|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
99.102.143.127
I just signed up for Amazon Drive unlimited $60/year to back up my NAS.
Seems to good to be true. What am I missing?
Follow Ups:
I have for many years now been using Crashplan with unlimited storage for even less yearly. This service automatically backs up whatever is designated on any drives designated including network drives, which many don't allow. Currently I have a total of 2.4 TB music and 1.2 TB other files backed up.
You should never JUST have online backup but neither should you have JUST on site backup either.
Downside is speed. I only use it for my NAS to back up to, which took a while to start with.
Free, unlimited space, just slow. Perfect for backing up bulky music folders to an offsite, pretty safe, location.
I have 1 terabyte google drive , I like it and pay for it, I wasn't aware of a discount service from Amazon, I'll have to sign up for that one too. Thanks for the info.
If there is a catch I am guessing Amazon doesn't think that you downloaded the entire internet and then want to upload it there, I think at my max I had about 2 terabytes of music, it will be interesting to see support for it using open home standards, right now I stream google drive storage directly into my Auralic Aries,
A 2TB external drive is available for only $90 and that's a one time cost. The cloud is nice for some things but if you are going to use the files in only one location why pay rent for your own stuff.
I married the perfect woman. The downside is everything that goes wrong is my fault.
The catch about having only a local backup is if you have a house fire, you lose all your music.
My "local" backups are (1) in house, (2) at my daughter's house a few blocks away and (3) at my weekend house in a neighboring state. Loss of all would take a major calamity such that losing my library would be a minor result.
nt
Cut-Throat
But that's the point. Your "local" backups aside from in your house are in fact offsite backups. It's not online but offsite that is crucial added to onsite backup
Exactly my point. Anyone can take the back-up drive to work.
Disk is Cheap and getting cheaper every day. I would not trust a third party with my data. I do my own backups.
What if they lost your data and you called and they said 'oops -- Sorry... We'll give next year storage for nothing'
I am sure that they are not responsible for data loss.
Cut-Throat
It looks good. However I am rather cautious about placing the storage of all of my files with a third party. Which government agency will seek clandestine access to Amazon's (and other similar facilities) servers? What will happen if Amazon decides to close it or reduce the storage available per customer* if you have already stored more than the new limit? What if Amazon sells the project to another company or gets taken over? What about hackers?
My take is that if you are not concerned about these potential issues then it might be a great thing as a second string backup. But I would always retain a home backup system too.
* My bet is that like other "unlimited" storage offers it will be discovered that this is not sustainable and a limit per customer will eventually emerge or it will be achieved by a pricing structure.
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: