Crashplan is still cheaper for storage larger than 400GB.
Crashplan+ Unlimited is USD 2.92/month if you take the 4 year package. When I upload 300GB to Amazon and pay 0.01 * 300 = USD 3/month. Amazon would be even more expensive for larger amounts of data.
Is there some fine print I'm missing with Crashplan unlimited?
Whenever I read about "Unlimited" plans (Backblaze has it as well, for $3.96 if you get a 1 year plan) I always think of things like Joyent and their "Lifetime" hosting, or AT&T and their "Unlimited" data plans. Their business plan is usually structured around people not actually using the service, and those who do use the "Unlimited" option usually end up either (A) being rate limited, or (B) having a conversation with the hosting/data provider to encourage them to transition elsewhere.
What's exciting about this, is that Amazon doesn't care _how_ much data you send them - presumably they've priced this so it's profitable at any level you wish to use. It's a sustainable model. Services like TarSnap/Arq will likely adopt this new service (Possibly offering tiered backup/archival services?).
I have (close to) zero doubt that Amazon's Glacier Archival Storage will be available 5 years from now at (probably less than) $0.01/Gigabyte/Month. They are a (reasonably) safe archival choice. Now that light users (<300 Gigabytes) have a financial incentive to move off of CrashPlan onto Amazon - it further exacerbates the challenges that "Unlimited" backup providers will face. All their least costly/most profitable may leave (or, at the very least, the new ones may chose Amazon first)
With that said - I love Backblaze (Been a user since 2008) for working data backups, rapid-online (free) restores - and I will continue to use them, but I wouldn't plan on archiving a Terabyte of Data to them for the next 20 years.
They put the provider in an adversarial relationship with the user and give them an incentive to keep you from storing data there. They will make it hard for you to use their service.
Also remember its free to recover your entire Crashplan archive (I have 500GB with them). If you wanted to recover 500GB with Glacier it would cost $200 @10MB/s (according to someones calculation further down) You have to pay for retrieval
Not totally true, you have to pay for retrieval for 1GB and upwards per month: http://aws.amazon.com/glacier/#pricing as well as 5cent per upload/retrieval request.
Crashplan+ Unlimited is USD 2.92/month if you take the 4 year package. When I upload 300GB to Amazon and pay 0.01 * 300 = USD 3/month. Amazon would be even more expensive for larger amounts of data.
Is there some fine print I'm missing with Crashplan unlimited?