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."The user interface (UI) is easy to use."
"Our customers can backup to local storage and they can back up or replicate to the cloud."
"Acronis is a flexible solution. It can back up workstations, endpoints, and even your virtual environments and cloud-based environments. So, we can do the backup of the whole gamut of products."
"Universal Restore is valuable to us."
"The most valuable features of Acronis Backup are cloning and many other capabilities. For example, you are able to clone the whole operating system and drive. Additionally, the solution is a complete package."
"The most valuable feature is the extra protection, especially for the backup."
"One of its most valuable aspects is its user-friendly interface."
"The licensing model is very good."
"I have used Micro Focus Data Protector for the file backup facilities. My primary use of the software is to backup file data."
"Data Protector is quite simple and easy to deploy. The deployment is always the same. It's on a server, and the agents are deployed to the machines in a straightforward way. We have two engineers who deploy and manage all our backup solutions."
"The stability of the product seems to be quite good."
"It is very easy to use and the interaction with various systems is very handy."
"It works excellently only with Oracle."
"What I like the most about this solution is that I can change and access the Oracle backup file."
"It's user-friendly and not overly complicated to configure."
"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."
"Some of the default settings out-of-the-box should already be set up for the novice user. For instance, the warnings that say a hard drive has bad sectors and stops the backup from performing."
"It would be better if they made it easier to obtain images for laptops and desktops. It isn't easy right now to have many different types of desktop computers. This is because Microsoft is changing a lot of things in Windows 10."
"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."
"In some cases, at the time of reinstallation, some disasters happen. For the licensing on the computer the name of the computer and domain, everything is removed from the registry level. Then we have to install the Acronis from the start for it to work properly. Otherwise, the Acronis software will cause a lot of trouble at the time of reinstallation. That's where they need to improve the product. In the case people want to install the same software with the same hardware, it should not stop me."
"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."
"I would like to see better centralized management, because I use it across multiple clients. To have a console that centrally manages them would be nice."
"Improved support for immutability and Utility AirGAP could be beneficial."
"The biggest problem that we have is when the antivirus is installed, the whole machine runs very slowly and some of the machines hang."
"The new backup systems are using new mechanisms for the recovery phases; for example, VM, recovery and testing the backup before recovering it. These features are not available in Data Protector."
"Many of our users complain about the GUI. You still need to rely on the command line interface. Because it originated as a Unix system, Data Protector is still a command line-driven solution, which makes it seem rather dated compared to systems that are built around a GUI from day one. It doesn't affect the functionality, but some people don't find it user-friendly."
"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."
"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."
"Virtualization."
"The interface has been the same for many years and needs to be updated"
"This solution is not scalable."
"Faster VEAgent Restores"
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.