Azure Backup Reviews

I utilized Azure Backup for the purpose of backing up and restoring data. Specifically, I performed a recovery operation by transferring data from a single location to one of several designated locations. Our objective is to replicate the data from the original location to a secondary location, ensuring that we can restore it from the alternate site in the event of any unforeseen disruptions.

Azure Backup provides support for virtual machines. To get started, we must install the agent on the VM, allowing us to initiate backups and store the data in our designated storage. By leveraging the backup data, we can then enable the site recovery feature. Initially, we must create the site recovery configuration, where we identify the purpose and requirements of our setup. Additionally, we need to create an account and subscription to facilitate this process. Within the subscription, we gain the ability to migrate or replicate our backups from one location to another, ensuring data loss prevention measures are in place which has improved our organization's functionality.

The most valuable feature of Azure Backup is the file recovery and file vault.

Azure lacks sufficient solutions for a particular scenario, we may need to resort to using third-party applications. In such cases, these applications can be employed to facilitate backup, replication, and the efficient utilization of internet connectivity and bandwidth. They enable us to effectively manage and transfer data while ensuring optimal utilization of network resources. However, it would be a benefit if we did not have to use third-party applications for these operations.

As an additional solution for prospective clients, we can implement Digital Rights Management (DRM) or high availability measures. By setting up DRM or establishing high availability configurations, we can ensure that services remain operational even in the event of downtime. This approach guarantees uninterrupted production and minimizes any negative impact. To deliver this type of solution to clients, the vendor will need to create and provide an architecture and solution that ensures zero downtime.

I have been using Azure Backup for approximately seven years.

I rate the stability of Azure Backup a seven out of ten.

We have engineers using this solution who report to me.

We use the solution regularly and we plan to increase usage.

I rate the scalability of Azure Backup a seven out of ten.

I rate the support of Azure Backup an eight out of ten.

Positive

I have used Veeam Backup and Veritas Backup previously. I switched to Azure Backup because we are able to have flexible deployment methods.

The initial setup required some assistance. The deployment depends on the company's size and environment. 

The first stage of our deployment is accessing the client's information, such as environment size, the reason for use, and what deployment model we are interested in.

I rate the initial setup of Veeam Backup & Replication a seven out of ten.

I am able to the deployment of this solution in some cases. However, if it is a large environment I will need assistance. We need approximately two to three engineers for the deployment, but it depends on the requirements. We could need more people to assist. The engineers will have to have knowledge regarding Azure and hybrid integration. We use a third party for deployment.

We evaluated other options before choosing Azure Backup, such as Veeam Backup.

Maintenance does not necessarily require any additional review. We can calculate and plan where everything based on the scheduled downtime. If the codebase is extensive, requiring a hundred or more hours of work, it would be advisable to allocate a team of three to five engineers to handle the maintenance tasks efficiently.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate Azure Backup an eight out of ten.

We're using it as a native tool for VM-level backup.

When it comes to Azure Backup, the advantage is that it's native and it's very easy to configure. We don't require a separate tool or manage something on a separate server. At the backend, it's managed by Microsoft itself, and we don't need to manage it. 

In Avamar, the file-based restores are very quick and fast, whereas, in Azure Backup, VM restore is super easy, but if I have to do a file or a folder restore, I have to mount the entire VM image. I have to wait for some time for it to be mounted, and then I have to go inside and then check the file and copy it somewhere. It's a bit of a manual process, whereas in Avamar, you can directly select a file and folder, and it'll recover with whatever permissions you want. That's better in Avamar, and that's the only thing that's lacking in Azure. File or folder recovery is complex and time-consuming.

I've been working with Azure Backup for two years.

There is no separate tool, so there is no issue with stability. If the Avamar server goes down, all the backups will fail, whereas, in the case of Azure Backup, there is no separate tool. If there is any issue with a particular server, only that backup will fail, but there is no single point of failure in Azure Backup, which is not the case with Avamar because it has to rely on a server. I'd rate Azure Backup a ten out of ten in terms of stability.

I'd rate it a ten out of ten in terms of scalability because there is no limit. You can configure as many backups as you like. There is no limitation on storage space because it's not a separate tool. It goes to the Azure backend. They are managing it, so there is no storage limit. It's completely scalable.

The level-one support is not that good, but it's slightly better than Avamar. I'd rate them a five out of ten.

Neutral

We also use Avamar, but that can only take a file-level backup for the VMs in Azure. For a VM-level backup, we have to use a native Azure tool.

With Avamar, we have to manage the Avamar server, whereas we don't need to manage the Azure server. We just directly configure the backup of each server, and we don't have to worry about the maintenance of the tool because it's inherently native to the Azure portal. That's the biggest advantage.

