|
|
|
|
|
|
by ad_hominem
3219 days ago
|
|
|
This is also what drew me to Crashplan, but I've been irritated with the service long enough that I think I'm glad they've forced my hand. For one, their client is very bad at backing up without affecting other network services; when I'm on a video call I frequently have to pause Crashplan backups entirely or I'll have stream issues (or manually limit the upload speed to something really small that I'll inevitably forget to undo later). I've never had this issue with Dropbox for instance. The client is also written in Java so it's a resource hog; beyond annoying my desktop machine that also made it hard to install directly on a somewhat resource-limited Synology NAS device a few years ago (I eventually got the install to work but it sporadically won't start up on boot due to memory constraints). Really, on my Linux desktop my most important files are my code, documents, pictures, and video, which are all already backed up to Dropbox. If my hard drive died it wouldn't be a big deal to do a fresh install as long as I can sync my code, documents, etc. with Dropbox. So I may just go without a full desktop backup solution. I don't know how they're going to transition to enterprise given their trashy desktop client but good luck. edit: in addition to Dropbox I'll probably add tarsnap to sync the important things to S3 |
|
|
I kinda feel that makes them perfectly suited for enterprise. I've never thought of enterprise software as having a particularly good user experience coffsharepointcoff
I'm also rather glad CrashPlan forced my hand. There were a lot of good ideas about it (the peer-to-peer features were interesting), but I really hated the Java client. And I always had to pause it's uploads if watching Netflix, because it would saturate the upload channel completely. (On a Mac here, for what it's worth.)
They've given plenty of notice though, so I'm thankful for that.