Version: 2008

Crave

Comments on: Acronis miscalculates data on users' bad backup habits

Acronis misinterpreted its survey data and showed an alarming percentage of people back up only once every two or three months. But it turns out the stats aren't as bad as you think.

Add a Comment (Log in or register) (13 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next
by whizkid454 May 20, 2009 1:38 PM PDT
Those are probably consecutive percentages. For example, if you back up once a week, you also backup at least once per month, at least once per year, at least twice per year, etc. So the higher percentages should be higher than previous time frames...
Reply to this comment
by ngodong May 20, 2009 1:40 PM PDT
Yes, I thought about that too but you can't have 94.6% backup once a year AND 25.5% never back up.
by cyclingkitties May 20, 2009 2:20 PM PDT
@ngodong

You are not reading the questions carefully. 94.9% back up once a year OR LESS, which includes Never. The 5.1% left over are the 124 people who skipped the question.

There is nothing wrong with the chart or numbers at all.

I'm not Asian, but I did go to MIT, which may be why I get it...
by ngodong May 20, 2009 2:31 PM PDT
@ cyclingkitties, then the survey should say that 100% back up once a year or less, in which case what's the point of a survey?
by cyclingkitties May 20, 2009 2:46 PM PDT
As I said, some people skipped the question, and they are not counting those in the 94.9%. This is standard practice in multiple-question surveys. 75% of the respondents may answer one question, 95% answer another, and so on. It would be wrong to show each question adding up to 100%.
by cyclingkitties May 20, 2009 2:51 PM PDT
PS the better focus of this blog entry would have been the nearly 50% who back up at least once a week. In my experience, that's a pretty incredibly high number.

Your interpretation of "about 87 percent of computer users back up their data once every two or three months--way less frequently than recommended." is wrong also. What the chart shows is that about 87% of computer users back up AT LEAST once every two or three months, including the 48% who back up at least once a week or more.

In general, your entire article misunderstands and misinterprets the data and should be corrected. Not everyone reads comments.
by ngodong May 20, 2009 2:56 PM PDT
@ cyclingkitties you got it, all interpretations, including the 87% back up once every 2-3 months, were done by Acronis yes they were incorrect. That's the main reason for the blog. I think you should skip the numbers and read the text a bit :).
by cyclingkitties May 20, 2009 3:00 PM PDT
Ah, I didn't realize that first interpretation was theirs and not yours. Fine.

But you later say "I couldn't help but notice that when added up, the numbers total around 500 percent." which makes no sense. These are cumulative percentages and are not meant to be added up.
by ngodong May 20, 2009 3:06 PM PDT
@cyclingkitties , you are right, but that's just one (and most obvious) of the scenarios (it would take too long and be boring to bring up all of them -- not everyone like numbers like you :) ) to show how the chart might not make sense. I have discussed this multiple times with Acronis and we went through different ways to interpret it, none was flawless.
by upuaut May 20, 2009 2:12 PM PDT
There should be an option for 'once every more than a year' for those who back up once every 1.5,2,3,4, or 5 years, like i do.
Reply to this comment
by Jack K1 May 20, 2009 2:15 PM PDT
Back up? I back up nightly. I don't see any point in risking more than a day's worth of work. Seriously.
I image my drive monthly because I also don't have a day or two to waste rebuilding my machine. Drives fail. It's in their job description. It's like musical chairs. When the drive fails, the game is over, and whatever you had is gone, gone, gone.

Math skills? Marketing people aren't hired for their math skills. More's the pity.
Reply to this comment
by DJ_Lae May 20, 2009 2:28 PM PDT
They don't add up, but I can see how they did it. The Full and Incremental columns' percentages are calculated from the Response column. The way they're stacked is misleading, perhaps, but not incorrect. They won't add up, either, as some people will do full or incremental backups (or both).

Unless they really wanted to say how many people in each bracket performed (or didn't perform) a particular backup type, which seems weird.
Reply to this comment
by Banderasky June 2, 2009 11:10 PM PDT
I don't care about this arguement, it's just a promotion method of Acronis, you don't take notice in there is many link backing to Acronis. com, there more it's reported. the happier they are~~~
Reply to this comment
(13 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next
advertisement
advertisement

About Crave

The name says it all. Crave is our blog about gorgeous gadgets and other crushworthy stuff. If you would like to contact Crave with a tip or comment, please write to: crave@cnet.com

Add this feed to your online news reader

Crave topics

15 sites that went kaput in 2009

Web sites launch all the time, but they also shut their doors. We highlight 15 that bit the dust this year.

Top 10 news stories of the decade

Let the debate begin: Was the iPhone more important than iTunes? Was anything bigger than Google finding a great business model? CNET offers its list of the 10 most important stories of the '00s.