FreeNAS vs Backblaze in long term

[Squar0L]

Now that Black Friday is on us, I wonder if I should buy more HDD or start using BackBlaze. This is my situation: I'm backing up two Macs with 500GB disks on each on time machine to a 4TB NAS. There are about 1TB of long-term archives, very infrequently accessed. My bad is that the NAS has a single drive. I see three options:

1. Do nothing. It will risk losing my long-term archives. Mac TM backups considered ephemeral. Cost is $0.
2. Beef up NAS to proper redundancy with 2 more 4TB HDD. Do not address storage growth. Costs $300.
3. Use current 4TB NAS as quick local TM backup and archive cache, delegate replication and long-term storage to BackBlaze. I have 250mbps down/10 up Internet. Costs an average $150 a year.

It seems #3 is the way to go, I wonder if I missed any important point.

 

[hescominsoon]

do both...freenas can use backblaze as a backup target...point your machines to freenas as their local backup then have backblaze as the backup target for your freenas. You then have proper redundancy for the local backups AND cloud backups to boot.

Here's how it goes down:
First your costs are going to be lower than 150/yr
https://www.backblaze.com/b2/cloud-storage-pricing.html

start with number 3.
Save the money for the second HDD then execute number 2.
From what i read you have 4TB of storage with 1TB of archives. You have 4x growth factor right there...you will be fine for a while.