Top
Best
New

Posted by rrreese 22 hours ago

Backblaze has stopped backing up OneDrive and Dropbox folders and maybe others(rareese.com)
1019 points | 619 commentspage 6
keitmo 16 hours ago|
It seems to me that Backblaze does NOT exclude ".git". It's not shown by default in the restore UI -- you must enable "show hidden files" to see it -- but it's there. I just did a test restore of my top-level Project directory (container for all of my personal Git projects) and all .git directories are included in the produced .zip file.
solarkraft 21 hours ago||
So what are HN’s favorite alternatives?

Preferably cheap and rclone compatible.

Hetzner storagebox sounds good, what about S3 or Glacier-like options?

freedomben 20 hours ago||
> So what are HN’s favorite alternatives?

I assume when asking such a question, you expect an honest answer like mine:

rclone is my favorite alternative. Supports encryption seamlessly, and loaded with features. Plus I can control exactly what gets synced/backed up, when it happens, and I pay for what I use (no unsustainable "unlimited" storage that always comes with annoying restrictions). There's never any surprises (which I experienced with nearly every backup solution). I use Backblaze B2 as the backend. I pay like $50 a month (which I know sounds high), but I have many terabytes of data up there that matters to me (it's a decade or more of my life and work, including long videos of holidays like Christmas with my kids throughout the years).

For super-important stuff I keep a tertiary backup on Glacier. I also have a full copy on an external harddrive, though those drives are not very reliable so I don't consider it part of the backup strategy, more a convenience for restoring large files quickly.

solarkraft 10 hours ago||
That’s why I like rclone, but I’m concerned with where to actually put the stuff.

Those $50 indeed sound high to me. I think I’d be fine depending on the Glacier backup, is that rclone compatible? What do you pay for it?

lizknope 19 hours ago|||
The cheapest is a computer at a relative or friend's house. I have my backup server at my parents house. We both have gigabit fiber so it works well.
brycewray 15 hours ago|||
Backblaze's B2 storage is fine if used with a separate app over which you have more control. Others here have mentioned Arq. I have used it, as well as Kopia[0] and Blinkdisk[1] (Blinkdisk is essentially Kopia but with a nicer UI). Can recommend all three highly; the latter two are FOSS.

[0]: https://kopia.io/

[1]: https://blinkdisk.com/

qsi 4 hours ago||
Just checked the Backblaze website where you can find the following page https://www.backblaze.com/computer-backup/docs/supported-bac... which says:

This article answers the question, "What does Backblaze back up?" Backblaze backs up all of your data across all of the user profiles that are on your computer as soon as you install the client.

Backblaze believes that you do not need to worry whether you selected all of the files that you care about, put any files in a different location on your computer, or added new files that may not be included in your online backup. Therefore, Backblaze automatically selects all of your data.

This is at best flat out wrong, at worst a blatant lie. But this was what I thought I was buying and paying for. Turns out you do have to worry!

Don't lie about other stuff you don't back up. Very disappointed in Backblaze.

domador 6 hours ago||
I was similarly upset and also dropped Carbonite over 15 years ago over something along these lines. Backup services should be agnostic about the data they back up for their customers.
mrwetsnow 12 hours ago||
fwiw, the .git files are being backed... but..

1. You have to check "show hidden files" in the web ui (or the app) when restoring and

2. If you restore a folder that has a '.git' folder inside of it (by checking it in the ui) but you DID NOT check "show hidden files", then the '.git' (or any other hidden file/folder) does not get restored.

Which is.. unexpected.. if I check a folder to restore, I expect *everything* inside of it to be restored.

But the dropbox folder is, in fact, not there. Which is a surprise to me as well. :(

