Our primary backup solution has been Commvault, although different teams have utilized IBM Tivoli and other capabilities like Rubrik in the past. Commvault's stability and cost-effectiveness have solidified its position as our preferred choice.

We previously used Dell Avamar Data Protection Software but it did not have a viable immutable backup copy option, so Air Gap Protect was the reason we switched to Commvault Cloud.

I've been doing this for about 30 years, and I've used a lot of backup packages, but Commvault Cloud for backup & recovery is the most impressive one I've ever used. Its breadth of support, stability, and configurability are years ahead of what I've seen in other products. It's more than just a backup and restore product; it's a cyber resilience product that we find new ways to use all the time, especially with our Azure migration. We're able to move data into Azure using Commvault a hundred times faster than any other method that the DBAs or server admins could find. There are several technical reasons for this. Commvault Backup & Recovery is simply light years ahead of any other backup and recovery solution I've seen.

We have worked with Veritas and IBM in the past, however, that was a very long time ago. I wouldn't be able to compare them to this solution as too much time has passed and much has changed. We used those solutions maybe ten or so years ago now.

Ten years ago, we were using a rudimentary backup system that I can't even remember the name of. It was not a major project or product, and I think we were using it to create disk backups on-site. Commvault allowed us to move to off-site backups with great visibility and transparency.

We were using Veritas Backup Exec. It was very inconsistent in completing backups and made our servers very unstable. We used to restart servers on a weekly basis when we were running Backup Exec. Once we centralized those backups off the file servers, we had servers that could run for nearly a year if we wanted them to. Typically, we'd have to reboot them for updates, but they ran rock-solid after we took the backup software off.

I have worked on Veritas NetBackup and Dell Networker. Commvault was offering more options and solutions. We also found it to be very user-friendly and easy to deploy. 

We used Atempo Time Navigator before Commvault Backup & Recovery but could not back up virtual machines or perform snapshot backups. This was a major problem, as we had a large environment of virtual machines that were not being backed up. Commvault solved this problem, as it can back up both virtual and physical machines. This was the main reason we chose Commvault, and we have been very happy with it since then. Atempo Time Navigator also had horrible support.

We were using Microsoft Azure Backup Server (MABS), but there were many problems with it. We turned around, started using Metallic about a year ago. I tested it out. We now have 80% of our servers being backed up to Metallic. We will probably have the rest in the next six to eight weeks. At that point, for the first time in two years, we will have all our servers completely backed up.

When we used to have the on-prem version of Commvault, it was nothing like Metallic. Metallic is a different solution, but it is Commvault. Back in those days, when we had Commvault, it was pretty complex. It was very granular. It had many features, but it was complex. You really only could have one or two guys working on it.

We left Commvault five years ago because the grass is always greener on the other side and cheaper: bigger, better, and stronger. Of course, we came to find out: none of the above. Nothing was true. Basically, we were talked into it by Dell EMC. My old manager, the person whose position I now have, was talked into using Quest Rapid Recovery product by Dell EMC, saying, "Hey, you don't need Commvault. They are one of the biggest backup solutions in the world, and we are an up-and-coming, starting company. We're going to make it cheaper for you. We are just as good. We will show you some cool demos." Those demos looked great. Of course, we went with it. To make a long story short, in the four and a half years that we had Quest Rapid Recovery, we were never compliant on our backups, not once. We were duped.

We are finally back with Commvault, and we now have a 100% compliance backup solution. 

We switched to Metallic because of money. Right now, we are paying less for Metallic than we ever were for Rapid Recovery. I have reclaimed man-hours back for my team. I had one guy for five to six hours a day managing those two other systems, Microsoft Azure Backup and Quest. I lost four to six hours a day for one of my top-level guys by having him troubleshooting that all day long. By going to Metallic, we have freed up man-hours, infrastructure costs, and the time to manage.

