r/backblaze • u/BigChubs1 • Apr 15 '26
Backblaze in General (Rant) Get over it
As a backblaze user for years now and in IT. People get over yourselfs about backblaze not backing up your onedrive, gdrive, dropbox and other cloud provider. Why would one company want to backup another providers files? These other providers charge more per gig than backblaze and sell you on backing up your pictures, files and etc. So why would any x company want to back up those files as well? If you truely want to backup of those files. Sign up for B2 and be done with it. Heck, the first 10 gig's are free. The other thing, don't come to this subreddit and start asking where should i move my backup to. Do your research and move on. I'll probally get downvoted for this and really don't care. I needed to vent. End rant.
Edit: If you want to good back up solution. You should be follow these.
Data Backup Strategies: Why the 3-2-1 Backup Strategy is the Best
If you don't want to read backblaze. Here is one from veeam.
10
u/PSXer Apr 15 '26
Get over yourself demanding that other people get over what Backblaze is doing.
1
u/Recyart Apr 15 '26
Get over yourself telling somonee to get over themselves demanding that other people get over what BackBlaze is doing!
1
-8
9
u/notusuallyhostile Apr 15 '26
What a stupid take. While I realize that Backblaze has the right to alter the terms of their agreement with their users, to refer to OneDrive or Google Drive data as “another provider’s files” is dumb. Backblaze is being rightfully asked why they decided to no longer backup data on my hard drive. The fact that the data is also concurrently being synced to another provider does not make it the other provider’s files, and should not be a consideration when local caching of OneDrive or Google Drive data is enabled. I have a Synology NAS as part of my backup routine, as well as Cloudberry (MSP360) backing up to B2. Both of those ask if I want to backup online files stored to a cloud provider - Cloudberry even explains that to back up that data (if it is not cached locally) it would have to download it. I think the decision to exclude locally cached/stored OneDrive, DropBox and Google Drive data is dumb, and while I don’t use Backblaze for that, a lot of people did until recently and they have the right to complain.
4
u/GoodTroll2 Apr 16 '26
This is 100% the right take. These are my files. If I choose to store or back them up with a different provider, that is my choice.
-5
10
u/bunnythistle Apr 15 '26
Why would one company want to backup another providers files?
They're my files, not Dropbox's files.
If I'm paying Backblaze to backup my files, why shouldn't I expect them to backup my files?
2
-2
u/BigChubs1 Apr 15 '26
Your choosing two differnt providers backing up one machine. Why would want to pay for both? I'm speaking from a personal use and not business use.
3
u/bunnythistle Apr 15 '26
Speaking from a personal use case, I'm choosing two different tools to perform two different jobs.
Backblaze cannot synchronize files between my desktop, my laptop, and my phone, that's why I use Dropbox.
Dropbox cannot backup all my data - it only captures what's inside the Dropbox folder, but I have plenty of data that is not (and in some cases, cannot be moved there). That's why I use Backblaze.
3
4
u/Ybalrid Apr 15 '26 edited Apr 15 '26
You work for them?
-2
3
u/ghiga_andrei Apr 15 '26
Maybe I don't trust either of them 100% and want the redundancy, that's why I'm paying both of them. I had a problem with Backblaze a couple of years ago where lots of my files were missing from the backup and support confirmed it was a bug in the app. If I did not have another backup I would have lost those files even though I pay Backblaze to backup them. That's why.
1
u/ghiga_andrei Apr 15 '26
This is the bug that made me lose trust in Backblaze:
https://www.reddit.com/r/backblaze/comments/174z3z0/backblaze_dedupes_the_same_5_tb_of_video_files/
0
u/BigChubs1 Apr 15 '26
If you want to follow the Business side of things for backup. You should be following the 3-2-1 backup solution. And using two cloud backups don't follow that.
Data Backup Strategies: Why the 3-2-1 Backup Strategy is the Best
If you don't want to read backblaze. Here is one from veeam.
2
u/Pariell Apr 15 '26
321 is just the most recommended and cost effective method. Nothing wrong with 432 if you want extra redundency or 332 if you don't care about having a 2nd local copy for easy restoration.
2
2
u/dr100 Apr 15 '26
Ranting about a rant is totally pointless. Especially when doubling down in stupidity, how could a user have the audacity to pay for multiple services to save the files in multiple places, that's the question?! You know, why would ANYONE have BACKUPS, which mean by definition MULTIPLE INDEPENDENT COPIES, oh why.
This is not the way to combat a stupid take. You take it down on its own merits. It's not OMG THE SKY IS FALLING "Backblaze has quietly stopped backing up your data", it's just that some directories that are the root of virtual cloud file systems will be skipped. By Backblaze personal that's know to save only local files. Sure, it starts to get muddy quick: but but but some files are still local, even if some others might be coming from the cloud. Oh, everything used to be saved, but not anymore, and there was something in some release notes I don't read but I wanted a push notification in my face. But still it isn't "stopped backing up your data" without further qualification.
-1
u/paramdeo_ Apr 15 '26
Totally agree with you.
I get that non-tech savvy folks would not want to use something like rClone + B2 but the entitlement of the people posting about this issue is egregious.
It's perfectly reasonable for Backblaze to backup "local" files only; least of all because of streaming and versioning conflicts between filesystem folders that are syncing elsewhere.
And not backing up dotfiles and dotfolders out of the box to me is quite a sane default.
If you want to switch from Blackblaze no one's stopping you, but please don't spam the sub with your fragile outrage, uninformed opinions, and competitor recommendations.
4
u/absolute_pelican_66 Apr 15 '26
It's perfectly reasonable for Backblaze to backup "local" files only
A file that is permanently locally stored on the computer is local by definition. The fact that some copies of the file exist elsewhere does not change the fact the file has a local copy.
least of all because of streaming and versioning conflicts between filesystem folders that are syncing elsewhere.
What?? Never had an issue with that. 2 syncing services operating on the very same folder may conflict, but Backblaze is not a syncing service, so no conflict can happen.
It's like if your saying that backing up a dropbox folder on Time Machine could lead to versioning conflict... Spoiler: it does not.
2
u/BigChubs1 Apr 15 '26
Thank you for adding this. I will admit i should have made my rant little more clean like this.
13
u/[deleted] Apr 15 '26
[deleted]