INTERACT FORUM
More => Old Versions => JRiver Media Center 21 for Windows => Topic started by: JimH on June 06, 2016, 07:33:30 pm
-
Would you trust JRiver to backup your settings to the Cloud?
Advantages:
If you lost them or the disk they are on, we could help you get running again.
If you added a new machine or switched to another machine, it would be easy to transfer them.
If you wanted to set up MC and share that setup with a friend, this would help.
Disadvantages:
If we worked at it, we could see your filenames and metadata.
If we were hacked, someone else might be able to see the same.
----
We're already doing something similar with Doctor Who and it hasn't created any problems.
-
i would trust JRiver for sure, and i see some advantages for sure.
feel free to hack my filenames and metadata. i've spent literally thousands of hours on it...would be nice if someone actually cared enough to look for it :D
-
In theory a good idea. So far, though, play doctor has seemed very strange and hard to use. From my perspective. Just being honest.
Brian.
-
Hard to use?
Maybe you mean Doctor Who.
If you have a problem, please start a new thread.
-
Not a matter of trust, just not something that would interest me. I'd rather see JRiver put the time and resources somewhere else.
-
What happens if you are subpoenaed? Do you even want to entertain that scenario?
Long story short, I'm OK with program settings being backed up but not sure if metadata is necessarily a good idea. Most of the reputable services that store customer data will allow the customer to retain their own encryption keys. I would be hard-pressed to allow an online service that didn't provide this. I suppose a private key is less cumbersome to manage than an entire library backup, but not by much.
Five years ago this wouldn't have even crossed my mind but times have changed.
-
The backup would be the same file that MC currently saves as a backup of your library. Whatever is in it would be what we'd store, so that you could download it and restore it.
I'd be flattered if somebody subpoenaed JRiver, but I would say no.
-
Not a matter of trust, just not something that would interest me. I'd rather see JRiver put the time and resources somewhere else.
-
Hard to use?
Maybe you mean Doctor Who.
If you have a problem, please start a new thread.
Yes, I mean Dr. Who. Sorry to have sidetracked the thread. I'm not concerned, so I'll leave it at this until I decide it's worth pursuing.
Brian.
-
My main music system does not normally communicate outside my local network.
How about a choice - backup to cloud, backup locally, backup to both the cloud and locally.
-
If each user chooses what is stored, then it sounds like a good idea. I'm thinking it would at least be great for most users to backup their photo library.
-
While I trust JRiver not to take advantage, I'd rather see JRiver put the time and resources somewhere else.
I have a robust backup system at home. That includes a backup of the MC backups.
If I want to backup the MC library to the Cloud, I can easily just copy a backup to OneDrive, encrypted or not. I could also automate that if I wished.
The capability may be of interest to non-technical users. But would they even remember that such a backup existed, and if so, how to access it? There are many threads where the restore of a backup would solve a user's problem, but they don't even recognise the solution or existing capability.
-
MC keeps my FTP login details.
This is very handy for me. I like that. I wish that Doctor Who would similarly store my login credentials and 'just log me in'.
Last time I checked (long time ago) MC stored these in the registry in plain text. This never bothered me as my PC is secure, as are the backups.
However, I would not be thrilled about sending that info into the cloud.
Are these details still stored in plain text?
-
I don't have an issue with the trust, but I already send my backups to Crashplan and don't see it as much of a benefit.
-tm
-
I've got everything already on an automatic cloud backup (Crashplan). I would also prefer to see JRiver resources focused elsewhere. (Like better documentation - it took an inordinate amount of time to find some info on using booleans in the expression language last night. A (very) simple thing, but I needed to validate how MC does it and it was tough. It needs to be easier).