We performed a comparison between Bacula Enterprise and Veritas NetBackup 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 can be used in virtually any environment we have onsite."
"The solution has extensive documentation and a very active community."
"It works great and it provides you with several standard tools to restore your backup, even after a big failure."
"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."
"The most valuable features are the special plugins such as SAP HANA databases, Microsoft SQL, and various types of virtualization."
"Bacula is pretty stable."
"The documentation is good."
"Its most valuable features are flexibility and reliability."
"The troubleshooting is very good."
"AIR and duplication, overall management and troubleshooting."
"The solution is stable."
"If you are running on a legacy tape environment NetBackup is best."
"I have found the Media Server Deduplication tool, deployment policies, and agentless features to be the most valuable features."
"The most valuable feature is that it is basically a replica of our SAND data. We archive the SAND data for recovery, if there is an issue on the fence."
"A more user-friendly interface (GUI) can be developed."
"Easier setup and configuration, perhaps including a GUI, would be an improvement."
"We are looking for a unique interface that can rule both enterprise and open source editions. Such a thing does not yet exist."
"We would like to see an improvement in the functionality of the GUI."
"The initial setup could be a bit easier."
"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."
"Extra features come with additional costs."
"Maybe they could add more cloud solutions."
"The HTML interface is a web application that does not offer all the features."
"The most common problem is the backup failures over the weekend. We have to troubleshoot and sometimes do restores and then we have trouble doing some of the restores."
"It is a very expensive solution. They should have a different scheme for selling it. They should also make it easy for us to switch from Solaris to Linux. We are having some trouble in migrating our actual catalog from Solaris to Linux."
"In terms of improvement, it's very difficult to make it work with multiple business units. Its security model is too constricted."
"I do not really like NetBackup as it is coming from a mix of other software packages."
"System administrators would be more efficient in NetBackup if the number of tools and command lines was reduced."
Bacula Enterprise is ranked 31st in Backup and Recovery with 9 reviews while Veritas NetBackup is ranked 5th in Backup and Recovery with 112 reviews. Bacula Enterprise is rated 8.6, while Veritas NetBackup is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Bacula Enterprise writes "Very cost-effective and well organized with good compression". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Veritas NetBackup writes "Efficient data recovery and replication features ". Bacula Enterprise is most compared with Bareos, Veeam Backup & Replication, UrBackup, Dell PowerProtect DD (Data Domain) and Acronis Cyber Protect, whereas Veritas NetBackup is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Rubrik, Veritas NetBackup Appliance, Veritas Backup Exec and Azure Backup. See our Bacula Enterprise vs. Veritas NetBackup 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.