At the time we chose Commvault, it was the best, according to our evaluation. There were three main options: NetApp, Commvault, and one other. There wasn't a lot of competition in that area for enterprise-level organizations.

We reached out to our partners, COOLSPIRiT, who engaged with Metallic and we setup a Demo. We all liked it because the solution is just simple.

We have Commvault for onsite backups. Commvault is used for on-prem mailbox backups, whereas Metallic is used for cloud backups of Office 365. We moved to Metallic as a SaaS backup solution.

We were on-prem before with an old version of Exchange, and we used old backup software to back it up.

Prior to Commvault, we used Veritas NetBackup for five years.

A lot of our environment is currently backed up using Commvault but we are planning to use Veeam and Commvault together. Veeam is priced better than Commvault and right now, we use Veeam to back up our virtual machines. As we split more of the information between the two different applications, we may use Veeam for cloud environments, and for traditional environments, Commvault.

There are some applications like SAP HANA that are not compatible with the Veeam software. In cases like this, we use Commvault.

In the past, we have had an IBM solution. We have also used Micro Focus Data Protector. I personally also used NetBackup. It was called something else earlier, but it is NetBackup now.

I work with a couple of other solutions, such as HP Store, Veeam, NetBackup, MongoDB Data Protector, and Rubrik. Commvault is the most competitive in the market because local support is easy and faster.

I've used NetBackup before, and I think it's a good solution. It required more effort than Commvault, but I prefer it over EMC NetWorker. NetWorker was labor-intensive, buggy, and hard to use. We spent a lot of time dealing with EMC support. They have a large, competent support team, but we spent too much time with them. 

NetBackup is better than NetWorker, but it has fewer features than Commvault. NetBackup also has an old-fashioned interface that is harder to use than Commvault's. It's not user-friendly. Commvault is the best of the three.

We were using Backup Exec for a lot of stuff and ShadowProtect SPX, a StorageCraft solution. Now that we have this online, it's fantastic. Every product that we use from Commvault, in general, has been fantastic.

We switched to Metallic from our other solutions because they didn't provide the Office 365 backup component we wanted.

We needed a backup solution and I purchased their standard Commvault for our on-premises stuff. When I attended Commvault Go, their customer conference, they debuted Metallic and I said, "That's exactly the product I was looking for, for my 365 backup, and I'm buying it from Commvault." I already knew how their software works and Metallic is same. They're just doing it in a SaaS model for 365, endpoint, and even server backup if you want. I really needed that 365.

We have not used any other solution. We have been a TrapX customer from early on when they were just coming out.

We switched to Metallic from Commvault's enterprise backup because that solution is not in the cloud. Given that it was on-premises, trying to back up the resources in the cloud was inefficient. Metallic is in the cloud and it can talk directly to those other cloud resources. It was designed better for what we need to do.

We did use a different solution; this is the better solution for us.

There are multiple systems in place. We're in the process of replacing them.

As for the process of switching to Metallic, planning goes a long way. It's at an intermediate level between simple and complicated. We did the free trial and it was easy to get going.

We went with Metallic because it's a SaaS offering. It was one of the few solutions that offered SaaS with their own storage.

We needed to pick a global solution. I had been reading about Simpana, which is Commvault now, for a while and I had the opportunity to jump right into it and learn about it while deploying it. I had never used it. Everything, on paper, was exactly what we needed as far as it enabling a very granular setup goes, without it being a one-size-fits-all-application. That's what I liked about it: being able to customize and mold each location to use Commvault.

I had other requirements but they were requirements that I didn't know that I had until after I had found that I could do them in Commvault.

We went from Veritas NetBackup to Commvault. We switched due to upfront licensing and costs. We have more visibility into what we're actually purchasing. It seemed like, overall, the cost of Commvault was cheaper.

The licensing is more visible. It's more "per-diem." They're not forcing you into certain purchases. You can buy in bulk, per se. You can try things out. Commvault offers a lot of good, temporary licenses where you try something out before you commit to buying it. Once you express interest in purchasing, they'll supply a lot more information for you to make a better decision. I like that, versus the way Veritas works.