I'd rate its setup a ten out of ten in terms of ease because you don't need to read anything to configure it. It's super easy like filling out a form.

The number of people required for its deployment depends on how many devices we need to configure. If we're migrating a big enterprise with hundreds or thousands of servers, we would require two or three people to manage it.

The deployment duration depends on the migration timelines. Generally, 300 or 400 can be configured in one day because it's centralized. There is a checkbox to select everything and put it once the other policy is created.

It comes with a total package of VMs and other things, so it's a bit difficult to distinguish between just the backup cost because it's an all-in-one cost. I don't manage the billing. There is a separate team that manages the billing. Overall, its cost is better because the VMs are already there, and whatever you back up, there is only the additional cost of that storage, whereas if I have to use Avamar in Azure, a separate cost is there for the Avamar server, and in addition, whatever I take as a backup, there is a separate license with Avamar for that. So, there is a double cost if we have to use Avamar in the cloud.

It's pretty easy. When you do the AZ-900 or AZ-104 course, you will understand most of it, whereas, in the case of Avamar, there is no training shared for free.

Overall, I'd rate Azure Backup an eight out of ten.

Customers nowadays are planning to migrate their workloads from on-premises to the cloud, like Azure. Microsoft offers Azure Backup as a service, which allows backup for virtual machines, SQL databases, HANA databases, and even file shares. 

If the customer's workloads are supported by Azure, we recommend Azure Backup as a service. However, for workloads not supported by Azure Backup, we look for third-party investment solutions.

One notable feature is that snapshots are computed in less time, enabling faster system recovery. Even for large systems, we can recover them in less time. For example, if it's a recent backup, it can be done in less than 15 minutes.

Another benefit is that the backup utilization is not high. Comparing the pricing with other technologies, Azure Backup is more affordable for customers.

One feature is VMware backup with replication. Many customers are interested in this. Additionally, Azure Backup allows customers to extend their retention period for more than five or ten years, which is beneficial compared to other enterprise backup solutions. The monitoring capability is also good. 

Moreover, encryption is maintained by Microsoft if we follow the platform team management system. This is crucial as customers want to ensure the security of their data on Azure. The configuration is user-friendly, and we have control over backup storage utilization and VM consumption. 

When it comes to improvements, Microsoft should provide us with an option to explore the logs. So if there's any failure by seeing the error, in some cases, we will be able to resolve it. But 50% of the cases are being handled by Microsoft itself, like getting the logs from the back end. That's the one thing that I've seen that has to be enhanced from Microsoft's end.

Azure Backup is limited to certain workloads. It would be helpful if Microsoft focused on enabling backups for Oracle and other unsupported databases.

We have multiple customers, and we categorize the Commvault infrastructure based on customer mix. We have more than ten Comsources, and we distribute the load accordingly. Based on client utilization, we configure the backup equally across the media agents.

The stability is good. I didn't find any challenges. The installations also work as expected. The customers do not have any concerns about it.

Customer service and support vary based on the issue. I've had personal experiences where some issues took more than fifteen days to resolve while others were resolved in one or two days. Overall, it's good, but there is room for improvement based on my personal experience.

The initial setup is very simple. We have to have an idea of the networking cost structure and the configuration. We also have to get confirmation from the customer about what kind of retention they are looking for.

We can also have the data deployed to other regions, which is a nice feature. If there is any disaster in the primary region, we'll be able to read the data from a secondary region. That's also one of the very good features offered by Azure Backup. 

The deployment process is quite easy in Azure. Enabling backup for any VM takes less than five minutes. We just need to create a vault and discover the VM for backup. So, in terms of deployment, it's straightforward and user-friendly.

I haven't found the need for much maintenance. In comparison to other backup solutions where we maintain our own infrastructure, Azure Backup handles everything. We simply create a library, assign a policy, and associate the VM with the trusted backup vault. Microsoft manages everything, and there are no limitations in terms of storage utilization.

Comparing the pricing with other technologies, Azure Backup is more affordable for customers. It follows a pay-as-you-go model, where we pay according to our consumption.

In terms of Azure Backup, there is no special license required. We only need to pay for the amount of data we consume and the data transferred across the network. The pricing is calculated based on these two factors. There is no explicit license cost. We just need to allocate a budget for storage and related expenses.

When it comes to advice, it's important to understand the specific requirements of the customer. If the customer requires backups for VMs, SQL, and SAP HANA, Microsoft's Azure Backup can be a suitable choice. 

However, if there are other workloads that are not supported by Microsoft, alternative backup solutions should be considered. The decision depends on the specific requirements. Azure Backup offers services related to cost, storage utilization, encryption, and scalability.

Overall, I would rate the solution a seven out of ten.

