We performed a comparison between Veeam Agent for Microsoft Windows and Veeam Backup & Replication based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Veeam is a brand name that is synonymous with superior modern data protection for any environment. It is widely recognized, reliable, and trustworthy. Veeam Agent for Microsoft is specifically developed for Microsoft Windows and is limited by design specifically for Microsoft. Veeam Backup & Replication can support any load, any application, any storage, and any cloud. It is a complete solution.
"To do the actual backup configuration is also not too bad."
"The solution is meeting all of our client's requirements. It has good performance."
"It's straightforward to set up."
"It is a stable solution."
"The user interface is good. It provides a lot of information."
"The Veeam Agent for Microsoft Windows is easy to use and performing a recovery is easy to do."
"The solution is useful for taking backups for end-user laptops and end-user workstations where data is involved."
"The most valuable feature is the ease of use."
"I have found one of the most valuable features to be the integrity of the backups."
"I am not a direct user of this product, but my technical guys tell me that they like the product, and it is easy to use. We don't have any issues with it."
"Strong performance with a high level of compatibility."
"It most valuable features are seeding and faster backups over small links."
"It's scalable."
"It has helped us transfer the solution in two days instead of working for a minimum of one week to ten days."
"Instant recovery, ease of use, and integrations are some of the valuable features."
"The initial setup is very easy."
"I would like to see the capability for remote installation of third party applications added( Like installing WinRar MS Office etc..) , and Firewall for servers."
"There really are no cons. The product simply has to maintain development to keep up with changes in the operating system."
"The stability of this solution needs to be improved."
"In the next release, I would like to see it easier to implement."
"A feature I would like to see is universal restore. At the moment, restoration can only be smooth on the same hardware. Let's say you have a server and you back it up with Veeam Agent, in case it fails or crashes. If you later buy a new server because the same one isn't available on the market anymore, there's a high chance that Windows will not boot up if you restore from the Veeam backup because the hardware is now different. Acronis has the universal restore feature, so it will work with generic drivers and you can restore Windows in any dissimilar hardware. As far as I know, Veeam doesn't have this feature yet."
"I would like to have a more automated installation process."
"The support could be improved a lot, as it is currently non-existent."
"The solution's compression ratio and high speed for backing up can always improve. Aspects that need improvement are less time, better quality, higher security, and more compression. These are continuous requirements for any customer."
"It would be preferable if they could introduce a complete Linux version instead of relying solely on Microsoft for management. There should be a unified integration of all their products. Currently, there are various products like cloud backup and others that exist separately. It would be better if they could create a single comprehensive platform or product, as opposed to having disparate products that lack proper communication between them."
"Its price is higher than other solutions and can be improved. They can also change the version of the software more often."
"CDP also requires a lot of development, because there are a lot of restrictions now for CDP. There is a chance to improve CDP and make it much easier for the customers."
"The cost needs to be considered."
"The implementation of the features can be improved. Currently, there is no segregation of duty. Normally, any backup software or client service software is implemented in a way where one person is responsible for the implementation of the server, and one is responsible for the client, but Veeam Backup & Replication is not implemented in that way. Therefore, restores don't work like that. The backup guys have to do the restores, which is not a good thing. Its pricing should also be improved. It is quite expensive."
"I would like for them to develop the ability to fix the way it does backups. We can't pick a backup for one database. We have to do a backup on the whole Exchange VM. I'd like for them to change it to where we can do individual backups."
"There needs to be more integration with VMware and the virtual machine."
"Sometimes Veeam is not that effective when it comes to legacy environments."
More Veeam Agent for Microsoft Windows [EOL] Pricing and Cost Advice →
Veeam Agent for Microsoft Windows [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Backup and Recovery with 40 reviews while Veeam Backup & Replication is ranked 1st in Backup and Recovery with 329 reviews. Veeam Agent for Microsoft Windows [EOL] is rated 8.4, while Veeam Backup & Replication is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Veeam Agent for Microsoft Windows [EOL] writes "Functional application availability". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Veeam Backup & Replication writes "Beneficial pricing model, user friendly interface, and many free features". Veeam Agent for Microsoft Windows [EOL] is most compared with Dell PowerProtect Data Manager and Acronis Cyber Protect, whereas Veeam Backup & Replication is most compared with Acronis Cyber Protect, Azure Backup, Rubrik, Veritas NetBackup and NAKIVO Backup & Replication.
See our list of best Backup and Recovery vendors and best Cloud Backup 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.