It *is *a PITA.  I never claimed it was optimal.  Its cheap, and efficient
- when performed properly.  Lots of small businesses have done it for
decades.  The point was, if you are worried about the issues of a single
point of failure with a single drive - introduce a drive rotation.  Cloud
based backups are not always feasible because of bandwidth considerations,
as this discussion has been dancing around the core issue of.

We're all just spit-balling here.

--
Espi



On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 5:13 PM, Ken Schaefer <[email protected]> wrote:

> OP has users that are often "out of the office" - are they expected to
> take multiple drives with them, and rotate these "offsite"? Sounds like a
> huge PITA to me.
>
> Surely something that runs an agent that backs up daily deltas to an
> offsite location (CrashPlan, Iron Mountain), or back to "home base" via
> permanent connection (Direct Access + Windows Server Essentials 2012) would
> be a bit more robust? The admin gets reports/alerts, and you're getting
> software to automate an otherwise boring task that users are simply not
> interested in doing.
>
> Cheers
> Ken
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:
> [email protected]] On Behalf Of Ben Scott
> Sent: Tuesday, 2 September 2014 10:06 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [NTSysADM] Remote full computer backup to cloud
>
> On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 4:56 PM, Micheal Espinola Jr <
> [email protected]> wrote:
> > Rotate more than one drive.  Take the most recent drive off-site.
> > Make it a *daily* procedure/task for the user.  Often times with
> > unprofessional people; anything less than daily will be neglected.
>
>   s/less than daily//; s/unprofessional//
>
>   :-)
>
>   I've had the best results with having the computer send email to someone
> else, who's responsible for monitoring the backups, but not changing
> media.  That way the watcher isn't watching themselves.
> You're still depending on the watcher to do their job, but it's better
> than just one party.  Plus the reports can serve as a permanent record.
>
> -- Ben
>
>
>

Reply via email to