1. Silent exclusions break trust in “unlimited” backups
Backblaze quietly drops whole directory classes (e.g., .git, cloud‑synced folders) without clear notice, turning the promised “back‑up everything” into a source of surprise data loss.
“I feel that’s a systemic problem with all consumer online‑backup software: they often use the barest excuse to not back things up… at worst it’s to quietly renege on the ‘unlimited’ capacity they promised.” — Terr_ ## 2. Users demand full control and transparency
Many commenters switched to tools that let them see and configure every detail—no hidden daemons, no opaque lock‑in, and no surprise exclusions.“With restic I don’t need some kind of special server daemon… I like having the sense of options and avoiding lock‑in.” — Terr_
3. “Unlimited” is a marketing loophole, not a guarantee
The community repeatedly points out that any service advertising “unlimited” storage is inherently vulnerable to hidden caps, exclusions, or price hikes once the model becomes unprofitable.
“ANY company, and I do mean any, that offers ‘unlimited’ anything is 100 % a scam.” — massysett
4. Proper backups require clear definitions and regular restore testing
HN members stress that a true backup is simply a separate copy of data; versions, retention policies, and occasional restore drills are essential to avoid hidden corruption or loss.
“definition of the term backup by most sources is one the line of: a copy of information held on a computer that is stored separately from the computer.” — dathinab
These four themes capture the dominant concerns: loss of confidence in Backblaze’s opaque exclusions, the drive for transparent, user‑controlled backup tools, skepticism toward “unlimited” promises, and the necessity of concrete backup semantics and testing.