Your Code42 renewal notice showed up with different news this year. New sales stopped at the end of 2025. Support ends at the end of 2026. After that, your backup archives get deleted.
So you start looking for a replacement, and the first name that comes up is CrashPlan.
Makes sense. Same lineage. Familiar interface. Probably assumes it’s the safe, low-effort choice, since it’s basically still Code42, right?
Not quite. And that assumption is worth slowing down on before it makes the decision for you.
CrashPlan and Code42 stopped being the same company in 2022
Code42 didn’t rebrand into CrashPlan. It sold it.
In 2022, Code42 spun off its backup business to Mill Point Capital, a private equity firm, and kept the name Code42 for what remained: Incydr, its insider risk and data loss prevention product. The backup product you knew went with the spinoff and became CrashPlan Group, a separate company under separate ownership with its own board, its own P&L, and its own reasons for making decisions.
Code42 itself was later acquired by Mimecast, which is why the backup add-on still bundled with Incydr is now the thing getting discontinued.
Two different companies. Two different endings. One of them just happens to still have “Code42” written all over your IT team’s institutional memory.
Why that matters more than it sounds like it should
If CrashPlan were still part of Code42, you could reasonably treat this as an internal product transition. A new plan, maybe a new UI, but the same company standing behind the decision.
It isn’t that. CrashPlan is a separate company that stands to gain from every Code42 customer who defaults to them without comparing alternatives. That’s not a knock on CrashPlan. It’s just how the incentive is built. A company selling you the “next step” isn’t the same thing as a neutral party recommending your best option.
Which is exactly why CrashPlan has built migration tooling specifically aimed at capturing displaced Code42 customers. It’s a smart move on their part. It’s also a reason to look closer, not a reason to skip the evaluation.
The 5TB cap nobody’s mentioning
Here’s something worth checking before you assume CrashPlan is a like-for-like replacement: some of its plans now cap storage at 5TB.
If you were on Code42 for straightforward, unlimited endpoint backup, that’s a meaningful change, not a rounding error. Plenty of IT teams don’t find out about a storage ceiling until they hit it, usually mid-migration, usually at the worst possible time to discover a gap.
Ask directly. Get the number in writing. Don’t assume “backup” means the same thing across two different companies just because one of them used to own the other.
“Enterprise data resilience” is not the same pitch as “backup”
CrashPlan has also been repositioning its messaging, moving from straightforward backup language toward broader “enterprise data resilience” positioning.
That’s not necessarily bad. It might be exactly what some organizations need. But it’s a different product story than the one you signed up for with Code42, and different stories tend to come with different pricing, different complexity, and different things bundled in whether you asked for them or not.
If what you actually need is dependable endpoint backup, a platform that’s busy becoming something bigger isn’t automatically the simpler choice. Sometimes it’s the more expensive one wearing a more ambitious name.
The question worth asking before you default to anything
Not just about CrashPlan. About whatever you’re evaluating next.
Who owns this company, and what are they optimizing for? What happens to my data and my pricing if this company gets acquired, repositioned, or sunset the way Code42’s backup product just was? Is this the vendor I’m choosing on the merits, or the one I’m choosing because switching again sounds exhausting?
That last one is real, and nobody should pretend it isn’t. Migration fatigue is a legitimate reason people make worse decisions than they would otherwise. It’s also exactly the moment worth a second look, not a shortcut.
What we’d suggest instead
Compare CrashPlan against your actual requirements, not against the assumption that it’s the default successor. Ask about storage limits in writing. Ask what “enterprise data resilience” costs versus what plain backup used to cost. And give yourself enough runway to compare more than one option, because a rushed decision made under a vendor’s deadline is usually the vendor’s deadline working exactly as intended.
If you want a second option in that comparison, we put together a migration guide that walks through what a Code42 replacement looks like on Backblaze specifically, including a realistic week-by-week timeline that doesn’t leave you without protected data at any point in the switch. Backblaze Computer Backup runs a lightweight native client and deploys silently through the MDM tools most IT teams already use, so the evaluation itself is quick even if the decision takes longer. It’s not the only option out there. It’s just one worth putting next to the others before you pick anything.
Migrating off Code42 and want to see how the timeline actually works? Talk to our team about what it would take to move your environment to Backblaze.