Commvault is a cost-efficient solution. Just beware that there's a lot you're going to have to understand before you can get to the point where you're utilizing that cost-efficiency.

We provide solutions depending on a customer's requirements and setup. We also provide solutions like Rubrik and Veeam. I did not work with Veeam, but Veeam is mainly for on-premises virtualization. Its workload is very limited. Also, the expandability and scalability have limitations. However, if you have VMware Hypervisor on your premises, then the solution is okay.

We were using Symantec Backup, which did not have features like centralized management. Commvault has a centralized, single console where you can manage multiple locations of user's desktop data, which is one of the important features of Commvault.

We switched to Commvault because we were looking to centralize management. This reduced IT administrator time as well as providing stability and reliability for data backups in a single console, and we didn't get these features from Symantec. 

We were previously using a homegrown solution called Retrospect. We switched to Commvault because it's cloud-based.

When we looked specifically for a solution that would hold the backup on their cloud environment, Metallic Cloud was what we wanted. We didn't want to bring the solution into our environment, but we wanted the whole solution. Metallic was exactly what we were looking for. From my point of view, Metallic Cloud was the best solution that we could find.

Previously, the client didn't have backups for the 365 report. People who deleted their emails or files on SharePoint just lost them. So, this solution was quite important, because trying to do backups from an on-premise environment wasn't successful. It took a lot of time because of the low bandwidth over the Internet.

This solution mainly gives us backup functionality that the client wasn't able to do before. It is saving them a lot of bandwidth over the Internet and giving them functionality that they previously didn't have, such as, backups to their 365 tenant. They save 150 to 200 Mbps for nightly backup runs.

We used many different solutions previously. When we had some large issues in 2015, I decided to buy a professional corporate solution for all the systems. We did test some other solutions, but with Commvault HyperScale X, we received what we needed and much more. Additionally, Commvault HyperScale X was easy to maintain and use.

In the past, we used Dell EMC NetWorker and Dell EMC Avamar. The main reasons we switched to Commvault were the storage and backup costs. We wanted to find a cheaper solution. In addition, we wanted a solution that we could manage using a single interface, versus the multiple interfaces that we had with Dell EMC. Third, we wanted something that was simpler to manage and that could perform disaster recovery much better, including disaster recovery testing. We also wanted the ability to upgrade agents and software in a centralized fashion. We have seen an improvement on all of these points with Commvault, as a replacement for Dell EMC.

At one point, we almost tried to switch to another vendor. However, due to the economic scale and other factors, we didn't move forward. We decided to stay with Commvault in order to leverage all the modeling and pricing, and we were able to accomplish what we needed.

Since I have worked here, the company has always used Commvault.

Before Commvault we had other brands. We use Acronis Backup among others. We wanted to have just one solution for all our needs: for servers, for SQL Server, for laptops, etc. Our partner suggested we try Commvault and we saw that it was a good solution. It really helped us in dealing with backups, so we chose to buy it. Especially when you have public procurement, you cannot say I want to buy this particular solution. So it is tricky to do public procurement and get what you really need.

Our requirements included having one console for all systems. Before, we had Acronis for servers and we had Backup Exec for clients and we had Windows Backup for Windows servers, etc. So the main requirement was to have one place, one console, from which to manage everything: laptops, PCs, servers, databases, and everything. That was the main reason we wanted Commvault.

The second requirement was because we have employees who are outside of Belgrade; they are not sitting in our building. We needed the possibility of backing up their computers, computers that are not in our primary network. With Commvault we managed that very easily.

We now back up more than 70 PCs from our inspectors all around Serbia. With one solution we back up all of them. That was most important because people lose their computers and some computers crash. It was very necessary to have the possibility of protecting their data with a backup solution.

