Skip to Content

Backblaze for Mac officially launches

Back in December, online backup company Backblaze launched a private beta of its service for Mac users. Like its Windows counterpart, the Backblaze subscription service is $5 US a month (or $50 US a year) for unlimited backup space. Today, the company is officially launching its service for Mac users, along with an updated client, better support for external drives and enhanced recovery options.


Configuration and setup

Just like in the beta, Backblaze remains extremely easy to set-up and use. You just install the program (by default it will run in the background, though you can change this), enter in your e-mail address and password, and it will start backing up your files. The default setting has Backblaze running any time it finds an available internet connection. The backup process is constant and Backblaze stores multiple versions of a file for 30 days (so if you are frequently changing a document or spreadsheet, 30 days worth of revisions are saved to Backblaze).

If you want to remove Backblaze, the company has made the uninstall process easier and more intuitive. There is now an uninstaller built into the install DMG image, just double-click on Uninstall (right next to the install option) and you can take Backblaze off your system. If you trash the DMG, just download it again off the Backblaze web site for easy removal.

Backblaze won't backup your Applications (thought it WILL backup stuff in your User/Library folder, so many of your application settings will remain backed up), but it will backup your photos, movies, audio files as well as things like your iPhoto or Aperture database, various documents, and more. By default, .ISO, *.exe and *.DMG files are excluded from the backup file type list, but you can remove most of those extensions (*.ISO cannot be removed) if you want to backup that information.

The maximum single file size is still 4 GB, but keep in mind this doesn't mean your iPhoto or Aperture databases won't be safe. Those databases are actually just folders with lots of smaller individual files, that's fine. If you have individual files over 4 GB in size, those won't be backed up with Backblaze. You'll need to split the files into smaller segments or make alternate arrangements.

What's new and improved

I talked to Backblaze CEO Gleb Budman last week about what is new and improved in the official launch of Backblaze for the Mac. It's really clear, especially comparing the beta version of the client to the new official release, that the company really took the feedback from its Mac users to heart.

The biggest improvement in the service is the ability to backup from external drives. Gleb remarked, "Mac users love their external hard drives." This is very, very true. In the beta version of the client, you could backup from an external drive, but the interface was clunky and unintuitive.

Now, backing up from an external drive is as simple as checking a check box. Check what drives you want to backup and when that drive is connected, it will be monitored and backed up to your account. If it isn't connected, the Backblaze still remembers that drive and when you do plug it in again, data backup will resume. One note: Time Machine drives cannot be backed up to Backblaze (that would be backing up your backup drive, in addition to all your data, which is just overly redundant for a service like this). Additionally, your Boot Camp drives can't be backed up with Backblaze either. You'll want to use Backblaze for Windows while in Boot Camp or look at an alternate method of preserving that data.



Recovery

One of my favorite features of Backblaze, from the beta, was the various data recovery options. Not only can you download all your data off of the Backblaze servers, you can also order your data on DVD or on a USB hard drive. During the beta, an external 160 GB USB hard drive with all of your data was $190. Now, that external drive is 500 GB in size. So if the unthinkable happens and your laptop is stolen or has a complete and total data meltdown, you can get a 500 GB external drive with all of your data sent overnight via FedEx to your door. That's the sort of ingenuity I like in an online backup service.

Overall

Five months later, I'm still really impressed with the Backblaze service. Online backups aren't going to be the ideal solution for every user -- if you have lots and lots of EXTREMELY large files or you are with an ISP that severely limits your bandwidth, having your own redundant solutions might be a better bet. But for most users -- having an online backup, even in conjunction with something like Time Machine, is a really good idea.

Backblaze is easy to use, effective at backing up your data and well designed for Mac users. The service is available now.


Back in December, online backup company Backblaze launched a private beta of its service for Mac users. Like its Windows counterpart, the...
 

Add a Comment

*0 / 3000 Character Maximum

65 Comments

Filter by:
pellekrogholt

My first impression of Blackblaze was good but I have one big problem: it often *eats* a lot of cpu - it looks like it's the indexing part - have any one experienced this and if so found a proper solution? (I'm running osx 10.5.6 on a powerbook pro 2.33 ghz intel )

Of course I could de "pause" but thats only for the next 2 hours...

May 27 2009 at 9:10 AM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
1 reply to pellekrogholt's comment
pellekrogholt

And even if I pause Blackblaze its still *eats* lots of cpu now and then...

May 27 2009 at 5:04 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
JimMack

Backblaze scores big on UI, and maybe it's just my OCD kicking in, but I can't see waiting a month to see if my initial backup is successful. That's just not a realistic backup solution.