We use the solution for VMs and SQL servers. 

I like the product's restoration cases. 

The tool's backup should be faster. Azure Backup's support should be faster.

I have been working on the product for four years. 

Azure Backup's stability is good. 

My company has around 1,000 users for Azure Backup. 

Azure Backup's setup is straightforward and gets completed in 10-15 minutes. We need to identify the backup frequency and configure it. We would need around six to seven people to handle the tool's deployment and maintenance. 

A consultant helped us with the deployment. 

I would rate Azure Backup an eight out of ten. 

The product is cost-effective compared to other vendors.

Azure Backup must include features similar to enterprise solutions, such as Veeam.

I have been using Azure Backup for five years. We are using the latest version.

The product is stable. I rate its stability a ten out of ten.

We cater this product to small, medium, and enterprise businesses. I rate its scalability a five out of ten.

The initial setup has medium complexity. I rate the process a five or six out of ten.

The product's pricing is a three or four out of ten, where one is inexpensive, and ten is costly.

Overall, I rate Azure Backup an eight out of ten.

Azure Backup is a mandatory service. We have recommended every client to use Azure Backup. Many resources and databases are being backed up on Azure in different zones and regions.

We have multiple clients. Some of them have data centers. They have 100 to 200 virtual machines. We have set backups, snapshots, and replication for every machine in different zones.

Our client’s infrastructure is protected by the tool.

The product must improve on a database level. It should be made more application-aware.

I have been using the solution for one year.

If we have zone-redundant architecture, the stability is ten out of ten. If not, then it will be an eight out of ten. Overall, I rate the solution’s stability a nine out of ten.

I rate the solution’s scalability a ten out of ten. Our clients are small, medium, and enterprise-level businesses.

Sometimes, we meet technically sound people. Sometimes, we don’t. The support team calls within 30 minutes if we launch a ticket. The support team should contain more highly technical people. Overall, the support is good.

Positive

The tool is very easy to deploy and configure. A person who understands networks can deploy and configure the product very easily. If a person has a clear concept of networks, they can work on any cloud solution. I rate the ease of setup a nine out of ten. We have many clients.

We have replicated our clients’ resources from on-premise to cloud and from cloud to cloud. The time taken for deployment varies for every client. If a company has 100 VMs, the tool can be deployed in two days. We can configure the tool with Azure CLI.

It is a very cheap cloud solution.

The solution is improving day by day. New features are introduced, and existing features are updated regularly. Oracle and Azure have some partnerships. They have signed an agreement. Some of our clients have data centers, and we configure their applications on Azure cloud. Azure clients also want to configure their applications in different zones and regions. Azure Backup is good. It can protect the resources of a company. Overall, I rate the product a seven out of ten.

We have implemented a secondary contingency plan for most clients, where the primary infrastructure is on-premise, and the containers are hosted in the cloud. Some clients are currently migrating their primary solutions to the cloud. In these cases, the servers run on Azure, and Azure Backup provides backup server services. Additionally, we have implemented Azure SQL and Azure Intune for these clients.

The daily backups have become easier since we no longer need to handle large backups. The use of Azure Backup as a service has proven reliable and simplified our daily operations. Previously, we relied on LTO backups for data retention, but after migrating to the cloud and adopting Azure Backup, the delivery process has become smoother.

The simplicity of the whole operation is the most valuable feature of the solution.

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.

I have been using the solution for the past four years.

I rate the stability of the solution as a nine out of ten.

In a fully cloud-based solution, scalability is good, and I rate it a ten out of ten. On the other hand, for an on-premise setup, there may be challenges related to recovery and the potential impact on the Internet link's bandwidth. Therefore, I rate it an eight out of ten.

I believe Microsoft could improve its backup support.

Neutral

The initial setup was easy.

The pricing of the solution does not depend on the service itself but rather on the minimum data volume encountered. This pricing approach seems reasonable and is on par with other competitors in the market. It is a good solution for on-premise needs because it is more cost-effective. When evaluating the overall financial expenditure, including operational costs and the impact on the IT team, Azure Backup is a favorable choice.

I recommend it; however, I want to emphasize the importance of thoroughly checking if the cloud backup solution aligns with the required time frame for recovery. Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

Currently, I have Many Azure VMs for clients, and We are  doing the backup, disaster recovery, and tactical replication for all of them.

We install the backup stack for our clients. We explain the situation and have our technical team complete the installation for the clients.

With set up managed retention using the backup policy. We do retention, and we do security. 

The level of security is high on it.

Most of our clients used to have Mac storage in all of their offices, such as NAS (network-attached storage) by 20, or 30 terabytes. We have informed our clients, rather than keep their storage on-premises and risking it getting damaged with no disaster recovery, it would be better to synchronize it and move it to the cloud. Some of the clients will keep it on the cloud while some others have to keep it on-premises and on the cloud at the same time for direct synchronization.

