|
The free CrashPlan works well for me. I have it set up to back up automatically to an external hard drive and over the Internet to a relative's computer, also running CrashPlan. Optionally, you can subscribe to their cloud storage and access that with the mobile app, which I did for a while. Even the free version sends an email report of the status. It seems unobtrusive but is always running in the background.
Tom
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you Tom, but I prefer something in my own house than something remote... I can understand the advantages of getting something out of our house, but I don't feel right to put all our pictures, videos, music and so outside.
I know nobody will be interested in our life, but who knows 
Apart of that our Internet speed is not the best one...
I'll go with Robocopy, tested it and worked like charm at first attempt. 
|
|
|
|
|
Crashplan doesn't require that your backup leave the house. You can backup to a local drive, or have 2 computers in the same house backing up to each other. Crashplan also uses deduplication to reduce the required bandwidth and storage. If you do choose to backup outside of your house, your backups are also encrypted so that whoever you are sending your backup to, can't look at your data. You can also use an Android or Apple app to access your files when you are not at home.
|
|
|
|
|
IOMega used to include a backup utility with their hardware. Intended of course for use with their Zip and Jaz drives, but the programmers did it right and let you backup to anywhere, even over a network.
I used to have it set to monitor my documents and program source code subdirectories on several machines and when a change was noted, it would copy the files to a set of USB drives I had connected to a Linksys NAS controller.
The idea being that if there was a fire or other emergency, I'd just grab the external USB drives and run out the door.
I'm pulling a blank on the name, sorry.
Psychosis at 10
Film at 11
Those who do not remember the past, are doomed to repeat it.
Those who do not remember the past, cannot build upon it.
|
|
|
|
|
Don't worry at all, now I've already decided to follow up the suggestion of using Robocopy, it works fast and well.
Thank you!
|
|
|
|
|
I have the same arrangement. I use a simple .NET command-line utility I wrote. It copies only newer files of a directory (with subdirectories) specified on the command line, and has an option to delete files that no longer exist on the source, and another option to ignore directories with certain names (for cache and temp files). I could probably upload the source, if you want. However, it seems slow, possibly because it completely scans the directory and subdirectories as it goes, and puts out a message about files it did not copy. I did that, because sometimes it was just sitting there, and I wouldn't have known otherwise what was going on or where it stopped, if it failed. And while it is fine for me, since I make shortcuts for the directories I often work in and run the appropriate one when I am finished with a task, the rest of the household cannot be expected to have the discipline to run it regularly, and the de facto head of household insists that all computers be turned off at night, unless a special exception is made. So, I am still looking for the perfect tool. But, so far, what is great about my own utility, is that I am in total control of it, and it is simple enough that it is easy to make relevant changes with a text editor and recompile if necessary.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, that is a good option, but in my case and for my requirements robocopy will do: super-fast and well...
I'm happier than a clam...
Thank you for posting
|
|
|
|
|
I can recommend SyncBack, it is easy to use and has more options than you'll ever need.
(just get version 3.2.26, latest version has cluttered options interface)
http://i40.tinypic.com/2a6j9zl.png
Haven't tried FreeFileSync yet.
|
|
|
|
|
I'll go with Robocopy as some others suggested. I've tried it and I'm really happy with the results.
Thank you for posting!
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Cambridge Guide to English Usage wrote: Historically speaking, both ain’t and aren’t are probably descended from an’t, recorded during the late C17 as the regular contraction. Sound changes of the C18 affected the pronunciation of the vowel "a" before nasal consonants, raising it in some dialects, and lowering and retracting it in others. While ain’t is a product of the first process, aren’t represents the second in terms of British (r-less) pronunciation – though not in general American. If only an’t was still available, it would avoid the grammatical discomfort and provide a nonstigmatized alternative to ain’t.
So, I am clear now then, ain't I? 
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, you are literally clear [^].
yours, Bill
~
“This isn't right; this isn't even wrong." Wolfgang Pauli, commenting on a physics paper submitted for a journal
|
|
|
|
|
So, it seems, were some other "chaps":
Bill's link provided: Good writers have used “literally” nonliterally as far back as the 18th century. Charles Dickens used it. So did James Joyce, Louisa May Alcott, F. Scott Fitzgerald and Vladimir Nabokov.
... (and) ...
If you’re hearing the nonliteral “literally” or “irregardless” or “ain’t” enough to annoy you, that’s a case for including them in dictionaries, not against it.
|
|
|
|
|
I pity the fool who doesn't have enough brainpower to use literally figuratively.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
No, you an't.
This message is manufactured from fully recyclable noughts and ones. To recycle this message, please separate into two tidy piles, and take them to your nearest local recycling centre.
Please note that in some areas noughts are always replaced with zeros by law, and many facilities cannot recycle zeroes - in this case, please bury them in your back garden and water frequently.
|
|
|
|
|
Yay 
So I am conversant!!
|
|
|
|
|
Better ain't it than innit.
---------------------------------
Obscurum per obscurius.
Ad astra per alas porci.
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur.
|
|
|
|
|
Innit the truth.
This message is manufactured from fully recyclable noughts and ones. To recycle this message, please separate into two tidy piles, and take them to your nearest local recycling centre.
Please note that in some areas noughts are always replaced with zeros by law, and many facilities cannot recycle zeroes - in this case, please bury them in your back garden and water frequently.
|
|
|
|
|
Word
---------------------------------
Obscurum per obscurius.
Ad astra per alas porci.
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: a nonstigmatized alternative to ain’t.
"Aren't" ain't stigmatised in my book. Ugh! I can't believe I just used "ain't" [spits repeatedly]...
Pedantic? No, just precise in my ways.
- I would love to change the world, but they won’t give me the source code.
|
|
|
|
|
I think my ain'ter ain't ain'ting anymore. It must is stuck because I ain't able to make any sense of the above. Must shake my head vigorously to see if I ain't able to shake it loose! 
|
|
|
|
|
Herbisaurus wrote: If only an’t was still available
Standards at Cambridge have certainly plummeted, if they no longer know how to form a subjunctive.
Herbisaurus wrote: it would avoid the grammatical discomfort and provide a nonstigmatized alternative to ain’t
... But would cause other problems, e.g:
ant -projecthelp
Does that mean it ain't not helpful to the project?
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Ain't that a fact! You sho' is!
|
|
|
|
|
More species per hectare than in all of North America!!!
Protect the Yasuni national park?[^] perhaps some other time 
Ecuador abandons rain forest protection to pay its China debts.
I don't blame them, I am just deeply saddened ...
Will our kids have a world at all to live in, and if so, what sort of world will it be, ?  every unrecoverable resource of the world gets ruined at one pace of another in order to make someone temporarily rich.
* That's even without counting the (presumably) natural disasters like the currently ongoing Yosemite Fire[^]
--
If money is your hope for independence, you cannot reach it.
Being loved gives you strength,
while loving gives you courage.
modified 25-Aug-13 5:38am.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
