They say: “Syncing is not a backup”
I ask: “Why not?”
The product Obsidian Sync would be so much more useful, if it did backups!
Technically speaking Sync already does backups with its version history. Obsidian runs locally with local files. Sync uploads encrypted copies of local files to the server, when it notices changes. The server retains a few days to months worth of those copies. One could consider a remote backup.
So why not reinvent Sync as “Obsidian Backup Service”?
It could still sync between devices. But the emphasis would be on reliable backups.
The need
Obsidian support reminds us to backup our Obsidian files: “If you haven’t backed up your computer yet, it’s a good idea to start now!”
Unfortunately, backups of computers are difficult. There are not so many people out there who regularly backup their computers with backup services or on external drives. There are even fewer who set up network backups with rsync or git.
Backups of mobile devices are even worse. How many people have figured out a way to reliably backup mobile devices while on the road?
If Backups are that important, why not offer a service that makes it easy to backup Obsidian files?
A cross-plattform service that provided automatic fine-grained backups of local vaults, regardless of device or OS, would be nice! 
The technology
The technology would be similar to current Obsidian Sync:
- Regularly encrypt and upload versions of all current, changed and deleted files to a remote server.
- Make those versions accessible on all devices.
- Notify the user on other devices very soon, when newer versions of a file are available on the server.
- Give visual feedback, if the current status of remote backups is unknown, eg when offline or slow connection.
- Download the most recent version automatically, if it can be merged easily.
- Ask the user what to do, when the remote backup and the current local file are in conflict. Offer solutions to resolve the conflict.
- Provide a UI that clearly visualizes the status of the backup server.
There would be one major difference to Sync:
- Syncing is optional! Users who already have a third party sync service running, like iCloud, could still use all backup features. But unlike Sync it would not interfere with the existing sync service, because Backup Service would not try to download and merge changes from the backup server.
Obsidian Backup Service could still sync local vaults. But syncing would be more of a welcomed side-effect of the speedy backup generation, for those who need it. The primary goal is to retain a fine grained version history of local files on a remote server.
The business model
The promise would be different.
Whereas Obsidian Sync is a fragile thingy that needs an external safety net, Obsidian Backup Service would be the safety net.
I would pay for such a safety net.
The pricing model would be similar to Sync’s current model with quotas for online storage. I dont’t like the current pricing model for a sync use case, because it charges for file versions that are not immediately relevant for syncing. But I find it perfectly appropriate for backups, because I’d be paying exactly for what I want—backup copies of my local files.
The customers
Obsidian Backup Service would be optimized for a single-user setup with multiple devices on multiple platforms. It would not include sharing or collaboration.
I think of collaboration as a separate product—lets call it Obsidian Teams. A product for teams would need some kind management tool.
Personally I don’t think that Obsidian’s local-files-first principle and collaboration mix well. In most cases dedicated collaboration services would be the better choice, because they have user management, access management and real-time updates already up and running. Why use Obsidian, when there are plenty of other options available, like wikis, Notion, Etherpad, various online office apps, privacy-first online storage, Slack, git servers, etc.?
I think that a reliable Backup Solution would be a viable product.
Related: