[ffistometer]

That's backup as in a second copy of a file way way Way WAY away from the original copy, therefore not a "crock" at all.
A file on Apple iDisk is much safer than a file on a hard drive attached to your Mac (i.e. Time Machine) as if there's a fire and your Mac's wiped out, your Time Machine hard drive will probably be wiped out with it, won't it?
I'm sorry but anyone who relies on a single backup copy of a REALLY important file on any type of media, thinking it's safe that way really is fooling themselves.

I feel sorry for the author of the original story, but please people, as someone who's been dealing with peoples lost data for 20-odd years, MULTIPLE COPIES ON MULTIPLE FORMATS!

What iDisk REALLY enables you to do is have multiple copies in multiple formats ON MULTIPLE SITES effortlessly, hardly “crock” at all Gandhi if you understand how to use it.

Don't RELY on the technology to make it simple for you to maintain 1 copy on what you perceive as a total incorruptible medium that's backed up 1 type of backup medium. You're living in a fool’s paradise. MULTILPE COPIES ON MULTIPLE FORMATS!

Then all you need is a bit of discipline to keep the copies regularly updated

[joem]

"The only way to guard against over-writing a working file with a corrupted version of the same file is to use Time Machine or some other backup method that makes consecutive redundant backups of all your files."

Actually, the only way to guarantee you won't lose a file is to back it up to more than one physical device, and keep the backups off line when you aren't using them. Time machine makes multiple backups if (and only if) there is extra space on the TM drive, but if the drive or anything (hardware or software) in the backup path fails, you can lose it all.

I use three external drives for backups. I plug in a drive, back up the machine, and unplug it. The next backup goes to a different drive, and a drive isn't reused until it's the oldest so I always have the last three backups available. There is no single failure that can cause data loss with this scheme.

And there's no substitute for having detailed knowledge of the way your entire system works.

[zulusafari]

It's to bad TM can't handle this. You can use as many drives as you want, but it will not use more than one at a time. I wish that TM would continue to use more than one and do incremental backups, but it cannot. Each time you attach a new drive since the last backup, it will do a whole new backup all over again, not a new incremental backup.

[bart]

This is exactly the reason for dot-Mac in the first place - to allow access to important files when you are not at home. I use iDisk to store data I accumulate when I am on the road, and want to access them from work or home later.

I DO back up certain files to iDisk from my Mac, but manually. There has never been an auto-sync which would recover corrupted files - synchronization is not backup!

[Bill1]

I agree that iDisk "sync" is not a backup and is potentially corruptible.
But what about using Apple Backup to iDisk as a fall-back? In addition to Time Machine, and regular clones (e.g. with Carbon Copy Cloner)?
That's three different and redundant formats, software, and media.

[mergatroidal]

I always bring the a file off the iDisk to Finder before editing. Why risk a glitch in transmission while an edit is in process?
Automator returns any important file back to iDisk dated name, and into three separate e-mail accounts which filter the file to a specific folder.
Time Machine is for the banks and brokerage houses. Don't need or want it.

[VdkaShaker]

I agree with multiple backups in multiple formats. However, one aspect which I haven't notcied in the posts or the article is the need for off-site backup. The cloud solutions seem pricy for full backup of data off-site. My "perfect storm" experience happened several years ago. I had a RAID1 type backup with multiple archive copies of files. Someone broke into the house and stole the drives (thankfully I had my laptop with me at the time or it would have been gone too). How much I wish I had just burned a CD or DVD and kept it at work. Lost a lot of family pictures that day.

At least TM is a huge step forward for the novice crowd who did nothing (or very little) before. Today I use TM for my internal drive. In addition, I ChronoSync important files to a second external drive. Large media files that live in extra space on my TM drive get ChronoSynced to a third external drive. Everything has two copies (at least) on two drives, and where possible I keep several archives of the files over time. Its still far from perfect, and STILL no off site. Its hard to keep up with storage needs that evovled and grow over time. I'm always chasing more space. For every Gig you use for data files it seems you need 2 or 3 more for archives of those files. I don't think people consider that when they get started.

Part of the problem is how many DVD's it would take to back it all up. I have several video files I ripped from old VHS tapes that won't fit on a DVD (maybe that's an entirely different problem I need to solve!).

Bottom line...For all my efforts I'm still looking for a better solution, and I don't feel entirely secure in my backups.