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."The tool has a lot of features."
"Azure Backup is very simple to use and user-friendly."
"It's easy to deploy."
"You can select the tiering for your backup and manage your cost."
"You have the flexibility to encrypt your backups and choose the storage capacity you're comfortable paying for."
"It is easy to schedule backups."
"The MARS agent makes it easy to use."
"The feature that I have found the most valuable is that it is easy to create a backup by using Azure Backup. It also has a good user interface and nice features for sending notifications when any backup fails or there is a change in the status of virtual machines."
"It brought many advantages - such as the learning curve being very light."
"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."
"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 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."
"Azure Backup is limited to certain workloads. It would be helpful if Microsoft focused on enabling backups for Oracle and other unsupported databases."
"I would like to see better integration with more products, and more services."
"The support for Office365 backup is atrocious and is something that has to be improved."
"Azure Backup must include features similar to enterprise solutions."
"Technical support is in need of improvement."
"They need to improve the frequency of the backup. You can only backup one to three times a day. It would be better to back up continuously throughout the day."
"Lacks an AI system that would enable easier upgrading of the hardware."
"My company faces a lot of difficulties in restoring any encrypted VM backup."
"Easier setup and configuration, perhaps including a GUI, would be an improvement."
"The initial setup could be a bit easier."
"We would like to see an improvement in the functionality of the GUI."
"We are looking for a unique interface that can rule both enterprise and open source editions. Such a thing does not yet exist."
"It could improve its interface or offer a specific screen for the manager of the company."
"A more user-friendly interface (GUI) can be developed."
"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."
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.