do something. I use DVDs but now my computer has a hard time reading them. My computer has some DVD problems I don’t know why. I can read them fine on my daughters computer. I’m paranoid I guess. I once lost all my sons baby photos because of lighting on my ex hd. I was so devastated. All those videos ( his first cry) I cried for days. I took my hard drive to get worked on but know one could get the photo and videos. So now I back up back up and back up. I use DVD’s and photo bucket and now I wanted to tried backblazes because I don’t always remember to back up on photo-bucket and for some reason I cant upload videos there. I tryed Ccarbonite but it didnt suport ex hd.

By: Tinus

Tinus — Sat, 05 Feb 2011 11:07:39 +0000

Hi, I would like to make use of a nice off-site back-up solution like Blackblaze at fixed price for all of my data. I downloaded the 15 days trial but certain important folders are excluded, such as the Library. [ My iTunes and iPhoto archive seems to be excluded and I can not change the settings ] Would this only be during the trail period or would Blackblaze not back-up such folders ?

By: Matthew Dornquast

Matthew Dornquast — Mon, 24 Jan 2011 01:07:29 +0000

Sorry if it wasn’t obvious, I work for Code 42/Crashplan.