![]() With Mozy you can restore one of the previous versions before the corruption took hold. But isn't that the point of a backup system, so you don't have to do it manually. Unless you keep another backup somewhere else on your files system you are screwed. SugarSync has "backed up" your corrupted word document over your good version. If you then restore this file from SugarSync you will discover that it has the same problem. The file is corrupted, you need to restore it. This happened to me in the past with a few large word docs. One day you may open this word document and discover that all the images are replaced with big red 'X's. Imagine that you have a very important word document. ![]() With all this great sweetness with SugarSync (pun intended) it has one serious flaw. Why I'm (reluctantly) sticking with Mozy. You can also visit the mobile version or iphone version of the website to download other files. In addition to the website SugarSync has a mobile windows client that can view images in your backup and sync your mobile photos. With Mozy you can download the backup through their 'web 1.0' website but that is it. This is really great if you need to work on a file while on the road. On the website you can view, download, and update files in your file set If you update the files online they are also updated on your computer next time that computer syncs. Probably one of the best things about SugarSync is its 'web 2.0' website. They can even be setup to keep certain directories in sync across computers (hence the name). With SugarSync you can install the application on multiple computers, they can all upload to the same account. Understandably because Mozy's service is for unlimited space they restrict you to one computer. It really eases the mind to know which files are safe and which are not. Even if the speed wasn't an issue the SugarSync application shows me what files have been uploaded and which are pending. Now I haven't done any intensive benchmarking so I can't say for sure but files appear to be sorted and uploaded to SugarSync rather quickly. SugarSync doesn't appear to have this problem at least during the limited beta when traffic was likely low. It takes Mozy a long time to sort out what files have changed and several days to upload all these files. ![]() That means many files are changed all at once not one at a time over many days as Mozy expects. The files I'm backing up to Mozy are actually periodically copied from my main drive to my backup drive before being scanned and uploaded (see Backup Strategy). The truth with Mozy is that once I got above a few GB it became painfully slow index and upload files. For the same price on SugarSync you get 30 GB which for most people is plenty and practically speaking all I would every imagine uploading to Mozy in its current state. Mozy offers unlimited backup for $4.95 a month. ![]() With either application you can download the files either through the application or online. Both programs then monitor the folders you specified and uploads changes to the website. With both Mozy and SugarSync you install an application on your desktop, select which folders you want to backup/sync, and let it go. I suspect many people are using it this way. However, because SugarSync copies your files to their website it also serves as a backup solution. Mozy, on the other hand, is an off-site backup solution. SugarSync, as the name implies, is a syncing program. Comparing SugarSync and Mozy really isn't fair. While testing SugarSync I can't help but compare it to my current online backup solution, Mozy. The beta is now finished and anyone can signup for a 45 day trial. I recently had the pleasure of participating in SugarSync beta.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |