Though Backblaze is pretty good at what it does and you can set your own encryption key, if that's the concern.
[1] https://help.backblaze.com/hc/en-us/articles/360038171794-Wh...
Oddly, SpiderOak has been a background go-to for years and always worked smoothly for backing up everything I select in a wholesale way, keeping a fairly clear record of what was saved, removed or moved, and adjusting immediately to any file changes or deletes I do. The SO interface is shitty and often freezes, and lacks many basic features like being able to see file sizes or scrolling through long file lists easily, but at least overall, I can quickly and easily see when backups are happening, how they're being done and what's being saved. Also, for restoring files, it's surprisingly fast despite a reputation held by many that it's slow.
Hard disagree. The jankiness of their software was what made me cancel my sub after several years. Firstly it doesn't follow the OS date and number formatting. It's a minor thing, but it's so annoying having to parse the dumb M/D/Y format and comma thousands separator etc (being da-DK). It's not a deal breaker, but on the other hand, it's such a low-hanging thing that most other software gets right immediately.
But far more importantly, the BB client would some times just decide to re-upload several hundred gigabytes of data that I know for sure didn't change, which makes me wonder if it's just the client being retarded or if the data got lost server-side. And it takes absolutely forever to detect USB harddrives being plugged in. And its log files will grow to absurd sizes, and you're not allowed to purge them or the client will become brain damaged. And one time I needed to do a restore, it took literal days for BB to prepare it and I had to get support involved. I feel I just can't trust the BB stack, the client being the weakest link by far, and backup I can't trust is worthless.