Re: Backup
Todd H. wrote:
> I disagree--Nemo's dead on on this -- the traditional methods ARE at PITA.
> That's why no one does them.
And again, what's different with backing up to another hard drive?
Especially a removable one that needs handled every bit as much as more
traditional media to obtain anything even close to the same security?
>
> Why? Because windows doesn't include reasonable backup software that's
> usable for folks,
What magical backup software comes with Windows that works with a hard
drive any better than any other media? For that matter, what backup
device doesn't come with software that's better than Windows backup? ;)
> and people even with dvd writers, aren't keen on
> swapping 10 or more DVD's through their system to backup,
This only needs done once, or very rarely. Incremental backups are
considerably smaller and can be done multi-session. If your dailies are
filling DVD's that fast, it's not going to be long before you're buying
more hard drives either. I have yet to run across teh modern backup
application that doesn't compress, and if you're just doing "copy *.*"
you're not really doing backups anyway.
Your rule-of-thumb ideal backup is an image of a "clean" install of the OS
and all your applications, maybe configured, and possibly with a "base"
data set (usually needed for setup). This should NEVER change unless your
OS or software changes, and you should make as many copies of that
starting point as you see fit. Two minimum as far as I'm concerned.
And unless you're doing something extreme there's no way in hell you[re
going to fill even a single DVD. Most such backups will fit on a CD in
fact.
>From that point on your backups are going to be incredibly small unless
you're generating huge amounts of data. If you are, you're not longer that
"typical user" we're discussing. A 3 DVD set rotated daily will last you a
very long time, and help guarantee you're no more than three days behind
if you need them. That's the worst case scenario of failed backup media.
> and not to
> mention all external media devices writing to tape or optical disks tend
> to be slow.
Is the speed of something that runs in the middle of the night more
important to you than being able to recover good data?
/me Shakes head and sighs....
You people are confusing convenience and security here. It's easier, so
it's better. If that's the way you want to think the fine, but I see it as
nothing less than a byproduct of the dumbing down of computer users with
pretty interfaces and bogus slogans.
The ONLY point Nemo had that even remotely resembles anything truthful is
the possibility that those lazy, incompetent users he was talking about
might actually do backups if they're made idiot tolerant. But they'll do
poorer quality backups none the less, and for the vast majority doing them
the right way isn't too taxing on their synapses or their time resources.
> Hell, does windows backup even deal with multiple disks? I
Completely irrelevant. If your data is worthy you'll find a suitable
replacement for software that might not meet your needs. If you don't care
or you think saving a couple minutes out of your month is more important
that having your data secured properly, then you'll copy everything to a
second hard drive and believe your ass is covered. Right up to the point
you find that the malware that corrupted your data also whacked ALL your
backups because you're keeping them on a device that's "just another
drive". Or right up to the point that you loose that big contract because
your backup drive fails, and 6 months of work are all on that singe,
fallible device.
Good Lord people, this whole "use another hard drive" argument COMPLETELY
IGNORES decades of tried and proved backup tenets. Using rotating,
multiple media and redundancy aren't inconveniences, they're designed in
safety features. ALL media fails. This is why you assess your risks and
rotate media as needed. If you do have a problem, you're no more than 'X'
period of time away from becoming current. That value is potentially equal
to your entire time dedicated to GENERATING that data in Nemo's silly
solution.
> haven't even checked lately, that's how much I've given up on windows
> backup. And the general user populace just isn't willing to spend money
> on backup software, even if we all agree that htey should.
The "general user" you're talking about doesn't have a need for any real
backup solution in the first place. They burn their pictures of the kids
and their quicken data to CD, and if they're whacked they reinstall and go
back through the pictures with a few "OH! I forgot we even took those!"
exclamations.
> Hard drives with true one-button backup are making it convenient enough
> for people to take periodic fulls ystem backups without the hassle of
> additional media swapping.
Yup.... "it's easier, so it's better". :(
Sorry guy, but easier is worse. Increases the odds you'll find yourself
empty handed and/or back up corrupted data over good considerably. In fact
in the scenario we're addressing it's almost guaranteed something bad will
happen, typically backing up corrupt data. Been there, seen that, more
than once.
> Remember, I'm talking about the general user populace here. Among all
> things, they're lazy, and hard drive backup is really hte lowest barrier
> thing we've seen on the market to date that I can consistently talk a
> 50-something-year-old proprietor of a 2-5 man shop (who has all sorts of
> other things to worry about) to do regularly.
I run across this scenario on about a monthly basis. With only very few
exceptions over the time span of almost two decades of doing it, that
person you're describing is more than willing to put forth the minimal
effort if they really care about their business in the first place. And if
they don't, they're no more likely to hit one button than they are to swap
a removable media. the backups won't get done EITHER way.
If the user is at all serious you just need to logically and calmly
explain the glaring flaws in relying on ANY single media backup scheme,
and those periodical media swaps don't seem so problematic after all.
Especially if you drive the point home with some real life horror stories.
Like the local weekly newspaper that called you because their accounting
and subscription data was hosed when the same lightning strike took out
their only backup and their originals in one fell swoop.
I picked up one of those "bread and butter" accounts over that little
fiasco. They guy that lost it thought like you and Nemo... all your backup
eggs in a single basket because it's easier. I sold them completely new
custom equipment, new software, training, and a service contract. And I
understand they sued the poor *** who lost their business for the
entire amount because his "backup" program was suppose to prevent the
losses they suffered.
If you want to be that guy, don't let me stand in your way. I'll take
the business. But don't drag other people into your silly "easy is
better" way of defining various backup media and techniques. It's not fair
to them at all. Enticing maybe, but then so is crack and hookers for a lot
of people. Of course crack and hookers can leave your pockets empty and
give you things you can't get rid of too. :(
.
