Tape is dead in most small business already. There's just no point in it. Putting all your eggs in one tape-format basket means that when you have a fire, not only do you have to spend days getting your data back, you've also got to pay a small fortune for the machine that can do that (if those drives even exist any more).
Extended NAS systems are what I see taking over from tape. Automatic network replication to a copy that then gets marked read-only, forwarded and verified to other NAS further down the line, etc. Offsite backup can be as simple as taking a NAS home for the smaller outfits, or mirroring to an off-site NAS or cloud storage.
Sure, one NAS is not "backup" on its own. You don't want to be able to overwrite written data automatically, But if you have enough of them, they become very reliable at a cheaper pricepoint than handling tape backups. This means you can buy more of them, and buy "more" reliability.
If your data is mirrored this way, in enough places on devices that don't automatically modify themselves to the very latest data, then you have backups. The old-farts of IT like to tell you otherwise, and bring up "RAID is not backup". But, sorry, at scale, and managed as such, it actually is. Especially when you have a RAID of RAIDs that you manage and cycle and secure properly
And buying something of that scale is something that a small business can do much easier with spinning disks than they can with tape. For the cost of the last tape drive and initial tapes, I can buy half a dozen NAS devices of larger size that - in a pinch - I can run VM storage from directly (iSCSI, etc.) if I want.
Restore times are better. Capacity is much better. The automation is much easier. Networking is so much easier. Restore is so much more "obvious" if your network guy suddenly dies.
There are concerns, but so long as you are considering them, they are rarely barriers. Most places do not need to keep data for dozens and dozens of years, and offline retention for most drives is actually stupidly impressive. Those that do generally cycle backups onto new media anyway, so nothing's changed there.
But drives are scaling SO MUCH faster than tape that it's stupendous. Hell, tape is often within range of SSD storage (not that I'd trust retention on that without a lot of redundant backups until the tech matures properly). And you can literally pop down to the local computer shop and buy a NAS that will backup your entire small business network - something you can't really do with tape. Do that a couple of times a year and you have a backup that's probably superior to whatever you had before.
I work in schools. The previous school had tape but it was a "last resort" backup. We never restored from one in 5 years despite two server failures. Always, there was a NAS or even just a drive that had the data available which could get us up and running NOW, this second, rather than 8 hours down the line. By the end of that employment, we'd basically abandoned tape use as anything other than putting one in the fire safe next to the drive backups (which were mirrored to encrypted cloud storage). The IT audit I had when they were trying to justify pruning every member of staff? Couldn't find a fault in the backup strategy and was able to see more copies of the data than they actually believed necessary.
The school I work for now - they employed me because their last guy didn't backup (to tape or anything else) and they lost the entire data and had to send live drives off to a data recovery firm. My prime concern has always been not repeating his mistakes, and showing that their data is safe. I NAS everything and there isn't a tape around.
It's pointless to worry about tape and expensive drives when you can just slap a NAS in each building, mirror to them as appropriate, mirror that to an off-site NAS, mirror that to the cloud, etc. The extra space available means you can store more historical copies in the case of a rollback.
And even from personal experience - every drive I have ever had eventually ends up getting copied onto the bigger, newer drive I just bought and takes up less than 10% of it. As such, I have brand-new drives that are still hosting entire copies-of-copies-of-copies-of-copies-of-copies of my entire hard drive from 10 years ago. And each copy is there because it's come from the copy I did to a bigger drive. And then copied that to a bigger drive. I still have the original disks, but I'll tell you where I go to when I want a file I know I have and want to make sure it will work first time.
Properly managed NAS is, as far as I'm concerned, vastly exceeding the definition of "good enough" for backups for everywhere I've ever worked.