The way I read “free egress” is “you pay for it even if you don’t use it”. It’s not a good thing.
1 Like
Yes, but both ways have merit.
Paying for what I use probably results in a lower bill on average. However, “what if I need a lot for one month?” then I would get a very large bill.
On the other hand, paying a fixed amount probably means I overpay on average, but it also prevents surprise bills.
We selling product to the developers and Enterprises, not consumers. So they want to change their infrastructure or configuration options to have all advantages, especially when they want to have a fastest speed in the world, global availability and encryption out of the box for the lower price than legacy cloud storages.
3 Likes
yes, Duplicati with a native integration and with an S3 as well. You may also use restic of course.
3 Likes
It’s good that there are backup programs that support Storj. However, how likely is it that someone is going to find out about that program and be convinced to use Storj for the storage instead of one of the other options?
we need more of this, more “mainstream” backup solutions.
1 Like
Come on, it has been 2y and millions! That is a very long time and a huge pile of VC for a start-up! The economics either work or they don’t. Adding another 2 years will not change anything, just like the last 2 years did not change anything when it comes to the economics of STORJ. You spin that, as I wish for the downfall of STORJ.
That is good to know. Did not realize that this is the official stance of STORJ.
NO! Nobody uses Duplicati - it’s odd, buggy and cursed!
Enterprise uses Veeam, Nakivo, Acronis etc. Duplicati is useless even for home users.
6 Likes
Fully agree here. Stable version EoL, current version in beta for the foreseeable past, this is all you need to know about this abomination: there is no stable version. Why would anyone use it? And that is before even considering that it’s unstable, corrupts data, and plain garbage on all platform but windows (mono framework and all its juiciness comes with it).
Good alternatives were already mentioned, I’ll add duplicacy (but not their WebGUI — it’s utter garbage). The CLI is very good, and supports storj natively.
I am using Duplicati. It works just great for my usecase 
1 Like
No it isn’t. Uber was launched in 2009 and is only turning profitable this year. With a whopping amount of 25.2B collected in funding.
Airbnb launched in 2008 and has posted it’s first profitable year last year with 6.4B collected in funding.
Lyft had yet to become profitable, launched in 2012 and collected 6.4B in funding.
Why these examples? Because they are similar in that they are mediators between suppliers and consumers. These types of businesses typically run on razor thin margins and need a LOT of scale and optimization to eventually become profitable. You don’t get there overnight.
I’m sure you can think of a few other similar style start ups, look it up, find their funding, launch date and profitability. It’s all the same story.
3 Likes
Seeing that there actually are backup programs for Windows that use Storj, the question now is - do we want those users? I am talking about a random person who would use one of the backup programs to back up his data to Storj. Such a use case would result in data that is uploaded and later deleted, but very rarely downloaded.
If we don’t want them, then whatever.
If we want them, then the question becomes is Storj being advertised to them? It is one of the options in those backup programs, how is the user being convinced to choose it over one of the others?
As for companies - I do not know how it works with large companies and how they can be convinced to use Storj instead of Amazon, but I know that for a small company, I would have trouble convincing my boss to use some random small company with a weird business model for storing our data instead of one of the big ones. And even if I did, if there were any problems in the future, I would be blamed for them because “well, you told me they were great, we should have just used Amazon”, while if there were problems with one of the big ones, I could defend by saying “everyone is using Amazon, if Amazon has problems then others would have problems as well”.
1 Like
Sure, why not? Even Storj Inc.'s worst case of 0.75 USD/TB brings profit to frugal storage node operators, and these customers don’t actually require too much of egress, which is apparently the pain point here. And given backups is one gateway to learn the tech, even more so!
for backups even for enterprise, magnetic tape is most cost effective, it can be up to 580 TB one tape.
You buy a backup robot for tapes, and several tapes, investments only 10-15k but it last for very long time.
1 Like
Even I use tapes sometimes, though older tech (LTO6 right now), since I cannot afford the brand new tape drives. It’s a bit annoying to use, but once the tape is out of the tape drive, there is no remote access to it, which is nice.
1 Like
Magnetic tape still in use? I thaught it’s a defunct tech, like floppys. What’s the transfer speed on those?
LTO-9 is like 400 MB/s, a single tape can store ~18 TB and costs ~150-200 EUR new. Latency is kinda high though, and the tape itself still gets tangled sometimes.
2 Likes
Have to agree with this. My own experience of Duplicati was very poor.
Yeah we used to archive process control backups to LTO - it worked well. We were always able to get the backups back when needed.