I am currently working on a Windows platform and using Microsoft Azure. Additionally, I use Windows platforms, including Server OS, IIS, and database servers. Also, I use mailing solutions such as Microsoft 365 and G Suite.

I used Backup Exec more than ten years ago. I switched to Acronis because I got an offer from Acronis with some free licenses. After I used them, I decided to purchase Acronis.

We did previously use other backup solutions. We switched to Acronis as we wanted to try something new. 

I've also used Veeam Backup. It's very similar to Acronis. Veeam does have a separate console for its backup.

We were using Windows backup before Acronis Backup. I use currently using Veeeam backup.

We previously used on-prem Exchange and used Veeam to back up the on-premises server, we have since moved to hybrid exchange with the mailboxes in the cloud.

Normally, we used to provide Veeam as well. That said, Veeam has a completely different product and a different portfolio. They have a different cloud-based option, and Veeam doesn't have a cloud-based option. Which we would use would depend on the client's needs. Both products are good. If a client has multiple servers for backing up, Acronis is best. The way they are priced is completely different as well. As an MSSP partner, we typically get good pricing with Acronis. We don't have the same relationship with Veeam.

I used many Backup solutions, but Acronis has an all-in-one solution that addresses security, simplicity, and stability for backup and recovery.

We did use Backup Exec. It belonged to Symantec at the time. Now it's Veritas. The reason we switched was because I experienced firsthand what Acronis could do using the Western Digital version, the free version, or the version that comes with Western Digital drives. I was very impressed.

I went deeper, got into Acronis, and it was recommended by a company from whom we purchase equipment. It's just a solid product in my experience.

Previously, I was doing this manually by making copies of hard drives and setting a copy aside. In some cases, if I said, "Oh, I don't need this anymore, making a backup of a disk to a series of DVDs." That worked for different clients. When a client says, "We're done”, I don't have any reason to keep their work online. The one thing I have not tried is to back up anything onto permanent offline storage like a DVD. I have a solution that does a good job at that now, and that's not something that I would schedule.

The strength of Acronis is that you schedule things and you basically don't have to think about it anymore. Whereas, the backup offline, I do that here and there. It's not something I do on a regular basis at all. In a way, I don't care whether they do that well or not, but it looks to me like they would do it. I just have to try it.

I have used Veeam and Commvault. 

Not myself. But at this company they had Carbonite, a really bad application. We switched because of this application's features that permit us to do many things.

We were using Norton or Norton Ghost or maybe DriveImage Backup. Then, we switched because we needed a solution for backing up the server OS, and then for servers that contained more than just one single hard drive in a RAID configuration.

We have many customers that have converted from other backup products to Acronis. Two examples of these are Veritas and Veeam. 

We have used Azure Site Recovery a little bit. Acronis is a better product, though.

I switched 20 years ago, so whatever I used before Acronis would not be not relevant now.

It was a Microsoft backup. The stuff that came with the file server, SPF 2008. It was absolutely awful compared to Acronis. Acronis is dedicated to doing backup.

Special for IT Central Station Visitors: Free 30-Day Trial of Acronis Backup 12.5

Yeah. Let me tell you this. I've been working at my company for a short time, and before I worked for them, they were using Carbonite.

Carbonite doesn't back up the full information. It's a real expensive solution, and then when you try to get your information through their servers, it has a cost.

Instead, you are paying a contract by year.

We are resellers for Barracuda in Jordan.

Barracuda is a very rigid backup system. All needs are available in Barracuda.

I trust Barracuda. I don't see anything missing in Barracuda. It covers our needs because there is an agent to help with other types of databases.

I would rate Barracuda a ten out of ten.

I've used all of them. I've used Norton Ghost, and years and years ago something called FastBack. Norton Ghost is really the only other one, but my experience is there are more problems with using it than Acronis.

We used Symantec. We switched because they had a bad user interface and it was very difficult to use. I left Symantec years ago for Acronis. The only other backup I encountered was the one included with Windows Server OS.

We previously used Veritas but we have found Acronis Backup easier to use.

I have experience with Arcserve and another backup solution.

For a smaller environment, which is what we have now, Acronis is fine.

In Ecuador, a lot of people use Veeam Backup, Arcserve, and Veritas. The government also uses Data Protector from HP. Acronis is very easy and a new way to get backups or any kind of images or information. But Arcserve is a local solution that you need to install in a server and create jobs from another server. Acronis is a cloud solution, but with Arcserve, you need a server to install it. It's a very different way to use this application.

It's difficult to recover from tapes because of certain data center solutions in Ecuador that use UDX. It's like a hard disk that you can connect to a USB port, and you can get all the information. But when it falls on the floor, you can lose all the information in other types of hard disks. But the capacity is not much, just around three or four terabytes. But it's a good solution to use with some clients because they don't have a lot of space in their servers and this capacity is enough to recover old information.

Our company mostly uses Veam. Only I am using Acronis within our organization.

