<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Another backup failure: Carbonite</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.brentozar.com/archive/2009/03/another-backup-failure-carbonite/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.brentozar.com/archive/2009/03/another-backup-failure-carbonite/</link>
	<description>Your technology pain-relief experts.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 16:37:59 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Commander Joans</title>
		<link>http://www.brentozar.com/archive/2009/03/another-backup-failure-carbonite/comment-page-2/#comment-33736</link>
		<dc:creator>Commander Joans</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 23 Oct 2011 18:32:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.brentozar.com/?p=2965#comment-33736</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m seeing a lot of these hiccups and losses with the big traditional backup providers.  I&#039;d recommend giving www.absorb.com a lookup.

They send an appliance over to you that manages all of your scheduling and if you do have a loss on your side you have the option of pulling the data off of the local equipment.  Its a little less stressful than handling a 4 day online download. There is an added level of security too because the equipment they send talks to the remote backup provider through mac address security.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m seeing a lot of these hiccups and losses with the big traditional backup providers.  I&#8217;d recommend giving <a href="http://www.absorb.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.absorb.com</a> a lookup.</p>
<p>They send an appliance over to you that manages all of your scheduling and if you do have a loss on your side you have the option of pulling the data off of the local equipment.  Its a little less stressful than handling a 4 day online download. There is an added level of security too because the equipment they send talks to the remote backup provider through mac address security.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jonathan Colvin</title>
		<link>http://www.brentozar.com/archive/2009/03/another-backup-failure-carbonite/comment-page-2/#comment-32101</link>
		<dc:creator>Jonathan Colvin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 Jul 2011 18:46:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.brentozar.com/?p=2965#comment-32101</guid>
		<description>I use carbonite and my default browser is Chrome. It works just fine.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I use carbonite and my default browser is Chrome. It works just fine.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jack</title>
		<link>http://www.brentozar.com/archive/2009/03/another-backup-failure-carbonite/comment-page-2/#comment-31869</link>
		<dc:creator>Jack</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 Jul 2011 08:27:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.brentozar.com/?p=2965#comment-31869</guid>
		<description>&quot;Jack, I found the workaround for making Carbonite back up all extensions after 30 seconds of Googling&quot;

Please advise me how

Please also advise how to use Carbonite to backup and restore EFS files.

Also how to use Carbonite on a machine that does not use IE as its default browser etc.

You will find, as most Carbonite users have already, that things start to go badly wrong - as Carbonite incorrectly make assumptions about the configuration of the PC.

I had to reconfigure my PC just so Carbonite would work at all.

Browser applications are not as robust as compiled windows applications - they are designed for multi-client wan/internet applications (at which they are great) creating a single-client (IE) local-machine web application like Carbonite has is a very foolish decision - the end result is a very fragile UI plagued with security problems, performance issues and bugs = Kludge.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Jack, I found the workaround for making Carbonite back up all extensions after 30 seconds of Googling&#8221;</p>
<p>Please advise me how</p>
<p>Please also advise how to use Carbonite to backup and restore EFS files.</p>
<p>Also how to use Carbonite on a machine that does not use IE as its default browser etc.</p>
<p>You will find, as most Carbonite users have already, that things start to go badly wrong &#8211; as Carbonite incorrectly make assumptions about the configuration of the PC.</p>
<p>I had to reconfigure my PC just so Carbonite would work at all.</p>
<p>Browser applications are not as robust as compiled windows applications &#8211; they are designed for multi-client wan/internet applications (at which they are great) creating a single-client (IE) local-machine web application like Carbonite has is a very foolish decision &#8211; the end result is a very fragile UI plagued with security problems, performance issues and bugs = Kludge.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Aleksey S.</title>
		<link>http://www.brentozar.com/archive/2009/03/another-backup-failure-carbonite/comment-page-2/#comment-31860</link>
		<dc:creator>Aleksey S.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 Jul 2011 19:43:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.brentozar.com/?p=2965#comment-31860</guid>
		<description>Jack, I found the workaround for making Carbonite back up all extensions after 30 seconds of Googling.

I&#039;ve never had Javascript errors on Carbonite on 3 computers I&#039;ve used it on.

The whole &quot;not everybody uses IE&quot; debate is so 1998. Whether you like it or not, it&#039;s become a part of Windows, and there are many projects that rely on its presence for providing simple functionality.

It&#039;s functioned fine for me on Internet Explorer versions 6 to 9, as no doubt intended - there&#039;s no &quot;forcing&quot; users to do anything, and it never forgot my preferences.

And again, I don&#039;t know what you mean by &quot;low quality cludge approach&quot;, because the heart of Carbonite is clearly efficient. It is more optimized than Mozy (by a long shot) and more optimized than Backblaze. It is as close to distraction-free backup as I&#039;ve ever found. 

An &quot;experienced&quot; developer should be able to see past the GUI part of the product and understand where the real work was being done.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jack, I found the workaround for making Carbonite back up all extensions after 30 seconds of Googling.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve never had Javascript errors on Carbonite on 3 computers I&#8217;ve used it on.</p>
<p>The whole &#8220;not everybody uses IE&#8221; debate is so 1998. Whether you like it or not, it&#8217;s become a part of Windows, and there are many projects that rely on its presence for providing simple functionality.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s functioned fine for me on Internet Explorer versions 6 to 9, as no doubt intended &#8211; there&#8217;s no &#8220;forcing&#8221; users to do anything, and it never forgot my preferences.</p>
<p>And again, I don&#8217;t know what you mean by &#8220;low quality cludge approach&#8221;, because the heart of Carbonite is clearly efficient. It is more optimized than Mozy (by a long shot) and more optimized than Backblaze. It is as close to distraction-free backup as I&#8217;ve ever found. </p>
<p>An &#8220;experienced&#8221; developer should be able to see past the GUI part of the product and understand where the real work was being done.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Page Caching using disk: enhanced
Object Caching 530/534 objects using disk: basic

Served from: www.brentozar.com @ 2012-02-08 22:41:58 -->
