We performed a comparison between Dell NetWorker 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."It is scalable software. All you need to increase is its RAM and CPU. It's pretty easy."
"Data domain is a good feature."
"Technical support is good."
"The solution has a longer lifespan."
"Storage-wise, EMC is user-friendly."
"Deduplication is the most valuable feature of this solution."
"Dell's technical support are quite helpful with straightforward issues."
"This solution is really the best in the market! After evaluating other solutions, we automatically decided to use this one."
"It is a traditional backup model. If you talk about file server and the official Windows database, it's a stable product."
"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."
"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."
"I like that Micro Focus keeps a separate catalog of our data."
"Data Protector's GUI is the most useful feature."
"The solution is easy to use."
"Backup of SAP/Oracle -- they are more robust than the competition."
"The most valuable feature is the capability to back up our SQL server."
"The support is an area with concerns where improvements are required."
"The stability of the NMC could use some attention, as it tends to be a bit shaky during jobs and other operations."
"They need to be compatible with the cloud because EMC NetWorker cannot compete with other products at the moment. EMC focuses only on their own cloud and do not take into consideration other cloud vendors."
"It's complex in nature."
"The configuration is too complex."
"It's not easy to integrate. We have to read a lot of documentation in order to configure the solution."
"The UI is not user-friendly."
"Lacks a restore feature."
"The product can be developed by including functionalities like DR, CDP, and SureBackup, which are currently unavailable in the solution."
"Faster VEAgent Restores"
"In SAP restoration, we faced issues with changing the SIDs and changing the path for every backup object. It is quite a lengthy process to do that."
"We face challenges with its stability."
"We faced some certification issues after we upgraded to version 10.2."
"The downside of the flexibility on offer is if you over-configure it, it may fail to function as some configurations may not match."
"I do not think that this solution is relevant in the current IT market. They have not upgraded their features and functionalities which makes it difficult for them to remain competitive."
"It can occasionally be inaccurate in its backup/recovery time estimates."
Dell NetWorker is ranked 14th in Backup and Recovery with 73 reviews while OpenText Data Protector is ranked 24th in Backup and Recovery with 100 reviews. Dell NetWorker is rated 7.8, while OpenText Data Protector is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Dell NetWorker writes "A stable tool that has an easy-to-use GUI that enables quick restoration". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText Data Protector writes "User-friendly, competitive, agent-based, and easy to manage". Dell NetWorker is most compared with Dell PowerProtect Data Manager, Dell Avamar, Veeam Backup & Replication, Veritas NetBackup and Commvault Cloud, whereas OpenText Data Protector is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Commvault Cloud, Veritas NetBackup, HPE StoreOnce and Veritas Backup Exec. See our Dell NetWorker 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.
