Of course, either way of putting it would be engaging in lazy stereotypes about both platforms that haven't been accurate for years, if they ever really were; so let's not.

NB: I'm a very happy Arq user; I bought it because Time Machine crapped itself every couple months requiring me to recreate the backup (a pain in it's own right: 400g over wifi) and leading to a severe loss of confidence that backups were actually going to be there if I need them. I tracked it down to Time Machine gets really unhappy if you sleep your laptop while it's in the middle of a backup. However, having to check if Time Machine is running before closing the lid or being willing to run a 1-2% chance of corrupting the backup isn't really a workable state of affairs.

In a couple years, Arq hasn't eaten my backups. It's like Time Machine except written by competent people. This situation sucks but I'm sure Stefan will add enough tests.

On a digression, this is part of my increasing frustration with how shitty Apple sourced mac software is. This tiny company beats the pants off Time Machine, even including the recent screwup.