[newsimage]http://static.rankone.nl/images_posts/2011/06/26mj8L.jpg[/newsimage]These days everything is digital from home movies, to baby pictures, to music collections. Having all those files sitting around necessitates a backup solution that is safe, secure, and redundant. LaCie's CloudBox will offer you safe, secure, and redundant but they'll do so at a bit of a steep price. Read the full article here: [http://www.myce.com/news/lacies-pricey-cloudbox-stores-100gb-of-data-locally-in-the-cloud-47415/](http://www.myce.com/news/lacies-pricey-cloudbox-stores-100gb-of-data-locally-in-the-cloud-47415/) Please note that the reactions from the complete site will be synched below.
With a little internet research, you could setup a VPN with a family member far-far away, and do backups of important stuff to eachother …
Would probably cost less too.
“$100 a year”. Wow, so much for the cloud. I’ll take a sunny cloud-less day and vote for what debro describes. What’s more likely -
- My home and relative/friend are both robbed and/or burned to the ground on the same day. Note - encryption prevents anyone from reading HD data.
- Some cloud-supporting company is hacked on the internet.
It’s only a matter of time before we see embarrassing cloud-stored information spread all over the social sites. In any case “cloud” is supposed to imply remote CPU resources, this is nothing more than remote storage at a ridiculous price.
$100 a year is actually not as bad as I’ve seen with some providers, e.g. Dropbox’s 100GB account is $240/year. However, I do agree that for personal use, there are a lot of other options. Besides using a friend’s place as a host, a webhost is another option if you’re happy to manually encrypt and upload your data. For example, I remember Siteground use to have a 750GB storage limit before they went unlimited, so I’d imagine they’ll not have an issue with a few hundred gigabytes of data, which would give you a lot more storage space for well under $100 a year
For a small business, another option is to get the boss to host the backup at its house. If the company deals with a lot of data (e.g. photography), this would work out a lot cheaper than pretty much any online backup service and assuming it’s secured properly, there’s no risk of a 3rd party company snooping on the data or cloud service hack or security breach (Dropbox example) exposing the backed up content. Also, carrying out a restore would be a lot easier, since the boss can take in the backed up data instead of trying to download 100GB or more off the web!
It’s only a matter of time before we see embarrassing cloud-stored information spread all over the social sites…[/QUOTE]
Ha! It had already happened before I wrote this.