lpcvoid 21 hours ago||
Hetzner storagebox. 1TB for under 5 bucks/month, 5TB for under 15. Sftp access. Point your restic there. Backup game done, no surprises, no MBAs involved.
creatonez 17 hours ago||
Hetzner Storage Box is not even remotely a similar product to B2, considering the only reliability offered is the disks being in RAID. There is no geo-redundancy at all. The number of simultaneous connections is also quite limited, though this might not matter for many use cases.
Dylan16807 17 hours ago|||
B2 has no geo-redundacy by default. It's RAID across a bunch of neighboring servers.
justsomehnguy 12 hours ago|||
I feel what you need to chose between $5/m and 99.999% SLA
poisonborz 21 hours ago||
Until there is. Backblaze was also trusted years ago. Selfhost, it became easy enough.
notrealyme123 19 hours ago||
Selfhosting Offsite is hard. Accessing services via standard protocols like ssh/webdav and just pushing your encrypted blobs there is a good middle ground. They can't control what you upload, and you can easily point your end-point somewhere else if you need to move.
BLKNSLVR 17 hours ago||
Commenting on the presentation, not the content: Why is there a white haze over the entirety of this website?
creatonez 17 hours ago|
Hi-DPI displays have convinced web designers it's okay to use ludicrously thin fonts with barely any contrast.
BLKNSLVR 16 hours ago||
I was waiting for some kind of pop up, so I could click "Deny all" and then the text would be readable. But no. It just stayed essentially greyed out, like reading it is an invalid option (which turns out to be the case).
faangguyindia 21 hours ago||
I backup my data to s3 and r2 using local scripts, never had any issues

Don't even know why people rely on these guis which can show their magic anytime

CodesInChaos 20 hours ago||
* S3 is super expensive, unless you use Glacier, but that has a high overhead per file, so you should bundle them before uploading.

* If your value your privacy, you need to encrypt the files on the client before uploading.

* You need to keep multiple revisions of each file, and manage their lifecycle. Unless you're fine with losing any data that was overwritten at the time of the most recent backup.

* You need to de-duplicate files, unless you want bloat whenever you rename a file or folder.

* Plus you need to pay for Amazon's extortionate egress prices if you actually need to restore your data.

I certainly wouldn't want to handle all that on my own in a script. What can make sense is using open source backup software with S3/R2/B2 as backing storage.

Anamon 12 hours ago|||
Even with Glacier, S3 is ridiculously expensive compared to almost anything else.
faangguyindia 20 hours ago|||
which service you recommend?
gpm 15 hours ago||
In terms of software I've been impressed by restic, and as a developer who wants to be able to not back-up gitignored files the rustic clone of restic.

In terms of cloud storage... well I was using backblaze's b2 but the issues here are definitely making me reconsidering doing business with the company even if my use of it is definitely not impacted by any of them.

ralfd 21 hours ago|||
> Don't even know why people

Most people (my mom) don't know what s3 and r2 is or how to use it.

palata 21 hours ago|||
This. I use Restic, the cloud service doesn't know about what I send, it's just encrypted blobs as far as it is concerned.
Terr_ 21 hours ago||
> encrypted blobs

I like how you can set multiple keys (much like LUKS) so that the key used by scheduled backups can be changed without messing with the key that I have memorized to restore with when disaster strikes.

It also means you can have multiple computers backing up (sequentially, not simultaneously) to the same repository, each with their own key.

bjord 21 hours ago||
you don't understand why pre-rolled critical backup solutions might be appealing to (especially non-technical) people?

also, you pay per-GB. the author is on backblaze's unlimited plan.

gadders 13 hours ago||
I've been on Backblaze for a few years now, ever since Crashplan decided it didn't want individuals to use its service any more.

It's always been just janky. A bad app that constantly throws low disk warnings and opens a webpage if you click anywhere on it. Being told the password change dialogue in the app doesn't work and having to use the website etc etc.

Just all round not an experience that inspires confidence. In comparison, Crashplan just worked.

Anamon 12 hours ago|
But Crashplan also had an absolute abomination of a bloated, sluggish, Java-based client.
gadders 12 hours ago||
It was a bit, but I never found it as bad as Backblaze.
ValentineC 10 hours ago||
CrashPlan required, if I recall correctly, 1GB of RAM for every 1TB backed up. It got a bit unwieldy after a while, because I have multiple terabytes of photos and videos over many years.
mikewarot 14 hours ago|
I assume they do some form of de-duplication across all files in their system. Most windows system files, and binaries would be duplicates, and only need to be stored once. I'm relatively sure this is true for most other systems, like Linux, MacOS, etc. Why not just back everything up for everyone?

It really shouldn't take up much more space or bandwidth.

Personally: I had to go in and edit the undisclosed exclusions file, and restart the backup process. I've got quite a few gigabytes of upload going now.

defaultcompany 10 hours ago|
They encrypt files on the client before transmission.
Tor3 2 hours ago||
There was a Swizz cloud backup system existing until some years ago.. can't recall the name but it started with a 'V'. They also encrypted the files on the client side before transmission, but the files were encrypted with their own md5sum or some such as key, and therefore similar files from different systems, encrypted, could still be de-duplicated across their whole system.
More comments...