Backblaze headquartered in San Mateo, California offers continuous, automatic cloud backup for personal and business use. Backblaze Business Backup consists of cloud solutions to safeguard systems and files (e.g Veeam, Servers, NAS, Workstations).
$7
Per Computer
CrashPlan
Score 7.7 out of 10
N/A
CrashPlan® provides secure, scalable, and straightforward endpoint data backup, to help organizations recover from any worst-case scenario, whether it is a disaster, simple human error, a stolen laptop, ransomware, or an as-of-yet-undiscovered calamity.
N/A
Pricing
Backblaze Business Backup
CrashPlan
Editions & Modules
Monthly
$7.00
Per Computer
Yearly
$70.00
Per Computer
2-Year
$130.00
Per Computer
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Backblaze Business Backup
CrashPlan
Free Trial
No
Yes
Free/Freemium Version
No
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
—
Discount available for annual billing.
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Backblaze Business Backup
CrashPlan
Considered Both Products
Backblaze Business Backup
Verified User
Anonymous
Chose Backblaze Business Backup
It's honestly been so long that I've been using Backblaze - maybe 10+ years - that I don't even remember other options I compared it to way back when. I've had a subscription on all of my personal machines for years, and we've used it on all of our machines at my job for the …
We are using Aliyun OSS (Alibaba) as a primary storage server alongside with Backblaze. We are previously using Amazon Services, but our team is choose using another service because of the pricing and the complexity. Aliyun is having much feature, its almost like Amazon but …
CEO/President - 360° IT Consulting, Server Management, IT Security
Chose Backblaze Business Backup
Backblaze constantly will win in price and ease of use. Code42 has gone through multiple transformations, and with their ups and downs we had left on a down and haven't looked back. Wasabi is good, but with their API key system, we have relegated that to only for Synology's …
The price for cold storage at the Google Cloud Archive tier beats all other costs. We also need a hot copy of most of our half a petabyte on a system with API integration capability to multiple products and B2 meets that need.
I actually use BOTH Time Machine and Backblaze, for belt-and-suspenders backup redundancy. If my house burns down (along with my computer and external Time Machine backup drive), Backblaze has my back. If Backblaze vanishes for some reason, I have my Time Machine backup.
We picked Backblaze since it was super easy to use, understand, and sell to our clients. We did try a few other services and for various reasons like price, ease of use, or other reasons we didn't choose them.
Their customer service is filled by millennials, so basically nothing is ever Backblaze's fault.
I tried the service two times, in 2018 and today to see if they'd improved at all. The first time I discovered that they throttle upload speed. They refuse to admit it, but with 900 …
Backblaze has excellent reviews, and I felt me and my client's data was secure. Bitlocker had a recent security issue I read about, and you have to have Windows 10 for business to use it. Norton is an excellent and reliable product, but the experiences I have had with Norton …
Backblaze B2 offers very similar service as these providers, but at a much better price per GB. I've been able to vastly provide better and more cost-effective service in regards to my backup offerings because of B2 storage. It's a fantastic service with an insane price point …
Dropbox and Google Drive are both very popular file syncing/backup services that I use regularly. Backblaze is more "low-level" than them, providing more value in lieu of user-facing features like granular multi-device syncing, easy file-sharing, and online document …
Both are great choices for backup, They both offer similar features, however, Backblaze offers unlimited storage and SugarSync offers different memberships with different storage sizes.