There were other factors as well, like having a partner in Serbia. Also, if we wanted to add new functionality we didn't want to have to buy other software or to experiment. We wanted to be able to just buy a license for the additional things that we needed.

We used NetWorker and Veeam. The NetWorker solution was the older solution and, in some very old clusters, we also used TSM (Tivoli Storage Manager) from IBM. The TSM solution was no longer supported and the Dell EMC NetWorker solution, which we used for our physical servers, was difficult to maintain. Veeam was a good solution for our VMware infrastructure, but we needed a solution with support for a wider variety of infrastructure types. One of our major goals was to eliminate our multiple backup solutions by going with Commvault.

We did not previously use a different solution. 

Veeam, Veritas and Rubrik are three software comparable to Commvault Complete Data Protection. Veeam is competitive in price and demand. Their solution is not very good, but many people use it because it is not expensive. Commvault Complete Data Protection, however, is the best out of all of them.

Prior to using Commvault HyperScale X, we were using Commvault with Windows Server. We switched due to the complexity and software updates with Windows. HyperScale provided a good offer that would improve our space requirements.

We have been using NetBackup and Veeam. As compared to NetBackup, Commvault is an improvement. NetBackup licenses are expensive as compared to Commvault. 

Previously, we were using EMC NetWorker. It had some limitations. We compared it with Commvault to determine which solution would fulfill our requirements. We switched to Commvault because it had certain features that were not available in EMC NetWorker.

Previously, different products were used depending on the product or brand, however, it meant having a dedicated specialist for each product as well as more space in the data center, greater use of servers, storage, networks, etc.

Our company used to use PC Backup but that's gone away and now they want to use OneDrive. A lot of executives feel that OneDrive is sufficient and that we don't need an actual backup solution.

The reason for going to Metallic was that PC Backup couldn't do Linux or Macintosh. We needed something that could do everything. It is a complete SaaS solution, backing up to the cloud.

We previously used IBM Tivoli Storage Manager (TSM). TSM does not offer a solid VMware solution nor does it have strong reporting.

This solution has helped us to optimize infrastructure usage. With the solution's deduplication, we are saving storage space. Whereas, on our old solution, we still needed the same storage space. We now have faster backup storage, giving us faster restores and file level restores. This saves time and time is money.

We do provide services for Veeam and Rubrik. When comparing Commvault and Veeam, Commvault has a single pin, but Veeam does not. Also, Commvault is great for any type of workload, but Veeam is great with workload platforms.

We earlier used Veeam as a backup solution. We were using Veeam's Community Edition. We also used HP data protector previously. We finally tried the Commvault solution.

Commvault people came and gave a presentation to us, and as compared to Veeam, Commvault had many features. It was user-friendly and easy to use, and it also had a lot of features. It had ransomware protection and data recovery. Veeam didn't have protection features. Our management agreed to use Commvault, and they gave their permission.

As described before, we use NetWorker and Veeam and the idea was to consolidate the whole backup environment with ONE enterprise tool.

We are consistently exploring new solutions for our systems, and each solution must align with our server requirements and other objectives. Our timing is also a key consideration, as we operate on a three-year cycle. We have worked with SAP, Oracle, and Cisco.

We previously used Spectrum Protect.

There were ongoing configuration problems and they continued to increase as everything was a dependency. You had to have the client and the right version with the firmware updated to the hardware and the hardware to the right version. It was a very, very complicated mess. Once it ran, it ran really well. However, when you had to upgrade, you had to upgrade everything. You couldn't do some iterations.

Sometimes, they have already used Dell EMC NetWorker. When Dell EMC tries to sell them PowerProtect, we will suggest moving to Commvault because we know it is very good and has a stable environment.

We previously used an IBM solution. The main reasons we switched to Commvault were cost and complexity.

We were using Dell EMC NetWorker. We switched due to bad support and because we were having lots of issues. They were also slow in keeping up with the technology.

