Veritas NetBackup Reviews

Data replication among critical DCs across regions.

AIR and duplication, overall management and troubleshooting.

DDBoost.

Not since version 7 and higher.

The number of media servers is restricted and this should be pointed out by the vendor.

Quite good. Seven out of 10.

We switched due to better scalability and overall app management.

It's pretty straightforward for a simple configuration but much more complex for a large environment, with many features and tuning required.

Acceptable if you need to implement it for larger environments, e.g. over 1000 clients. For smaller setups it might be too expensive.

IBM TSM, EMC NetWorker.

This is a mature product, one of the market leaders, so if you can afford to purchase and have significant infrastructure to be protected, then go ahead and speak to Veritas.

I use it to back up servers, databases, files, and photos. 

I like the virtual server backup. 

Maybe they could add more cloud solutions.

I've been using NetBackup for more than 10 years.

It's very stable and very good.

It's easy to scale. 

Technical support is very good.

It's somewhat complex. It wasn't very easy but it's fixable. It takes about one or two hours to deploy.

I would give it a nine out of 10.

We use Veritas NetBackup for backup and archive protocols.

I like the cross-platform features. 

I think reporting can always be improved. Their pricing can also be improved.

I have been using Veritas NetBackup for about 20 years.

Veritas NetBackup is a stable solution.

Veritas NetBackup is a scalable solution.

Veritas NetBackup technical support is good and responsive.

We run into issues now and again, but essentially the initial setup is pretty straightforward.

I think we used a reseller to implement Veritas NetBackup.

We pay on an annual basis. There are some additional costs to the standard licensing fees, but they're all optional. The pricing, of course, can always be better.

For anyone thinking of using Veritas NetBackup, I'll tell them that they'll need a certain level of expertise to run the product successfully.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give Veritas NetBackup an eight.

We are using this solution for data protection.

The features are good.

It is not very user-friendly.

There are delays in Veritas that can be done in automation.

In the next release, I would like to see automation and better support.

I have been using Veritas NetBackup for more than seven years.

We are using the latest version.

Veritas NetBackup is stable.

It's a scalable solution that is enterprise-level software and is used for the organization. It's not user-based, it's infrastructure-based.

Technical support is not good.

They are not quick, it could be faster. You don't get any support quickly. You have to wait for 30 minutes or one hour. You will get better support if you get business-critical services, which will be provided at an additional cost.

The initial setup is simple, it doesn't take a lot of time. It's less than 30 minutes to set up if you have the cloud.

In terms of cost, it's not very good. I would rate it a five or six out of ten. They want everything to be sales and money.

I would not recommend this solution to others because of the cost, but as an option, I would say yes. Rather than NetBackup, I would go with Veeam or Commvault.

I would rate Veritas NetBackup a six out of ten.

This is our default backup solution for our data and storage.

The most valuable feature is the trouble-free operation, as we have not had many problems with it.

We are not able to back up our attached drives, which is something that should be improved.

The speed of restoring data could be improved.

The pricing is an area that can be improved. 

I have been in touch with technical support and I would say that they are okay. I wouldn't rate them "very bad" or "very good" because I haven't been dissatisfied, yet I haven't seen anything impressive either.

The area for improvement that I can see with support is that they have to have better internal coordination. Multiple people or teams work on the same problem and the coordination on their end could be better.

The team who was working on the initial setup was well aware of what they needed to do, so it was straightforward.

We have two people who do the maintenance.

We had third-party assistance with the deployment and we are satisfied with the experience.

I find the cost of this solution to be high. The licensing is done based on the size of the source. If you have a source size of one terabyte then they will charge for a one terabyte license, although what is actually being stored is much less. This is something that they can improve on.

We have been exploring other options that are available in the market. Products like Veeam have similar features, so we will continue our evaluation and consider cost as one of the main factors.

My advice to anybody who is considering Veritas NetBackup is that it's not a bad product and it's good to be prepared. I suggest reviewing the price in advance.