While Backblaze plays an important role in my overall data redundancy strategy, I continue to use Dropbox Business for certain key assets I need granular access to. I use Apple iCloud passively as well as a local Apple Time Capsule. For a single-user setup, Backblaze provides …
I previously used Crashplan before they pivoted their business model. Crashplan was fine, and has feature parity with Backblaze. I was motivated to move from Crashplan to Backblaze for 2 reasons - 1, as they pivoted, they increased their cost, which was frustrating, and 2, …
Backblaze offers similar functionality and simplicity to many of these systems. In terms of value, it would be a bit better but we are really comparing small amounts at this time. All other backup systems offer similar recovery times with similar pricing, however, Backblaze is …
While Dropbox is great at sharing files with others, it's not the best at recovery and their price keeps increasing. I stopped using the Pro version when I found Backblaze, and I continue to use it for file sharing, but not long term storage. In that sense, they're different …
It is the cheapest storage option, but it doesn't have disaster recovery like the other options on the market have. Also, you can't spin up and use the data live like you can on AWS Cloud, Microsoft Azure, or Google Cloud Storage to use in the production of a product.
So there are two ways in which Backblaze stacks up well against its competition.
For a while I backed-up files at my home office using a combination of free or "freemium" services, depending on the relative storage limits. These limits are typically less than 100 gigabytes. When …
In general, Backblaze stacks up quite well when compared to CrashPlan. The native desktop app, easier to use interface, and lower yearly costs make Backblaze a far more ideal cloud backup system for home users vs. CrashPlan (which has eliminated their consumer backup option). …
Having been a customer of Dropbox for many years now, I feel like I have a good grasp on what the company offers. I have friends and colleagues that use Dropbox as a pseudo-backup system. I think this is a huge mistake. Go with a company like Backblaze that specializes and …
Backblaze had the most features at the right price. We had also experienced some data loss on other backup services. So far, all of our data has been secure and readily available when we need it, without high recovery costs like some companies.
Backblaze surpasses the other options by enabling backup of attached hard drives - a feature that when I last checked, none of the competition offered. That's huge for me, with externals full of data. Carbonite is close to BackBlaze otherwise, but lacks this key feature.
CrashPlan (in my specific case the CrashPlan Pro or CrashPlan for Small Business (there seems to be somewhat of an ongoing identity crisis with the products) is significantly lower overhead, in terms of cost and complexity, when compared to the other two products I have …
Mostly the price is what drew me to CrashPlan -others I have used are expensive per GB storage and difficult to manage. Carbonite was costing $1000.00 a year for 1 server with 2 TB of data. CrashPlan helps keep down the cost and the client spends much less time paying me to …
Both of the entries I put need a dedicated VM or physical server to be utilized. VEEAM can be installed as a VM or on a physical server, but Unitrends has a dedicated server needed as a purchased product in order to get the backups running. CrashPlan is a simple install on any …
Unitrends is our primary backup solution here at my place of employment, and I have no complaints. It does on-prem backups to a storage pool and with that, we chose not to also use Unitrends could storage as the cost was pretty high. Crashplan has a low cost and we were …
Both AppAssure and Acronis Disaster Recovery Service was used in the IT business management firm in which I worked. AppAssure required off sight storage. It was challenging in that the size of offsite storage was an additional cost and rolling up could take hours. Restoring …
I have used SOS online backup. SOS might have had some advantages and was fairly easy to use, especially when searching for files. This is not to say that Code42 is difficult. But I did not feel that using SOS was justified given the exorbitant pricing scheme used by SOS.
We've been using Nakivo and Code42 together. It works great as we are able to have the peace of mind of having data backed up offsite (Code42) and locally (Nakivo) I found this combo worked better than the costly and complicated setup of both Unitrends and Zerto. My biggest …
Have used Veritas, Symantec, Mozy, and Carbonite. Veritas and Symantec Backup Exec from my tape days, and Mozy and Carbonite when I wanted to move to a modern backup service. Code42's interface, cost, simplicity of use, versioning, security, and low-impact sold me. No contest …
I formerly used SOS Online Backup. It was a very similar system, originally offering unlimited backups at a price similar to Code42. After more than a year of backups, SOS informed me that they'd be reducing my storage from unlimited to 2tb, and, increasing my monthly rate by …
The main advantage that CrashPlan has on competing services is it's ability to back up network drives and keep your backup archives indefinitely. While Backblaze costs significantly less ($50/year/computer vs. $10/year/computer - or $120/year/computer), it does not have the …
OneDrive is not a good backup solution for endpoints. It is for storing a few files and sharing those files but not for business backup. Druva is a very good product that we never had any problems with and I'm not exactly sure why we switched from it. Code42 has some extra …
For our business model, Carbonite was not as economical. CrashPlan offered unlimited backup and unlimited deleted file retention for similar cost. Additionally, we had better results with support during evaluation with CrashPlan.