Previously I used Ghost from Symantec. I also tried other products at the same time just to make sure I was making the right decision. No question that the Acronis is better than everyone else.

We were using Symantec Backup Exec. We switched when we had someone come in and manage all of this for us. It was a solution that they had chosen when we had enough people here that we could cover it on our own.

We found that we just didn't like the previous solution. With this solution, it's easy to switch out the backups. We are using the hard drives. With Symantec, you had to go through and figure out how to switch things. You had to bring in old hard drives with the old backup files on them. It didn't always read the old backup files, so we would have a heart attack. It just wasn't worth using.

We did yes. We switched because Acronis was recommended as a good backup system for use with NAS devices. We had tapes previously.

I have some experience with Altaro, Veeam, and Veritas.

With Acronis, when comparing Veritas and Acronis, even a small or medium-sized customer can access through Acronis. With Veritas, the solution is much more geared towards larger-scale companies. 

Previously, I was just using a Windows Backup built-in with the OS. I wanted something that was not tied to the OS directly, so that is why we switched over to Acronis. The Windows Backup was free and I switched to this which I'm now paying for; so cost didn't really matter, in the sense that it was more of a comfort level and non-proprietary tied to Windows Backup being done.

Symantec Backup Exec. Throughput issues and support issues. No real VMware support that's helpful.

Learn More: Get Free Trial of Acronis Backup

I have used Veritas in the past, but I had a very bad experience and it has traumatized me so I don't speak about that product.

I have used Commvault and that solution is quite similar to Veeam, although I would say that it is more mature than Veeam.

Actifio is better than these other solutions, but because of the price, I rate it behind Acronis. Nobody who is not a well-established enterprise will be comfortable paying for Actifio.

We chose Acronis because it had better non-cloud backup features.

We use Veeam and Veritas. They are similar products. Acronis has some limitations on the cloud side, but Veeam's cloud backup is quite efficient on cloud backup, especially when it comes to Microsoft 365, etc. Now I think Acronis also has those capabilities.

I don’t remember the name of the previous product I used, but it was discontinued by the vendor. It also was not as complete as the Acronis product.

We used Symantec Backup Exec which was okay at the time because it was all that we had. Once I discovered Acronis, I pretty much abandoned Backup Exec and now all my backups are with Acronis.

Try it Out! Get FREE 30-Day Trial of Acronis Backup. Includes Advanced Functionality.

No, this was our first.

I used a different solution, and I switched because the solution I was using wasn't stable. 

Yes, I was using Windows Backup and Restore feature. Upon discovering Acronis, I was fascinated by the flexible granular detailed features of 'what to and where to (multiple locations)' Backup and its central management capabilities as opposed to Windows' local system administration.

We used the inherent Windows Server Backup in the operating system. And the reason we switched is, the way it's configured, for me to save to a location that's local, it has to take the entire location. In other words, I have to dedicate the entire NAS device to the backup, and it will reformat all of it and take all its space for the backup. 

I didn't want that. I have a NAS device that has other backup stuff on it that is not part of the server backup. It's archived information, so I couldn't do it that way. So for me to have a backup I would have to do the backups manually every day.

Click Here For a Free 30-Day Fully Functional Trial of Acronis Backup v12.5

It is used for something very specific. It is a very small percentage of the whole environment. For the enterprise part of the organization, we are using other solutions, such as Commvault and Veeam.

We have just used local backups and not cloud backups, in the past.

I did not use a previous solution.

We upgraded from Acronis 7 as we upgraded the systems from Windows 2000 and XP to Windows 7 and Server 2008.

We've used Norton. I forgot name of the exact product, but it was one of their solutions. We also used something else. We tried Acronis and it was easy to use and it worked. That's why we switched. Since then, it's been Acronis.

Yes because I am looking for something easier to use and time conservation is very important in any organization re: backup.

We already having another solution which produces the same result for Windows. But, for Linux this software was the only one we knew about that supported the version of OS we had.

We switched to Acronis Backup because it allows us to easily manage and monitor our backups.

Previously, I was using Symantec System Recovery.

As long as Acronis continues to support Win XP, I will use Acronis.

Switched away from tape backups

I was previously using the following:

• Symantec, like P.q Magic.
• Ghost, which is another competitor, for partitions and backup.
• Something with Windows, like a basic backup solution and others.

A colleague of mine recommended Acronis Backup. He said, "You should try Acronis." This was when Acronis was not popular or common. Everybody was using the competitors' solutions. I tried it and it worked. 

We used Windows backup and we tried a few others, but I don't remember the names. We tried a bunch of free stuff and it was time to get the real deal. This solution had the best ratings.

We did not have a previous solution. We have always used Acronis, since version 7.

Previously, I have used many different solutions. Now, I am using Veeam and Acronis.

No.

I used Backup Exec and Ghost. I liked the imaging aspect of Ghost, but found Acronis Backup got much better over the years.

I didn't start using Acronis until I came here 3 years ago - it's what the organization was using already. I found that I liked it better than Symantec.

This was our first solution.

We were using Altiris.