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."This solution is very stable."
"When it was required that data had to be restored for our customer, it was accomplished successfully and this has kept our end users satisfied."
"The support for legacy products is very good."
"The response time of the tech support is swift. The support is fantastic."
"The software is quite complicated and useful for large corporations using different information systems."
"The software implementation takes about 30 minutes."
"Good scalability and virtual environment protection."
"NetWorker is fast and reliable."
"The feature that was most valuable was that we could restore one mailbox and we could do different backups for different databases."
"What I like the most about this solution is that I can change and access the Oracle backup file."
"The stability of the product seems to be quite good."
"Deduplication implementation with CAPA is very good."
"Ability to automatically detect and secure new data sources without requiring manual configuration intervention."
"I have used Micro Focus Data Protector for the file backup facilities. My primary use of the software is to backup file data."
"It is very easy to use and the interaction with various systems is very handy."
"The command-line interface is user-friendly and well documented in the reference guide."
"The interface could have a different appearance."
"The user interface has to be improved"
"The initial setup is complex."
"We are looking forward to better stability in future versions."
"The data storage capabilities should be improved."
"NetWorker's major problem is its legacy software."
"The stability of the NMC could use some attention, as it tends to be a bit shaky during jobs and other operations."
"The licensing rules are difficult to navigate and understand."
"We face challenges with its stability."
"I don't like this solution so much because it's very technical and compared to Commvault and Veeam, it's not so user-friendly. The interface needs improvement."
"It has a lot of undeveloped functions like window searching and patent searching, and within the main backup processes like VMware and Microsoft Exchange. It's completely not user-friendly, and it has no built-in antivirus software. In my opinion, Micro Focus Data Protector is not an enterprise level solution."
"Other tools seem to be easier to use."
"The graphical interface needs to be improved."
"The Micro Focus Data Protector support is not as good as Veeam Backup & Replication's support."
"They should design the solution so that it is much easier for deployment and make the UI easy to use."
"In terms of what can be improved, I would say integrations with MongoDB. We use MongoDB and we need to go to scripts to do backups. We need more integrations."
Dell NetWorker is ranked 13th 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, Symantec Data Loss Prevention and HPE StoreOnce. 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.
