IIRC You can have them send you a harddrive with your data on it and you'll get the cost of the drive refunded if you send it back to them within 90 days or so.
Absolutely! We've been using it as a special remote backend for our multi-TB git-annex repos, and it has been both painless and cheap. They have supported integrations for HashBackup and Rclone, and you can roll your own with their S3-ish (though not straight compatible) API. They have recently added native snapshots as well.
That said, as others have mentioned, b2's value differentiator is in cold storage. For us, it's largely insurance against failure of our other backup modalities. If you are pulling a lot of data back on a regular basis, the pricepoint is much more in line with the top tier providers.
Last I looked, the Free software python client worked fine. It was off to a bit of a rough start in the alpha release - but then quickly got some love.
Note that I for now tend to mirror data between servers/vps' I control/rent, so I haven't really used b2 in anger.
Keep in mind that most "unlimited" backup systems have one or more gotchas. Like:
* horribly inefficient clients written in java
* annoying retention policies
* limited compatibility, often no linux
* bandwidth throttling
* IOP throttling etc.
* horrible restore times
However if you skip that an pay as you go you typically get much more control, much more compatibility (including linux), and much better performance. Like say using S3 or Backblaze's B2.
It will be great if it can be used for individual backup needs with the help of an awesome desktop app like their desktop consumer backup app. (Arq doesn't fit my needs).
I've done the opposite. For me it doesn't matter how fast the uploads are (within reason), it matters whether I can restore reasonably quickly if something craps out. CP does have a disadvantage though: their client is written in Java and if you have a lot of files it takes up a ton of RAM.