We performed a comparison between Bacula Enterprise and Dell Avamar 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 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."
"Bacula is pretty stable."
"The solution has extensive documentation and a very active community."
"The most valuable features are the special plugins such as SAP HANA databases, Microsoft SQL, and various types of virtualization."
"It can be used in virtually any environment we have onsite."
"It works great and it provides you with several standard tools to restore your backup, even after a big failure."
"The entire system operates seamlessly, with minimal hands-on involvement, allowing us to focus on monitoring rather than constant adjustments or deployments, as seen in larger, more dynamic environments."
"The stability of Dell EMC Avamar is very good."
"What I found valuable in Dell Avamar is the deduplication feature. I also like that the solution can be integrated with Data Domain."
"We have a lot of backups, and this tool helps us with the RMAN Backup."
"The most valuable feature for me in Dell Avamar is the automation, which is good for completion."
"Duplication and the speed of backup are great."
"I like Dell EMC Avamar's compression of data."
"The product has a proven track record of good backups without much of a failure ratio. It also has a good backup in terms of the compression ratio."
"Easier setup and configuration, perhaps including a GUI, would be an improvement."
"We would like to see an improvement in the functionality of the GUI."
"The initial setup could be a bit easier."
"A more user-friendly interface (GUI) can be developed."
"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."
"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."
"If you need to pull data out of it to offload to tapes, that's messy. You have a mechanism for it, but it is painful."
"The UI is quite old. We've been using this UI since last year, and they haven't changed it. It would be better to update the UI periodically and create attractive dashboards from an administrative point of view."
"The solution could be a bit easier to use in the sense that they need to make it simpler to backup products and restore items."
"The solution, in the future, should offer support for mobile."
"It would be helpful if there was cloud support."
"Performance can sometimes be affected when tools are utilized for tasks like backup or deep archiving."
"Some integrations are not in place, such as the email alerts, which are not compatible with Office 365 SMTP gateway."
"It lacks support for certain plugins, like SAP HANA, for example."
Bacula Enterprise is ranked 31st in Backup and Recovery with 9 reviews while Dell Avamar is ranked 11th in Backup and Recovery with 81 reviews. Bacula Enterprise is rated 8.6, while Dell Avamar is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Bacula Enterprise writes "Very cost-effective and well organized with good compression". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Dell Avamar writes "Stable, integrates well with other solutions, and has a good price, but its UI needs a refresh". Bacula Enterprise is most compared with Bareos, Veeam Backup & Replication, UrBackup, Veritas NetBackup and Dell PowerProtect DD (Data Domain), whereas Dell Avamar is most compared with Dell PowerProtect Data Manager, Veeam Backup & Replication, Dell NetWorker, Dell PowerProtect DP (IDPA) and Dell PowerProtect DD (Data Domain). See our Bacula Enterprise vs. Dell Avamar 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.