Jump to content

Recommended Posts

God I'm confused.


I have been using Carbonite for a few years to back stuff up, but I'm not happy with it any more.


Fox, is your system foolproof ie everything is safe for ever? I have a load of stuff backed up on an external hard drive, but obviously that could fail. Is yours a sort of mixture between that and the Cloud?


I'm not bothered about sharing stuff particularly, I just want to be able to retrieve it if the worst happens and my laptop crashes - documents, photos and music.

Don't worry Quids, I keep the ones featuring you in a special place.



???? Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Salsaboy Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > I just photocopy everything and keep it at my

> > mum's house.

>

>

> What? even, er, THOSE photos?

Whatever external backup you have in your own home is probably just as likely to disappear in any fire or burglary as your primary stuff. So for anything you really value, you want some offsite storage as well, and a notion of how you will set about reinstalling your system and data after a disaster. Anything sensitive can be encrypted first, fairly easily.

Thanks ianr, I wasn't clear whether Fox's suggestion was both a physical system kept in the home and some sort of online backup.


The advantage of Carbonite was that it was easy to use, it backed stuff up automatically without my having to think about it (once the initial upload had been done) and once when I somehow permanently deleted a vital file, God knows how, I was able to reinstall it very easily.


However I then discovered that anything I had previously had on my laptop (and had had backed up on Carbonite) but had transferred to an external hard drive to free up space was no longer being saved on Carbonite, and that if I wanted to back that up as well I had to pay an additional arm and a leg.


Hence I'm looking for something else quite urgently, as my carbonite subscription is about to run out and I don't want to renew it as it has become too expensive for what I want it to do.

Hi Sue


The Iomega Home Cloud. is basically a storage device. 1 Terabyte is 1024 Gbtes


1 terabyte is big enough for 300,000 + songs (?80.00)


4 terabyte devices are available for <?300.00


Once you buy it (?80.00)that's it. You only pay ?9.00 p/a for a dedicated domain name that you can access anywhere.

password protected.


It sits in your Home so is safe. (No Remote Storage ) You can upload what you like.

Good that you data is not stuck on a server in some unknown location.


Comes with Quick Protect so you can select the files/folders on your PC that you want to save

each time you update them. You can keep several versions of the same file so you can revert back to an older version.*


Useful if you update and make mistakes


You can also 'invite' people on to your device.

When you do this an email is sent to that person with an access code.

They will have to download the Iomega Manager Console and enter the code. (One Off)


Or you can add them as a User and give them Full/ Limited access

You have full control. And does not cost you anything.


The Cloud is yours.


http://iomegacloud.com/landing_page.php


Fox

Which is why something like an IOMEGA (or my QNAP-T212) but backed up to a cloud provider is the best of both worlds. The QNAP having the extra advantage of taking two disks you can mirror so a single disk failure doesn't matter.


Better versions of the QNAP take four disks you can RAID.

The Dillema is..


Anything Valuable you may wish to keep Remotely. In case there is a fire ??


Anything more sensitive you may not want to store remotely.


Hackers are more likely to hack remote Commercial Servers than your Little Home Cloud with all your

baby's and Pet pics..


I do not store much. or really need to store much. I bought it on a whim as I like Techy things.


Set up Apple icloud with my iPod Touch but have no real use for it.


Handy if you get mugged. If you are quick, you can take a pic of your attacker and it's off to the

Cloud to be retrieved later.


Fox

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • The dedicated dog waste bins often were left overflowing and/or used as general rubbish bins so I’m not convinced we need them when most folk know they can chuck their pooch’s poo in any litter or green house bin.   There will always be those who won’t clear up after their dogs. They’re boorish, uncivilised and often unhappy. Not much we can do about that.   
    • I went to France recently and in the city I visited there were large billboards on the main streets urging people to stop their dogs from messing on the streets and in a little park a sign said something to the effect that this park was built for your enjoyment not as a dumping ground for dog mess. There were also big signs about not fly tipping. I wonder if councils are too worried about offending dog owners by making a fuss about this major problem. I was a dog owner for many years, got free bags from the council and there were even bins around then.
    • I was also woken by this. It happened in two bursts, which felt even more anti social.
    • Surprised at how many people take the 'oooh it's great it got approved, something is better than nothing' view. This is exactly Southwark council's approach, pandering to greedy developers for the absolute bare minimum of social and affordable housing. It's exactly why, under their leadership, only a fraction of social and affordable housing has been built in the borough - weirdly Mccash chose to highlight their own failures in his 'near unprecedented' (yet unbiased 😆) submission. All the objectors i have met support redevelopment, to benefit those in need of homes and the community - not change it forever. The council could and should be bolder, demand twice the social and affordable housing in these schemes, and not concede to 8 storeys of unneeded student bedsits. If it is a question of viability, publically disclose the business plan to prove how impossible it might be to turn a profit. Once the thing is built these sites can never be used for social or affordable housing. The council blows every opportunity, every time. Its pathetic. Developers admitted the scale was, in this instance, not required for viability. The student movements data seemed completely made up. The claim that 'students are taking up private rentals' was backed up with no data. There is empty student housing on denmark hill, needs to be fixed up but it's there already built. The council allows developers years to build cosy relationships with planners such that the final decision is a formality - substantiated objections are dismissed with wooly words and BS. Key meetings and consultations are scheduled deliberately to garner minimal engagement or objection. Local councillors, who we fund, ignore their constituents concerns. Those councillors that dare waiver in the predetermination are slapped down. Not very democratic. They've removed management and accountability by having no nomination agreement with any of the 'many london universities needing accommodation' - these direct lets MAKE MORE MONEY. A privately run firm will supposedly ensure everyone that those living there is actually a student and adheres to any conduct guidelines. There's no separation to residents - especially to ones on their own development. Could go on... We'll see how many of the 53 social/affordable units that we're all so happy to have approved actually get built. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...