We performed a comparison between OpenText Data Protector and Veritas NetBackup based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Backup and Recovery solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.
"The most valuable feature of Data Protector is its integration with VMware. A lot of software these days integrates with VMware, and you can run some of these things on virtual machines. You can even have your backup manager running on a virtual machine and use physical managers to move data around. Their VMware integration isn't too bad, but Commvault has that feature, and many other backup products do."
"Integration with HP storage is a very strong point for Micro Focus Data Protector. It is the best solution for general operations like backup and restore. Zero downtime backup (ZDB) is one very important feature, which is basically the integration with the storage array. It is a very strong feature. We're using storage with snapshots with this integration."
"The command-line interface is user-friendly and well documented in the reference guide."
"It works excellently only with Oracle."
"The file system backup (by far, the most used) is the most valuable feature."
"Backup of SAP/Oracle -- they are more robust than the competition."
"Data Protector's GUI is the most useful feature."
"What I like the most about this solution is that I can change and access the Oracle backup file."
"The troubleshooting is very good."
"I like that it's enterprise-capable. It can handle multiple operating systems. It can handle multiple database types. It can handle a lot of different backup use cases. It's flexible."
"Ease of installing, configuring, upgrading, and troubleshooting."
"Its most valuable features are flexibility and reliability."
"The documentation is good."
"This product is flexible enough to allow for backing up data from physical machines, as well as from your cloud environment."
"What I like most is it is a professional product. It supports all kinds of technologies, and I consider it one of the best backup products available."
"We are quite satisfied with the performance and reliability of the NetBackup product. When it comes to specific features, the most valuable is the Instant Recovery feature, which we call "short-term IR". Instant Recovery allows users to spin up backup images and bring back any VM instantly."
"Micro Focus are improving Data Protector with every new version and since we began undergoing training with the latest version we have not faced any real challenges yet. However, their support does need to be improved, in my opinion. In certain critical cases that we've had, they did not provide a satisfactory level of support."
"VMware backup integration and cloud recovery is lacking."
"Other tools seem to be easier to use."
"We have a lot of requests for the Micro Focus team, particularly in terms of the Japanese data pattern, as it's not as good now. The Japanese data pattern accuracy of the Micro Focus Data Protector needs to be improved because there are a lot of false negatives and false positives. We are currently testing this and our product team has been communicating with the Micro Focus team."
"VM backups needs to be improved. They need to make it similar to the way Veeam and Commvault are doing the virtual backups."
"This solution is not scalable."
"In general, you can say that Micro Focus Data Protector is behind in capabilities when compared with other backup solutions, such as Commvault, Symantec, NetBackup, but it is very strong for certain use cases such as array integration. We are using it in production even now. There should be some kind of cloud integration and archiving solutions. I think this is the area they need to focus on."
"The scheduler setup could be better. We are facing some issues scheduling the job based on our requirements."
"The product is not able to keep up with other competitors in the market."
"Its integration with Nutanix and technical support can be improved."
"It gets a lot of new features, but improvements in basic functionality are often sacrificed for a shiny new bullet point to put on sales presentations."
"There is a big change in Veritas. In the past, we could easily change servers or appliances and continue working by restoring the catalog. We could change servers from Linux to Linux or Linux to Solaris and perform catalog restores to continue working. But with the new version, we are forced to engage Veritas' professional services, which is too expensive."
"Data restoration from Veritas NetBackup is quite slow. I would also like documentation that I can share with my technical team."
"The most common problem is the backup failures over the weekend. We have to troubleshoot and sometimes do restores and then we have trouble doing some of the restores."
"The restoration method and the compression ratio need improvement."
"The solution could have a more clear dashboard about the license and the operation status."
OpenText Data Protector is ranked 24th in Backup and Recovery with 100 reviews while Veritas NetBackup is ranked 5th in Backup and Recovery with 112 reviews. OpenText Data Protector is rated 7.6, while Veritas NetBackup is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of OpenText Data Protector writes "User-friendly, competitive, agent-based, and easy to manage". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Veritas NetBackup writes "Efficient data recovery and replication features ". OpenText Data Protector is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Commvault Cloud, Symantec Data Loss Prevention, HPE StoreOnce and Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention, whereas Veritas NetBackup is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Rubrik, Veritas NetBackup Appliance, Veritas Backup Exec and Azure Backup. See our OpenText Data Protector 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.
