The area they could improve was when we were in Azure cloud, and Actifio got bought by Google, they stopped supporting us. So that's an area they could improve.

Integration with snap services of disk vendors (they only support IBM and Pure right now). Actifio uses the native backup capabilities of each application (like VADP for VMware), but could benefit from integrating these capabilities with storage subsystems for the best of both worlds.

We'd like to see more stats and details on what's happening in running jobs. We don't get much feedback from the client or the logging. Clients can go into their logging directories to find out what's happening. However, we have to access the log activity itself to see if any progress has been made and if it's been completed. 

If a job doesn't finish, we need to know what the errors were to get a high-level idea of the challenges. When we're troubleshooting, we go to the connected log. Then Actifio support also looks in the log and uploads some of what it sees to their ticket and then resolves the issue.

Another issue is the solution doesn't support AIX software or in the cloud, and we have a lot of servers running on AIX and Oracle. 

I miss the support they used to have in Portuguese. In terms of the product, it would be great to be able to price our backup costs within Actifio itself.

The product must provide AI features. Google has stopped supporting the on-premise version of the tool.

There are quite a few ways the product can be improved, actually. In terms of recovery the solution is very good, but still can be better. Specifically, they can improve in the area of ease of recovery and improve the speed. Also, the kind of platforms they support should be enhanced. Like now, they have recently started supporting SAP S/4HANA, SAP MaxDB, and SAP MongoDB. This is good, but there are more platforms that can be supported. Obviously this will take time before the platform support for more products appears in the solution. But I think this is one important addition that they need to make.  

Areas that need improvement would be the support for recovery in the physical environment. This includes a bare-metal restore, backing up a physical server, and then restoring the same on a physical server. Currently, it has to be on a virtual server.

In the next release, I would like to see bare-metal restore and a version that is comparable to solutions such as Acronis, where they have less but similar features at a lower cost. 

There is a lot to improve on and a lot of new features that are needed. Some of these, I have personally requested, for example to be able to set multiple/specific  hours/days on the workflow mechanism, and add the ability to support tapes/robot libraries.