We performed a comparison between Azure Backup and Veritas NetBackup based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Azure Backup slightly nudges out Veritas NetBackup in this comparison. Azure Backup is a more straightforward solution to learn, use, and manage, and provides some impressive next-gen cloud capabilities. Veritas is very complex to learn and manage. Additionally, it is lacking in some basic cloud functionalities, which makes the solution seem a bit dated.
"It's useful, it works, and it's fairly reliable."
"The most valuable feature is the ease in which it backs up our data."
"It is a stable solution...The product is worth the money you pay for it."
"We are happy with this product and have not found any issues while using it."
"The MARS agent makes it easy to use."
"All of the core features are valuable to us."
"It's very simple to configure which is very useful. It's not complex to configure it."
"First of all, you can schedule a backup for the client. You can schedule it as you like. You can also control the bandwidth, so the backup will not utilize. The internet will depend on the bandwidth."
"The VM portal and the CloudCatalyst are two of the solution's most valuable features."
"I like NetBackup's anomaly detection and Linux storage features."
"I like the virtual server backup."
"We were evaluating other products and getting confused between Commvault and Veritas NetBackup. The one reason that we started with Veritas NetBackup is the pricing of the license. There's no other reason from a technical perspective or even operation or capability of the two software. The main reason we chose Veritas NetBackup was that in our use case it is more cost-effective."
"The solution offers very good storage efficiency, so there's excellent compression and deduplication within the product that our clients really appreciate."
"The solution is easy to scale."
"There's a very nice central console for the administration of all of the instances."
"The deduplication feature is useful. Deduplication and compression features are what I like about NetBackup."
"Technical support is in need of improvement."
"It would be beneficial to receive alert messages if something isn't configured correctly, for instance, if service principal names are missing, a message could prompt you to set them up."
"It doesn't have the option to have a backup from the database. It has backup for the files, folders, and backup only the whole virtual machine. But if I need to do a backup from the Oracle database, from an Exchange server or from SharePoint, this ability isn't there. There is no application backup."
"I once tried restoring a Linux environment, and the size of the Linux VM or the data disk was really huge. It took a really long time to restore the environment and send the data from the storage to the disk. It took around 25 to 30 minutes, which was much longer than I anticipated. They can improve the duration of such restore operations. In the next release, it would also be good if they could reduce the duration for transferring the data from their storage to the actual storage while creating a virtual machine. They can reduce the duration or increase the data transfer rate."
"I believe more options could be available to understand better what's happening in the system. Additionally, automating the client updates and connector updates would be beneficial. Updating the connector from time to time can be challenging, and it could be made more transparent and straightforward for users. Moreover, another drawback lies in the time it takes to test full data backup recovery. Deploying a full recovery takes longer. We need to allocate a longer period for complete data recovery to establish the environment again."
"We would like to see some kind of notification given to the user that a file was not synchronized well or what may have happened."
"On-prem can be complex to set up but the cloud is simple."
"There is a limitation of 99 files restores per day which means that we can't complete a huge file restore. We would like Azure to increase the number of the possible file restorations."
"We had some issues with the hardware backup appliance."
"The licensing costs could be more affordable."
"I have been involved in upgrades. They have not been straightforward. Some of them have required us to make changes to our architecture and production environment."
"Veritas NetBackup is an expensive solution, and its pricing could be improved."
"The SQL Server backup features are not up to date."
"The implementation process could be simplified to make it quicker."
"It's a little bit complex to manage."
"Improvements can be made to the service by providing better and more competitive ratios on data backups. The functionality for backups is there with Veritas, but I would like to see them optimize and enhance this feature more."
Azure Backup is ranked 9th in Backup and Recovery with 51 reviews while Veritas NetBackup is ranked 5th in Backup and Recovery with 112 reviews. Azure Backup is rated 7.8, while Veritas NetBackup is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Azure Backup writes "Straightforward to set up and manage and allows us to monitor all backups in one place". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Veritas NetBackup writes "Efficient data recovery and replication features ". Azure Backup is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Rubrik, Commvault Cloud, Acronis Cyber Protect and Cohesity DataProtect, whereas Veritas NetBackup is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Rubrik, Veritas NetBackup Appliance, Veritas Backup Exec and Dell NetWorker. See our Azure Backup vs. Veritas NetBackup report.
See our list of best Backup and Recovery vendors.
We monitor all Backup and Recovery reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.