Maxym, please, explain to me how a person using Home Assistant Core installation and Home Assistant Container installation will use this “addon”.
Mind you, Addons can only be installed in a Home Assistant installation that uses the Supervisor. Also keep in mind that Home Assistant Core and Home Assistant Container do not have Supervisor.
In digging further, I found another thing that confuses me and hope someone can explain.
The announcement talks about new integrations that can offer additional locations, and goes on to say “Currently, this feature is brand new 
, so no integrations offer additional locations yet.”
I took this at face value at first, then on a whim I added a CIFS storage locaiton, and it popped up as an available target for (new) backup, and it seems to work fine. Granted those are not exactly “integrations” but they are an additional location.
So what is it that makes the new backup “special” that it requires a new integration to work properly with other targets. At least NFS (presumably) and CIFS work fine now, which covers a vast majority of NAS type solutions.
So does a “new integration … additional locations” have to do something special to be backup friendly? Was CIFS’s being available to me a consequence of being HAOS and not compatible with other install methods?
Or are the “new” integrations something, well, special?
Now that the “Create backup before updating” facility has been removed is there some way to replicate the functionality, ie backup only the component that is about to be updated?
Correct, it won’t work until they install the component that is made for doing this job. Ie they can run a docker image, or script it on their own.
Isn’t it a property of those installation methods? to delegate such kind of responsibility and work to their users? Isn’t it their will? Now HA teams include maintenance feature to that installation? It’s inconsistent.
Actually, the discussion falls into the monolith vs component-based category. Unfortunately core provides no modularity. So until it will, add-ons are the only way of making it modular.
The new system needs to work with all installation methods because nabu casa offers backups to cloud. Please stop trying to find fault in the thought process to bring it into core. There’s no reason to bring the monolith talk in the release thread.
Make a new thread if you want to continue this convo.
You may be tripping over vocabulary.
Addon is a special case word in HA.
It refers to a complete program running in its own container separately from HA but able to attach to HA.
Google backup, samba backup etc. Addons are in this category.
Core and container DO NOT support addons.
You may be thinking of an Integration.
No, i can use it when i backup to my local file system, no need for NabuCasa.
Please don’t entertain replying to maxym. He is trying to stir up conspiracy theories around HA trying to get more money by offering backups at no extra charge for a nabu casa subscription. Just ignore and move on. Thanks.
Yes you can.
But the recggent changes are about built-in backup system offering cloud storage (which is paid)
I don’t know it was the NC intention. But it might look like from 3rd person perspective (incl they forced the changes). Also it might look suspicious from legal standpoint (although it’s too small business to be on the radar)
I mentioned the add-on with confidence.
For further discussion please move to Why is the backup system built into core and not an addon?
More convoluted but just do a manual partial backup of the Addon you are updating.
Thank you. I didn’t know that was possible until now.
I installed a password manager on my laptop many years ago, when the password managers started coming out, and I started using random password, since I didn’t have to remember them anymore, then my hard drive crashed, and I lost ALL my passwords. So, I’m not going to do that anymore. I’m not going to depend on something that I might need a few years from now, and when I need it, it might not be there.
I’m not even going to depend on something from a big company that might be more likely to be around in the future, for example, I was using Microsoft Home Server when it came out, and they discontinued it after a couple of years, same thing with Windows Media Center, I had a nice set-up in my family room, and they discontinued it.
So, I need something under my control, where I can be completely responsible for it.
Wayyy off topic, but is this the old WWIV sysop I remember? 
Yes.
Mine still works.
So, I’m not going to do that anymore. I’m not going to depend on something that I might need a few years from now, and when I need it, it might not be there.
KeePass. Open source, with a database file that is easily transferred around (I personally use Syncthing). Apps available for PC and for mobile devices.
So, I need something under my control
This is why I haven’t switched to BitWarden - too obfuscated, in my opinion…
“As @ChipMIK says, if you don’t like the new backup system, don’t use it.”
I didn’t say that in any way. I commented on a guy that doesnt use backups. Please stop referring to my comments if you can’t do it correctly. TY!
Backup or not, 2025 is the, by far, most far out change ever made and this done poorly. If all were as blindfolded as your ongoing comments then HA would be no where as great as it is today and the programmeres/team need feedback to acknowledge they went a bridge to far.
Then stop making noise here about something you doesnt use.
Fun fact: This topic is about backups! 
Where were your backups in the past? Where are your backups today? Did you learn anything you want to tell us? 
do you mean you are going to develop everything yourself?
of only relay on open source?
only local?
I’m not really sure what you mean, but in today’s society it’s absolutely impossible to not relay on others (companies)