We performed a comparison between Azure Backup and Bacula Enterprise 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."I have no issues with the stability at all. So I don't necessarily care about the stability of the product. I look more at whether or not can I recover. And I haven't had a failed recovery yet. I've got no failed recoveries of all my years."
"It's stable."
"It offers seamless integration."
"The most valuable feature of Azure Backup is the file recovery and file vault."
"I like the product's restoration cases."
"With Azure Backup, you can readily make your environment if your setup somehow fails on the cloud or on-premises."
"I like that it's a simple system."
"With a couple of buttons, we can configure a VM for a backup and use the wall service, the storage wall service, pretty seamlessly."
"The most valuable features are the special plugins such as SAP HANA databases, Microsoft SQL, and various types of virtualization."
"Bacula is pretty stable."
"It works great and it provides you with several standard tools to restore your backup, even after a big failure."
"It can be used in virtually any environment we have onsite."
"It brought many advantages - such as the learning curve being very light."
"It is easy to scale Bacula Enterprise even if your system is growing tremendously in data and servers."
"The solution has extensive documentation and a very active community."
"Ransomware protection is missing in Azure Backup."
"The solution is quite technical. I wouldn't describe it as user friendly. It could be simplified a lot to make it more accessible to the average user."
"The user interface is a little bit confusing and it could be better."
"Technical support is in need of improvement."
"The support for Office365 backup is atrocious and is something that has to be improved."
"The length of time it takes to restore is our main source of frustration. It would be beneficial to shorten the time it takes."
"I would like to see better pricing."
"Azure Backup is limited to certain workloads. It would be helpful if Microsoft focused on enabling backups for Oracle and other unsupported databases."
"It could improve its interface or offer a specific screen for the manager of the company."
"We would like to see an improvement in the functionality of the GUI."
"Bacula needs a graphical user interface because, for administrators, the command-line interface is okay, but for the average user it is not very easy."
"Easier setup and configuration, perhaps including a GUI, would be an improvement."
"A more user-friendly interface (GUI) can be developed."
"The initial setup could be a bit easier."
"We are looking for a unique interface that can rule both enterprise and open source editions. Such a thing does not yet exist."
Azure Backup is ranked 9th in Backup and Recovery with 51 reviews while Bacula Enterprise is ranked 30th in Backup and Recovery with 9 reviews. Azure Backup is rated 7.8, while Bacula Enterprise is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Azure Backup writes "Straightforward to set up and manage and allows us to monitor all backups in one place". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Bacula Enterprise writes "Very cost-effective and well organized with good compression". Azure Backup is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Rubrik, Commvault Cloud, Acronis Cyber Protect and Veritas NetBackup, whereas Bacula Enterprise is most compared with Bareos, Veeam Backup & Replication, UrBackup, Veritas NetBackup and Acronis Cyber Protect. See our Azure Backup vs. Bacula Enterprise 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.