The backup is configured as replication or synchronized between both of them.

When we install for the client, they have a full solution. All of their computers are connected to a single sign-on with Office 365. They all have a domain on the Microsoft cloud. Included with this we add Azure, all of their HR software, ERP, and accounting on the cloud. The add-on backup to the environment will be with Microsoft.

One of the most valuable features is security and connectivity to the data.

The hardware is nice. We configure the hardware and can choose anywhere from two cores to 56 cores. 

We configure the machines the way we want.

We are using two different types of technology. Side to side and tier to side. Recently, we sent an email regarding this issue. Maybe they could improve the fees. The cost is a bit high.

If we had 100 users, and we are using the backup on servers, it would be helpful if the user could know the level of synchronization that he has done. It can only be done by administrative forces. As an example, if I am the administrator and I have users getting data online, I can see what is happening. However, for the user, if they are experiencing some kind of failure with their data, they do not receive any notification and do not know. It will work, but it will need a lot of customization.

We would like to see some kind of notification given to the user that a file was not synchronized properly or what may have happened. What we are doing now is through a third party system where they will notify us if a file is not synchronized properly inside of his computer.

We have been using this solution since 2016, so it's been almost four years.

We are now using the latest version.

The solution is stable.

With our clients, there is a 95% success rate, for the remaining 5%, sometimes it's a problem with the network or a problem with the files.

If we give them a server and storage they need to choose a security method if they want to protect their data. They need to add more to be available inside their servers. If a client hasn't chosen protection for his data and his data has malware or any virus, it is not under our umbrella, they must choose their security methods. For most of our clients, we provide security for them.

This solution is scalable and it's easy. It's like you are using your computer folder. We will be mapping. We would map the file to the server. It's like a new folder, a C, D, E, or F. New storage inside the servers will be created.

One of the clients that we have now has 50 terabytes of storage. We have created another server on a cloud backup for these 50 terabytes. They have 100 users that are using this backup through file sharing.

We always get direct support. I am supported well.

We use to have SAN storage , attached to our physical server 

But after being shifted to azure , we felt the performance and security more 

You need someone with experience to complete the initial setup. If you bring in an engineer or a computer science person who doesn't have experience in Microsoft then he cannot do it. They might be able to install the Windows Operating Systems and Active Directory but they won't be able to connect to the VM online on the cloud. They need some experience. If someone trains them, they can get it in one day or maybe two.

In my experience, each installation with us can take 18 days if the client requests an on-premises deployment. If they need just a server to create a backup, we will create a virtual machine online, which will take one or two days.

It will take time for an on-premises installation because we will install the server locally. This includes the operating system, the links, and connecting them to the server and then to the cloud. It will work online or offline. This will take 15 to 18 days.

Again, to backup online, for the server and Active Directory, it will be one day to complete.

We are using a file-shared backup; one for on-premise and one on the private cloud.

Our clients are seeing that it is cost-effective.

The fees are a bit expensive. When clients see improvements and see a product out of the box, clients will not look at the price, but the price could be lower. 

Support payment works by the level of partnership and the number of shares.

As a gold partner, we have more than 50 hours of support per year and this is more than enough. With the 50 hours, I get a one hour call. If I have a problem and I call, they have one hour to call me, and I have unlimited calls if I need them to call me after 24 hours or the next day. 

As gold partners, we generate the licenses for our clients and we pay monthly. Our clients pay annually or make two payments per year.

Sure , like any solution we just make evaluation and testing 

That’s what we have done before starting with azure backup 

Before doing a backup or getting any cloud solutions, you must first check the environment and the systems. Most companies will have computers in a workgroup. Each must have its own domain and Active Directory. 

You will have to do the know-how technologies inside the company for the basic configuration. Then they can choose and start. You know longer have to use storage that will stay inside the office because anyone can unplug it and take it with them.

With a cloud solution, you can specify which MAC address, user, environment, or region can get the data from the server.

I have been using Microsoft for 16 years. I am very familiar with all of the Microsoft technology.

Now they have the cloud, Microsoft Office 365 and Microsoft Azure, so we transfer and we have been awarded the digital technology transformation three times.

We are a cybersecurity company that cares about security for our clients.

As a gold partner and CSP partner, we have our portal. If a client needs 100 Azure servers then I can create them directly for him, without having to contact Microsoft or anyone. I can create them and the charges will come to me monthly. Also, I can choose the mode of payment, be it monthly or annually. There is also the rebate and the cashback that will come with yearly or monthly billing.

I don't see any problems with Azure. It gives our clients peace of mind. Data is important.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.