Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 9th Dec 2009 23:28 UTC
Permalink for comment 398714
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 22:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 13:30 UTC, submitted by JRepin
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 22:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 15:53 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 22:43 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 21:50 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:15 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:11 UTC, submitted by Drumhellar
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2008-08-19
For a contradictory point of view, look at it this way - Google backs up the data stored on their servers. Most users *don't* backup the data on their personal machines, or if they do, it's to DVDs or an external hard disk sitting next to the machine. Safe from a hardware failure, but useless in the event of a disaster (a fire, say) that destroys originals and backups alike.
So for the average user, Google is a much safer place to store their data. Most users don't have redundant off-site backups, distributed across the world. Google does.