We performed a comparison between Acronis Cyber Protect and OpenText Data Protector 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."One of the most valuable features of Acronis is its AnyData Engine which allows any device to connect to any other device for the purpose of data restoration."
"Consistency and reliability. The interface is easy to understand and consistent across applications. While not 100%, it is a very reliable backup solution."
"The tool’s licensing and pricing are economical for SMB customers."
"Acronis has a very rich functionality."
"I like Acronis Cyber Protect's backup process and its management console is intuitive."
"In terms of system-critical support, Acronis' technical support does really well. I would give them an eight out of ten for that."
"One of the features I have found most valuable is the restore point - it gives us what we need at the time we need it. The important thing is that the backup for Acronis doesn't depend as much on the device."
"It makes a full image of the hard drive. If a hard drive fails, all we do is recover to another hard drive."
"It is a stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten...The initial setup process for the solution is easy."
"What I like the most about this solution is that I can change and access the Oracle backup file."
"The most valuable feature is the capability to back up our SQL server."
"Performs the backup properly and protects our data."
"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."
"Micro Focus Data Protector's most valuable feature is its interaction with the fiber share. It is easy to use, we use it to back up without any problem to VTLs, and can use the Fiber Channel that is still the TCP."
"Data Protector is very good at automation. From the time of the backup, verification, and copy to tape, it is very good. I don't need to touch it, it will do it by itself."
"Backup of SAP/Oracle -- they are more robust than the competition."
"Acronis Backup can improve the latency when the file size is larger, we have had issues. Additionally, they could allow more flexibility when searching for information and I cannot download the CBIS backup copy information which could be made easier."
"The solution could improve by providing more database backup features and have better integration with many different types of databases. We cannot implement it in all of our infrastructures."
"The product would be better if they offered more integration capabilities."
"The whole product structure is confusing. You can actually get to do what you want to do. But Acronis seems to have a singular ability to make things difficult."
"When I first started using Acronis, I found it a little bit confusing when it came to the configuration."
"The solution's error handling can be improved specifically for Linux errors."
"I believe that the next release should be easier to configure as this one is difficult to configure even the easiest of tasks."
"One improvement that could be made is adding the option to download files in a PST format when doing a 365 or Google Cloud to cloud backup."
"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 technical support is poor and should be improved."
"The online backups of Office 365 have room for improvement. This is now available for the Exchange Online part of Office 365, but we're still waiting for SharePoint Online, Teams, etc. We know that it's coming, but it takes time."
"Virtualization."
"Micro Focus Data Protector must improve its overall evolution record. They need to focus on hardware based instant recovery, client recovery, and cloud ability. Now there is no cloud ability."
"The solution is not intuitive enough. I think they should work on the user experience and the graphical interface. These can be a lot better."
"The product can be developed by including functionalities like DR, CDP, and SureBackup, which are currently unavailable in the solution."
"I'm uncertain if it supports virtual machine backup and restoration. If they could enhance this aspect, they could gain more support from end users."
Acronis Cyber Protect is ranked 10th in Backup and Recovery with 117 reviews while OpenText Data Protector is ranked 23rd in Backup and Recovery with 99 reviews. Acronis Cyber Protect is rated 8.2, while OpenText Data Protector is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Acronis Cyber Protect writes " Good backup solution but challenges with the stability". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText Data Protector writes "User-friendly, competitive, agent-based, and easy to manage". Acronis Cyber Protect is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Veeam Backup for Microsoft 365, Acronis Cyber Protect Cloud, Azure Backup and N-able Cove Data Protection, whereas OpenText Data Protector is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Commvault Cloud, Veritas NetBackup, HPE StoreOnce and Symantec Data Loss Prevention. See our Acronis Cyber Protect vs. OpenText Data Protector 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.