When comparing CrashPlan vs BackupPC, the Slant community recommends BackupPC for most people. In the question“What are the best backup programs for Linux?” BackupPC is ranked 7th while CrashPlan is ranked 12th.
Ranked in these QuestionsQuestion Ranking
You set it up once and from then it runs in the background whenever you are not using your computers (or at specified times).
Pro Supports multiple backup destinations
You can set up different files/folders to back up to specific places.
Pro Differential and incremental file backup
CrashPlan updates only that part of the file that has changed, saving bandwidth and time.
Pro Unlimited online storage
The $5/mo individual plan and the $12.50/mo family plan gets you unlimited cloud storage.
Pro Allows custom encryption keys
Custom 448 bit user-provided encryption key can be used to encrypt the backed up data in the cloud.
Pro Users can order a physical copy of their data
They will send you an external hard drive to your house.
Pro Unlimited revision history
CrashPlan saves all previous versions of a file.
Pro No need to install anything more on the backed-up PC
Pro Able to handle large amount of servers and data
The disk IO can be a bootleneck but the system itself handles even multi terabyte servers easily.
Pro Supports various platforms
Backup method is highly configurable, using local copy, ssh, rsync, SMB or custom transfer, so able to backup almost any OS supporting these.
Pro Open Source
Pro Efficient disk format
The disk format automatically deduplicates files, and optionally compress files or assist recovery with redundancy information (par2); storage disk usage is very efficient.
Pro Combining full and incremental backups into "filled" view
Backups are always viewed as a whole, regardless of the count or data content of past incrementals.
Pro Rich command line tools
Apart from the Web UI there are command line tools for doing all tasks related to the backup system.
Con Home edition discontinued
CrashPlan's home edition will be shut down on October 23, 2018. They are no longer accepting new signups or subscription renewals.
Con Popular features (local backup and trusted offsite backup) no longer available
Con Heavy client
The BackupClient is based on Java and therefore a lot more memory-intensive than most other backup solutions
Con Version 3 on-disk format is impossible to "file-copy"
V3 format uses hard-links which is almost impossble to "file-copy" (using filesystem level tools like cp or rsync) on a large system, since the hardlink management eats up vast amounts of memory (the only way to copy a backup server is to copy using a whole-disk copying method). This has been fixed in version 4 format which uses pointer files instead of hardlinks.
Con Web UI timeouts on large amount of data to be displayed
The Web UI needs large amount of time to walk a directory with thousands of entries and it may cause the webserver or client to timeout. Large directories may require the admin to use the command line tools to list or restore files or directories.