I have used several tape drives over the years with Symantec Backup Exec. Tapes have so many negatives associated with them, I would never recommend them as a backup system. I have also tried a couple of other disk based backup systems. Compared to all other backup solutions …
CrashPlan just makes backups simple. It's LDAP integration isn't locked in to only AD (i.e., Commvault) and the product is much more solid and reliable than the end user portion of Tivoli's CDP offering that was replaced in our environment by CrashPlan. I can't stress enough …
We compared CrashPlan with other choices and they were either too expensive or didn't have the backup capacity we required at the time. For lack of a better solution, we were very close to signing with Mozy, and this was years ago when CrashPlan was still a new player in the …
I like Crashplan's centralized nature and flexibility with support for all platforms. Their support has been the best of all other competitors' solutions.
I have not used the product, but it appears to be in the same league as the Crashplan product. I tend to think Crashplan is better only because of naivete of the other product and the fact that the entire experience with Crashplan has been fantastic from setup to updating to …
We use Windows Server to backup our in-house associates as they are connecting to the domain and it is easy to keep track of. Our remote associates do not connect to the domain as often so we had to find a solution to enable us to get a secure, accurate backup of their data. …
CrashPlan demonstrated a more advanced development than other products we were evaluating. A number of them didn't compress and dedupe, which affected performance on the machine as well as the network. The controls and reporting of crashplan were way more intuitive and …
We looked at file sync solutions that require an end user to move data independently, and two major things stuck out:
1. The human error factor was high. You cannot trust people to move files, even if they are important or they've agreed to move them on a certain schedule, and …
Backblaze's "set it and forget it' interface is ideal for home users. In addition, the $50/year pricing is very competitive. Most business should find Backblaze as a very good backup solution, but in cases where a backup archive needs to be kept indefinitely, alternative solutions should be looked at (specifically CrashPlan - though it is significantly more expensive at $10/month).
This is a great Cloud backup solution. The cost is low, the bandwidth is managed well within the application, and the footprint for the client on a machine is very small and provides a notification menu icon with info about what is happening now or very recently. This does not backup to anything locally, so if that is a requirement, it will not meet that need. It used to be able to backup from one machine to another remote machine at one time, but now it is only cloud-based.
Backblaze offers unlimited backups for a low-low cost per computer. Essentially, it's $5 for an all you can eat back-up buffet.
The interface is simple - both on the computer side when you're configuring it. But more importantly, the online interface to search through your stored data is simple and efficient. Once you find what you're missing you can restore via downloading a zipped archive, requesting a USB drive, or you can have large data loaded onto a hard drive.
It has never let me down - which in the world of remote back-up is amazing.
Code42 is the most affordable backup system offering unlimited storage that I could find. I came from SOS Online Backup, which I ultimately decided to drop after my monthly rate for their unlimited plan increased by 20x.
With Code42's unlimited storage option, I don't have to worry about the fact that my backups are significant in space. As a photographer with thousands of images at stake, I need to run large backups often.
Code42 runs continuously and silently in the background of my desktop computer. It is truly "set and go", so I don't have to think about it when I'm away. It runs until the designated drive has been fully backed up to my cloud storage. It will then automatically email me once the backup is complete (or, it will email me if it encounters any errors).
Customer service is above par. Anytime I need help, a chat agent is available (chat is my communication preference), they are always friendly, and go above and beyond to resolve my needs.