I find it to be not a bad product, but it would be much better with improvements to pricing and performance.

I would rate this solution a six out of ten.

The primary use case is for archiving.

The most valuable feature is that it is basically a replica of our SAN data. We archive the SAN data for recovery, if there is an issue on the fence.

I think that the licensing model needs improvement. 

The stability is fine.

As it scales, it becomes expensive.

Our experience with tech support is mostly positive. But, we had some repeat issues and tech support was not entirely responsive to our needs.

The licensing model is cost-prohibitive as you scale out. 

No, we did not evaluate any other options. We only tried this solution in our environment.

I would advise not to use this tool. I think between the licensing issues and the older solution mentality it is not a great solution. They really have not kept up with the times. 

I am working with the latest update.

The solution is used for user backups. 

We consider the backup capabilities to be very good.  

There are so many things which need improving. With web access, we can't access the dashboards. A person can only access the particular system in which he installed that application. We cannot get access through our local network or web. We can use the local user's details, for the purposes of looking or making modifications, but these things are not available on the web or through net access. 

The dashboard systems need to be addressed. It would be very good if one could get access through his LAN, without the need to involve the server. 

A utilizations check and the ability to utilize the number of users editing facilities would be very good. 

While technical support is good, it takes them a long time, for reasons unbeknownst to me, to resolve issues and this is why we involve their partners. This happens every time they take the logs and search. Technical support only gets back to us the following morning. 

I have been using Veritas NetBackup for the last two years.

The solution is easy to scale.

While technical support is good, it takes them a long time, for reasons unbeknownst to me, to resolve issues, which is why we involve their partners. This happens every time they take the logs and search. Technical support only gets back to us the following morning.

Before using Veritas NetBackup, we made use of Druva. 

While we consider Druva to be very good, they only offer the cloud-based systems for the moment, which is why we switched to Veritas NetBackup. It offers an on-premises option. 

Both products are very good, but Druva's cost is much higher than that of Veritas NetBackup. They are also both very good feature-wise, but the difference between them comes down to the web availability of dashboard systems. 

Druva has certain fixed services, as well as additional costs. 

The initial setup is very simple.

The installation of the software for one who is familiar with the process takes around an hour. Otherwise, it can take two to three hours to complete the setup. 

We made use of a vendor. The solution does not require any maintenance. It is very useful and easy to maintain everything. If one is unfamiliar with the process, then he would be advised to make use of a vendor's assistance. 

Veritas NetBackup is considerably cheaper than that of Druva, the former being quite affordable. 

Veritas NetBackup does not have any additional costs, only the licensing fee. 

There are around 100 people making use of the solution in our company. 

The solution is easy and very good. 

I would absolutely recommend the solution to others. 

I rate Veritas NetBackup as an eight out of ten. 

We use NetBackup to take a snapshot of our endpoint server. 

The main thing I like about NetBackup is CloudPoint. You can take a snapshot of the endpoint and back it up with CloudPoint. The data backups are the most important. I also like how Veritas has simplified the GUIs. There are a lot of security features in place already around the connection as well as many intelligent policies and a pure understanding of the cloud policies, so it's direct compared to many others.

Veritas could simplify the firmware recovery in terms of the deployed. The process shouldn't be dependent on the agents. It should be completely agentless. 

I have been using NetBackup for two years.

NetBackup is stable.

NetBackup is scalable.

NetBackup support isn't great, but it's not the worst, either.

Setting up NetBackup is easy, but the documentation is a bit complex. Veritas used to have consolidated documentation, so it was easy to navigate the documents. The implementation guidelines were contained in a single document, so you didn't need to switch between multiple documents. Configuration should be the clearest documentation.

The price of NetBackup is okay. I think it's a little bit expensive but manageable. It has a lot of features, and the backup is better than most applications, so I think the price is competitive.

I rate NetBackup seven out of 10.