After 5 days of trial, and paring down what is getting backed up, I'm still only 14% done with the initial backup.

April 24 2009 at 11:42 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
gianmauro.calafiore

Hey, I didn't see any replies to the question #7 about Jungle Disk comparison.

I happily use Jungle Disk and I'm very interested to know the price/feature comparison.

Thank you in advance for any reply.

April 16 2009 at 6:05 AM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
alfriede

xtina, i have a really serious concern about backing up [sensitive] data to a remote server - any remote server - encryption or not. i work for the govt, both in atlanta and d.c., and to me, this building is 'too' nice, and smells of nsa funding. both the nsa and cia have absurdly deep pockets, and have funded many corps that would shock the general public if they knew.

do you have any info in regards to where the VC funding came from for this amazing building? i googled [heavily nsa funded], and came up with a few issues about that, but nothing conclusive. anyone?

thx

April 15 2009 at 6:36 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
1 reply to alfriede's comment
kc! Bradshaw

It appears that you can add a local password to your backup which renders it unreadable for anyone else. Not sure if this answers your question, but seems to make me a bit more easy about using it for my data.

I was almost considering backing up to an encrypted file, and then sending that over to Backblaze for storage. But their 4GB limit is restricting.

April 17 2009 at 3:50 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Joseph

Will post my review when i finish uploading my 1TB of data and try to access a file from home.

April 15 2009 at 2:52 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Tyler

Why has there been so little discission of iDrive? After a bad experience with Mozy I switched it to a few weeks ago and have (mostly*) been blown away:

- Fast!! 40 GB backed up overnight.. take that Mozy
- $5 for 150 GB is reasonable, and allows you to backup multiple macs (so I'm backing up some friends and family to my account too since I had space left over
- Web interface and optional finder add-on to access all files instantly

They also have a promo where you can get 12GB free, which is more generous than any other service. Why is no one talking about iDrive?

(*mostly because I've run into a few small bugs with the client, but nothing on the scale of what was happening with Mozy)

April 15 2009 at 10:02 AM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
John

Every review of backup software for Mac OS X should include the results of Backup-Bouncer (http://www.n8gray.org/blog/2007/04/27/introducing-backup-bouncer/ ). In the case of Backblaze, the results appear to be absolutely terrible (http://www.n8gray.org/blog/2008/06/09/backup-bouncer-and-time-machine/#comment-26856 ), apparently not retaining resource forks or even dates!

I'm sure it'll work fine when it comes to restoring some photos or Word documents, but don't you expect more than that from a backup solution? Imagine finding out AFTER disaster strikes that program X still (against Apple's recommendations) stores important data in the resource fork, all of which is now gone? Or that program Y assumes proper file dates?

As far as I know there is no perfect remote backup solution for Mac OS X, but Backblaze sure seems to be one of the worst when it comes to metadata. I've heard mostly good things about JungleDisk, in particular with a sparsebundle-setup, but I haven't used it myself in a long time (and back then it was pretty buggy). CrashPlan is another solution you should consider, it's not perfect with regard to metadata either but it's a bit better. I use CrashPlan myself as a remote backup complement to a local setup Time Machine and SuperDuper.

April 15 2009 at 6:07 AM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
1 reply to John's comment
Christina Warren

John,
It's interesting you mention that. When I talked to Gleb, he mentioned that in the course of the beta, getting resource forks backed up is actually one of the more major behind the scenes changes that they have made with the final version of the client.

I'd be interested in seeing those stats with the new version, instead of with the beta.

April 15 2009 at 11:09 AM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Drooling Dog

I don't think I'd use any off-site backup service as my primary backup plan.

For my money, off-site backup is a backup to the backup. For the standard backup, use Time Machine (or whatever your backup app of choice may be) with a regular ol' external hard drive.

Off-site backup is for recovery in the unlikely event that your internal and external are both crashed, physically damaged, or stolen at the same time.

April 15 2009 at 12:22 AM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
comctrl6

I use it and I think it is a decent server, specially since there is no size limit and it backs up all of the external drives.

One major problem with the service is that fact that if you perform a clean install of the OS, you'll have to re-upload ALL of your data. This is OK if you have a couple of megabytes of data, but having a few gigabytes of documents, movies and music is just time consuming. I bet this shortcoming will come to light as Snow Leopard is released.

Otherwise, it does what it says. Simple and to the point.

April 14 2009 at 11:58 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Drooling Dog

Running my first backup now. I dig the idea, but wow... It's more expensive when you exceed 150 GB, but I'm going back to iDrive.

April 14 2009 at 11:47 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Buy an ad here

Hot Apps on TUAW

Tweets

© 2012 AOL Inc. All Rights Reserved.