Backblaze, once installed, resides in the app tray on the lower right of windows. It's just a small menu that takes you to your website to perform recovery operations. You also have to install their little download and unzipping app after you select files to restore. I would like to see a single backup and restore interface that runs locally and handles all those details in the background.
If you have to reinstall your computer, they additionally setup and charge you for a new license, even though you have an account, you can't simply log in and reconnect to it. I didn't find this out until I saw the charge on my credit card. Now that I have the data I need downloaded, I have to call them and have the original license canceled for a pro-rated (partial) credit. I was told this is how system administrators preferred to minimize downtime. As a small business owner, I found it irritating.
The CrashPlan program installed on your computer is Java-based vs. a native application. While this makes development for CrashPlan easier, there are a lot of drawbacks to Java programs including more resources usage, less stability, and overall more clunky interface.
While this was also in the Pros category - CrashPlan is an extremely powerful and flexible program, which adds a great deal of complexity. Setting up CrashPlan isn't always a simple procedure, and depending on the complexity of your backup set, can take a while to tinker around with the settings to get everything to work properly.
The CrashPlan desktop program consists of a Java program front end, as well as a backend service - there are times when the backend service will crash, and the front end Java program will refuse to load. Typically, restarting the service or restarting the computer will resolve the issue, but sometimes more in-depth troubleshooting is required.
Perhaps one of the biggest downsides to CrashPlan is its price - at $10/month/computer CrashPlan is more than double the price of some existing backup services such as Backblaze (priced at $50/year/computer). To add salt to the wound, about a year and a half ago, CrashPlan discontinued their consumer options - which were very reasonably priced at $60/year for a single computer or a family plan priced at $150/year for up to 10 computers. When these options were discontinued, the cost of backing up with CrashPlan was effectively doubled for the same feature set.
Along with the previous example, CrashPlan had the option to back up to a remote machine on a different network with a free Crashplan account. This option was eliminated when the consumer line of services were discontinued.
While the backup service provided by CrashPlan are still first in class, the above two controversial changes have broken some trust between CrashPlan and its clients.
The only bad thing about Backblaze B2 is that to use it to its full ability, you need a third party to truly get any use out of it and its cheap price because they don't have their own software. Now, on the desktop endpoint back-up for non-B2 storage, they have a fantastic client with unlimited back-ups that is only $6 per month.
I've never had to reach out to customer support, but their periodic emails letting me know if a device is missing are very nice for informing me when something is wrong. Based on how helpful their system is, I would imagine their customer support is top-notch.
Friendly and knowledgeable support team available to assist with this product. Code 42 (formerly CrashPlan) offers unlimited storage options for reasonable costs, so you really can't go wrong with this product. They have been a reliable resource for our company, and I would recommend to others looking for an easy setup with unlimited storage.
I previously used CrashPlan before they pivoted their business model. CrashPlan was fine, and has feature parity with Backblaze. I was motivated to move from CrashPlan to Backblaze for 2 reasons - 1, as they pivoted, they increased their cost, which was frustrating, and 2, because they had always had a java-based client that wasn't as performant as a native client. Backblaze is so unobtrusive because of its highly performant client, and I couldn't be happier.
CrashPlan (in my specific case the CrashPlan Pro or CrashPlan for Small Business (there seems to be somewhat of an ongoing identity crisis with the products) is significantly lower overhead, in terms of cost and complexity, when compared to the other two products I have evaluated/used. The downsides are that it is also significantly less functional than the other products. CrashPlan is, as I have said a good value simple point solution.
The Backblaze service has provided a huge return on investment. We had a system fail, and it was very easy to have a drive with the backup data shipped to us for recovery.
The service has been very cost effective, allowing us to keep costs down while maintaining a good system integrity.
Tremendous cost savings as the amount of data you backup doesn't impact cost. One flat rate!
Implementation time was minimal and requires little to no maintenance. Since installation, I've not had to correct or fix any issues. It just works.
We opted to supplement Code42 with another solution that allowed us to backup data to a local repository due to the amount for data that changes in our firm.