I had a physical hard drive that I backed everything up to, manually. That was my backup plan, which was not a good backup plan. I'm much more comfortable with how things are operating now.

The reason I moved to Metallic was that my OneDrive files got too big. The manual backup was taking too long and it was not being accomplished as often as I wanted it to be. I knew I needed an automatic cloud backup.

Our company previously used NetBackup and TSM. One of the reasons we switched to Commvault was that our company was not satisfied with IBM's support. It was challenging. If support is not able to help you manage problems, you can't use the solution.

The plus with Commvault is that it really focuses on automation for deploying machines and discovering databases, etc. A Commvault administrator doesn't need to understand, in-depth, the application he is backing up because he doesn't need access into the application. It's much more focused on snapshotting for the synchronization between locations. The BMR process can be used across the cloud and on-prem solutions, so you can easily move machines from your environment to a cloud environment. And from that cloud environment you can convert to another vendor in the cloud.

That is all built on the BMR process, which is better than any other backup tool I know. Some of them, like TSM, don't even include a native BMR solution. Instead there is a third-party vendor that does it, so it's not fully-integrated.

I like it when everything is in one console and things can be automated via an internal workflow and deployment is fully automated so I don't need to access the operating system or application platform. Those are all benefits of Commvault.

We often had scale issues with our previous vendor deployment or found other solutions were better for a particular system and so would introduce differing technologies to address these challenges. This led us to have a large and awkward-to-manage backup estate.

The biggest driver for us was to get all of the backup services into one tool set and to get better control and visibility of our data estate.

I do work with a variety of other products as well. Commvault offers easy administration and access and also is less complex. It has a lot of upsides. 

Prior to Commvault, we used Tivoli Storage Manager from IBM. It is a bit lacking in terms of features, compared to Commvault.

We used to use Rubrik but we found Commvault to be a better solution. It provided time savings, handled more complexity, and provided more security.

We used Veritas NetBackup before but switched to Commvault Complete Data Protection because the costs associated with Veritas NetBackup were higher than the cost of Commvault Complete Data Protection. Veritas NetBackup had similar functionalities but had a higher price.

We previously used Veeam.

We have not used a previous solution.

I have worked with other similar solutions including Veritas and Veeam. Veeam is easier to implement than Commvault, although Commvault is quicker to deploy than Veritas.

Veeam is suitable for a small business but when it comes to enterprises, Commvault is one of the solutions that we implement. Generally speaking, Commvault Backup and Commvault Complete Data Protection are good solutions for enterprise-level companies.

Veeam is easy to use and is easier to implement but we do not only deal with small businesses. Most of our customers are enterprises and we have to select the best solutions for them. Other disadvantages to Commvault are that it doesn't support container-based systems and agentless backup is not supported in this software. However, it is more powerful when it comes to integrating heterogeneous environments.

I have also worked with other products, such as NetBackup and Veeam.

The pricing is a place where they all vary. While Commvault is cheaper than Veeam, it's more expensive than NetBackup. 

Our large telecom client switched to the Commvault solution because of both cost and complexity. This product provides them with a simplified, unified solution. What they used previously was a set of several solutions. There were different backup solutions for the different platforms, desktops were backed up separately, there was different hardware to store it, and there was another tool for regulatory compliance. Each task used a different software application, and by implementing Commvault it brought everything into one solution and solved all of their problems.

I used Commvault from 2011 to 2012 at one of my previous organization, but it was only for a short period of time that I worked with it. I then had to move onto other things. That experience helped me when we deployed the newer version of Commvault. At the time, it was Commvault Simpana, and now, it's only Commvault. That experience helped us to understand its requirements and how we could set it up.

We were using Dell EMC Data Protection Rapid Recovery. It wasn't flexible nor scalable. It did not meet all our requirements. It wasn't able to back up physical and cloud environments. It could not store data in the cloud, so we had to look at options to store and protect our data. We were unable to back up our Office 365 and SharePoint data. With Commvault, it has made it seamless for us to store data in the cloud, not only protect it. 

