We performed a comparison between Microsoft DPM and N-able Cove Data Protection 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."It has an application backup, a file backup, a system backup and a hypervisor."
"The user interface is very good. The reporting and monitoring features are also good."
"I like the core backup feature. I also like the file server backup feature. I find Microsoft DPM interesting because it has fantastic integration with Microsoft products. For example, in Exchange and SharePoint, DPM is excellent when it comes to backing up data. It also does a decent job with open-source products."
"The automated procedure is quite good for us, as it is able to capture all of the information that we require."
"Its capability to give a BMR for all the workstations that I want to connect to."
"The initial setup is quite straightforward."
"It is almost perfect for Microsoft products. It is not a very powerful tool, but it is okay for small sites and small businesses with Microsoft products. It is easy to use for backup and restore. It is good for backing up Microsoft servers such as Exchange and SharePoint servers."
"The most valuable feature is that DPM has an index so individual files can be searched."
"The monitoring makes it very easy to check whether a backup has gone bad."
"We use a neat feature called VDR status, Virtual Disaster Recovery status. It only works on servers... It's automated. Once or twice a month it will virtually mount the backup and provide a screenshot and advise whether or not there have been any errors."
"For starters, this is one of few databases that allow us to backup MySQL databases, most others only support Microsoft SQL. This solution also has a very user-friendly interface accessed through a web browser. Additionally, backups can be easily configured through N-able Backup."
"The ease of use and the console are great."
"The most valuable feature by far is the Virtual Disaster Recovery. On top of that is the bare-metal recovery. The recovery options that we have are great. We have tested the Virtual Disaster Recovery and the bare-metal recovery in just about any scenario you can think of. We have even restored bare metal, a full server, to a laptop, and had full functionality. It's just insane how well it works and how simple it is. It does most of the work for you."
"What I like the most about it's the ease of use and the reliability that it has when copying information to the cloud."
"The ability to back up, restore, and do different types of testing for the preventative maintenance has really increased our importance to these clients because they see the value in how fast we can get them back up and running. We're saving them money in that way."
"The most valuables feature is the alerts and monitoring that catches the failed backups."
"It would be better if it integrated seamlessly with open source and competitor products. In the next release, I would like to see some data governance frameworks. It should have support features for data integration and data replication like Veeam. Right now, we are also using Veeam for certain scenarios."
"The user interface can be improved quite a bit."
"It needs portability for other vendors. It is good for backing up Microsoft servers, but it doesn't support third-party solutions such as Oracle Database. It depends on Microsoft Volume Shadow Copy, especially for Hyper-V, which has a lot of problems. They should enhance the Volume Shadow Copy functionality. Its reporting should also be better. Reporting is too weak in DPM."
"Management reporting could be improved."
"The user friendliness could be improved."
"The data tagging feature needs improvement. The solution could be a bit more intuitive in certain aspects."
"We can't take a snapshot and take it outside, which is a problem."
"There is a very poor online user community in terms of people blogging about their experiences with DPM."
"Integration with a hybrid cloud is something that I found complicated."
"The one thing they don't are Linux servers, it's Windows only. I understand that directive. I have another product that I use for our Linux servers and stuff, but it would be nice if they had that flexibility on the Linux side. I understand the development and the world is geared towards Windows in 365, I know that's where the clienteles are and the business and the money is."
"We would like to have better reporting."
"N-able Cove Data Protection for Microsoft 365 is an area with shortcomings that need improvement."
"The recovery side, the restore side, could be a little more optimized."
"Having the licensing available for partners to be able to take advantage of testing without paying would make a big difference."
"A better default view on my dashboard would be great. There is a lot of useless information there that it pulls up. They could present the dashboard slightly better, in terms of the extra information after the first five columns. The first five columns are awesome. After that, I don't care about the rest, and there are another seven things after that."
"We don't use the solution’s automated recovery testing because SolarWinds made me cross. When they released it, I went, "Oh, well, that's quite good." Because if you use the system, then it supposedly spins up, and on the portal, it gives you a screenshot of the booted device. So, I phoned up, and I said, "Oh, that's really quite cool. How much is that?" They said, "No, no, no. It's all included in your license." I went, "Okay then," and went and deployed it on about half the fleet. One of the options that our customers have is they can pay us a small amount every month for us to test the recovery just to prove that it's viable, and I thought, "Well, this will do that for us. Nice." Then, in the next invoice, we got a charge for it. While It was not a huge amount, I took offense at the fact that we were told that it would be a no extra cost option that was part of our license, but it turns out that it's chargeable. Therefore, we haven't used it since."
Microsoft DPM is ranked 28th in Backup and Recovery with 17 reviews while N-able Cove Data Protection is ranked 7th in Backup and Recovery with 20 reviews. Microsoft DPM is rated 7.0, while N-able Cove Data Protection is rated 9.2. The top reviewer of Microsoft DPM writes "Good for backing up, but the 2019 version lags". On the other hand, the top reviewer of N-able Cove Data Protection writes "Provides feature flexibility and modularity for our customers". Microsoft DPM is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Azure Backup, Dell PowerProtect DD (Data Domain), Commvault Cloud and Veritas Backup Exec, whereas N-able Cove Data Protection is most compared with Acronis Cyber Protect, Veeam Backup & Replication, Veeam Backup for Microsoft 365, Azure Backup and MSP360 Backup. See our Microsoft DPM vs. N-able Cove Data Protection 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.