Arq does incremental backups... but does it do incremental restores? i.e. if I have already restored the backup to another computer, can I later fetch just what has changed? This is the only feature missing from duplicity[1] to make it perfect.
No, but it's on my to-do list. It'd be awesome for, for example, restoring from an older Time Machine backup (fast) and then merging in the latest Arq backup.
Nice! I've been using Arq for some time and it's great for selective backup (I use Backblaze for bulk backups.) Stefan, the developer of Arq, is also quick to reply and very helpful.
As with AWS, it's a gamble as to whether it will be there when you need it. I'm always nervous of all-you-can-eat plans. All it takes is a small estimate mistake to blow an entire business plan.
N.B. I've been using Arq since it first came out, and love it 100%. I do not, however, backup my music/video with it. That goes on a removable 2TB safe in a fire safe.
I don't think you misunderstand S3's pricing. They're not cheap. What they are is flexible, generally-high-availability, and you can choose the region you want to serve out of. For sheer storage costs, they're moderately high, same as their EC2 costs for sheer compute power.
... which is why it's inappropriate for a desktop backup solution. The chances of simultaneously losing your hard drive AND the entire RAID array in the Backblaze container that stores your data are so small that it's not worth paying extra.
If Backblaze loses your data and it's your only backup, you need to re-upload all your data. If that takes a long time and your hard drive fails during that time, you lose your data.
I think with remote backups, a 2-part backup is probably the best strategy. Time Machine or Carbon Copy Cloner on an external hard drive, and remote backups with Arq, or BackBlaze, or Carbonite, or whatever.
It's possible to lose your S3 data too (and then you're in the same situation as BackBlaze losing your data). For example, I once accidentally removed all permissions from files in a bucket with Transmit, including the permissions to read files or set permissions.
I think Arq is great, just playing devil's advocate.
Looking at the s3 breakdown of what you get for $5/month, standard s3 ($5/0.014 ~= 36GB) or reduced redundancy ($5/0.094 ~= 53GB) not including rest requests and traffic, backblaze begins looking like quite a deal. $3.96/month for unlimited backup storage for one computer seems hard to beat.
Agreed, I wouldn't want to backup my entire laptop on s3. But since the first 5GB on Amazon's s3 are free, I find it's a great way to keep an extra backup of my current projects.
The data is also encrypted with your own key. I know that's an option with at least one of those Mozy or Backblaze apps but definitely not with Dropbox.
Backblaze encrypts your data with your own key, but you can't restore your data unless you give Backblaze your key. When you restore, step 1 is to enter your key into their web page. Also, if you order a hard drive with your files, the hard drive is shipped with your unencrypted files on it.
Given that the account was just created, I tend to agree. Which is sad, as Crashplan is a genuinely good product (disclosure: I've been using it for 2+ years and am paid up for the next few years). It gives fine grained (up-to-the-minute) off-site backups w/versioning and easy restores (I've only done one-off restores, not full disaster recovery).
I've used it in production and personal environments.
But I hate the idea that they are farming out this kind of astroturfing. Gack.
Nah, it wasn't astroturfing; I lurk most of the time. It does everything that submission does, does it well and does it inexpensively compared with rolling your own or having to deal with the vagaries of S3 (who lost S3 and EBS data irretrievably in the EU last week).
So you can downvote me, but don't think that it was Code42 doing it - I have no relation to them.