We can set up proper retention policies now. So, if we need to store any data, for example, over a year, seven years, or 10 years, we can accordingly store it. We can then apply policy to that storage, which after that retention period, we will not have to go in and do a manual cleanup.

Veritas

I started my experience with HPE Data Protector, which I now hate, because it's now Micro Focus and it's killing me.

I have worked with Dell EMC. Their solution does the work, but there are a lot of the problems with the ESXi.

I have worked with NetBackup. NetBackup is good, but I haven't seen the new feature like they have in Commvault for integration.

I have also worked with Veritas Backup Exec.

I used Avamar a long time ago. 

Our company switched to Commvault because it had some issues with recovering data and the recovery time was high. Also, the local support team for our old product was not available when we needed them. That's why they were looking for something new and they found Commvault.

I have used IBM Spectrum Protect before. I have attended training sessions and implemented them as well.

In the past, we have worked with similar solutions from competitors such as Dell EMC.

Commvault is an enterprise product set and Veeam only started the virtualization layer. Commvault is already at the front. Veritas has a lot of appliances and Commvault only started doing appliances a few years ago. Veritas marketed their appliances aggressively but Commvault didn't. I think Commvault is moving into data management. 

We used Veritas. We switched because if I wanted to use a backup and recovery feature plus an archiving feature I would need to buy more software. With Commvault, I only need one license. It was not a centralized solution like Commvault is. 

When we made a paradigm shift after moving from the EMC network to Commvault, there is a difference when using both of the products. The other one is powerful but it's more complicated. This one is easier.

We have used Veeam. Commvault is more of an enterprise product. In terms of the scope of integration across multi-cloud/hybrid environments, Veeam is a five out of 10, while Commvault is an eight.

We used Spectrum Protect or Tivoli Storage Manager for quite a few years.

Currently, we are using Veritas, and I have also used Veeam in the past. Veeam is a good product but I prefer Commvault for backup and DR.

The DR setup is a little better with Commvault, with the failover features that are available. Also, we have been having many issues with Veritas and their technical team has not been able to solve most of them. They have not found what the issues are and they are taking too much time.

Compared to Dell,  the push installations are much easier with Commvault. I used to have to log on to every server to install and deploy new clients, but with Commvault, I can do it all remotely. It saves me a lot of time and hassle.

We have a second solution just for our virtualization platform.

We searched for a solution for other areas of protection, such as agent protection or protecting applications and virtualized cloud platforms that our previous solution could not handle. Our previous solution, EMC Avamar, was more restricted in terms of applications and platforms that it could protect.

Yes, we used a different solution. We switched due to consolidation and cost effectiveness.

Before Commvault, we used a French solution. It had issues with backups and was very bad. We had to migrate before we encountered a bigger problem. 

I have experience with several backup and recovery solutions, including product by Veritas.

We previously used Acronis as our backup solution in this company, but it is not a stable product. It fails as we need to restore a backup, and we needed a stable product. We also needed support for many different platforms. I had worked with this solution at my previous company six years ago and was familiar with it, which is why we choose it.

We did not previously use another solution.

I use other solutions (TSM, Veeam, etc.) and Commvault is my number one for ability to easily manage very complex environments with very little administrative effort. Also, resiliency is it's strong advantage, i.e., if you backup SQL DBs with Commvault and someone does a backup outside of Commvault, it will automatically convert the next job (whether log or differential backup) to full where other solutions could simply fail.

Another great example is when doing VMware backups, Commvault automatically discovered hosts affected with a known CBT issue (in v6.0) and turn it off, where needed. This is the difference between just having a backup and having data that you can count on if you need it.

Yes, we had different solutions across locations. The decision was made to unify the backup solution across our branches. CommVault was chosen based on multiple factors.

No, it was in manual backup earlier, now it is an automated.

No.