Re:What's Wrong with Google Drive, Dropbox, and OneDrive? Mo...
by conqrr on Friday February 23, 2024 @02:34PM
(#39485109)
Backblaze is cloud and suffers the major limitation of being expensive for an individual. The case for NAS for personal backup is getting stronger every day. For anything > 1TB, for personal backup or sync, a NAS is $400 investment whereas cloud would be $400 recurring cost which is ever increasing and has risks of ransomware etc.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:What's Wrong with Google Drive, Dropbox, and OneDrive? Mo...
by gruez on Friday February 23, 2024 @02:49PM
(#39485263)
The typcial NAS doesn't offer geo-redundancy. You can colocate it to get that, but that also significantly increases cost, which makes cloud competitive again.
Re:What's Wrong with Google Drive, Dropbox, and OneDrive? Mo...
by foobiekr on Friday February 23, 2024 @03:00PM
(#39485377)
For a very long time neither did backblaze.
Re:What's Wrong with Google Drive, Dropbox, and OneDrive? Mo...
by chimeracoder on Friday February 23, 2024 @03:12PM
(#39485513)
> For a very long time neither did backblaze.
Unless you live in a Backblaze data center, using Backblaze has always implied that your data is stored in at least two separate locations.
Re:What's Wrong with Google Drive, Dropbox, and OneDrive? Mo...
by secabeen on Friday February 23, 2024 @06:58PM
(#39487718)
If this is personal backup, you can usually find another tech-savvy friend who will co-locate a secondary NAS for free.
Re:What's Wrong with Google Drive, Dropbox, and OneDrive? Mo...
by awskinda on Friday February 23, 2024 @02:49PM
(#39485260)
It’s the same argument for the cloud. With Backblaze, I pay $x/month and someone else deals with OS/Software updates and hard drive failures. If I don’t outsource, I handle it myself for less.
It’s just a trade off based on how much time and comfort you have as a personal user.