We just raised a $30M Series A: Read our story

Compare Bacula Enterprise vs. IBM Spectrum Protect

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Top Review
Find out what your peers are saying about Bacula Enterprise vs. IBM Spectrum Protect and other solutions. Updated: September 2021.
542,029 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros
"It works great and it provides you with several standard tools to restore your backup, even after a big failure.""Bacula is pretty stable."

More Bacula Enterprise Pros »

"The interface is easy to use.""The archiving feature is the most valuable aspect of the solution.""Instead of taking three different backups of your systems, you're taking only one. You're able to crack that open and get what you need. The incident recovery, where it creates the VM and then you're running it, technically you're running it on Spectrum Protect. But then in the background, it's doing the storage motion and moving it off the Spectrum Protect back to your VMware environment. The users don't know the difference.""The most valuable features are the stability and also how it's seamlessly integrated with other IBM offerings.""The most valuable feature is the backup speed.""SPIR is Instant Recovery for Spectrum Protect. It sends snapshots using space efficiently and blocking backups to the Spectrum Protect server. It provisions the snapshot from the backup server to the same or new server near instantly.""Good user interface.""Their GUI has improved quite a bit. It's made the solution a lot simpler and less complex."

More IBM Spectrum Protect Pros »

Cons
"Easier setup and configuration, perhaps including a GUI, would be an improvement.""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."

More Bacula Enterprise Cons »

"Better integration with other tools and databases is needed.""Although I am not a technical user, I would say the cloud integration features could be improved.""Their support is lacking. I've talked to their developers and stuff in the last couple of weeks and they reassure me that some people have retired, and they're working on getting that bumped back up. But the support lacks a lot to be desired at this point.""This product comes up against other products available that are marketed better but the other products that it's in competition with are a single product and this is one of IBM products. If it could be marketed as more for competitors I think that's where it comes short.""The interface could be more user-friendly.""Replication services would be nice. If these could be enhanced to be always on so multiple storage backup services could be added as a cluster pool. This would provide a better availability service.""Technical support could be improved.""They took some of the funding off of it for a while. Therefore, instead of being a market leader, they took their position for granted. Then some competitors developed new bells and whistles that they advertise, and due to that lag a few years ago, there are not the resources to explain the differences."

More IBM Spectrum Protect Cons »

Pricing and Cost Advice
"This is an open-source solution."

More Bacula Enterprise Pricing and Cost Advice »

"The licensing fees are between $8,000 and $10,000 per year.""IBM provides an open license policy, which is more like a gentlemen's agreement.""One can go with either a PVU licensing model or a capacity based licensing model. Either solution does not block the usage, if over used.""It is fairly reasonable as compared to other solutions in the market.""We have capacity licensing. We use the front end. The capacity licensing is pretty okay on the licensing price. I used to use the old PVU-based licensing in the early environment, but now we use capacity-based licensing.""It is really expensive. Its price is not good for Latin America. Its price is good for the United States or Europe.""It is expensive.""The solution is expensive."

More IBM Spectrum Protect Pricing and Cost Advice »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Backup and Recovery Software solutions are best for your needs.
542,029 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Questions from the Community
Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Top Answer: The solution is a bit expensive, especially if you look at other competitors. They cost less. The licensing could be more competitive.
Top Answer: It's difficult in terms of the configuration at set up. In our case, it required another admin, one person dedicated to the backup. Compared with others, the pricing is high. There needs to be some… more »
Ranking
Views
2,878
Comparisons
1,866
Reviews
2
Average Words per Review
403
Rating
8.5
Views
11,848
Comparisons
7,775
Reviews
29
Average Words per Review
586
Rating
7.9
Comparisons
Also Known As
IBM TSM, IBM Tivoli Storage Manager
Learn More
Overview
Bacula Enterprise Edition is a set of subscription-based enterprise data backup solutions which empower data centers to truly escape data volume price traps. High numbers of enterprise organizations worldwide (incl. NASA, Bank of Austria, Swisscom or Sky PLC) have adopted Bacula Enterprise backup software in mission critical environments because of its advanced features and ability to handle high data volume at very low cost.
IBM Spectrum Protect (Tivoli Storage Manager) is a data protection platform that gives enterprises a single point of control and administration for backup and recovery. It is the flagship product in the IBM Spectrum Protect (Tivoli Storage Manager) family. It enables reliable, cost effective backups and fast recovery for virtual, physical and cloud environments of all sizes.
Offer
Learn more about Bacula Enterprise
Learn more about IBM Spectrum Protect
Sample Customers
NASA, SwissCom, Bank Austria, SdV Plurimedia, Leibniz University Hannover, Polfa Warszawa S.A., premaccess, NetLog, Swisscom Corporate Business, LocaWeb, wbsGo
CERN, Einstein Healthcare, Nyherji, Allianz Australia, TZM, ABT Online, NCT, Kindred Healthcare Inc., Cobalt Iron, TransGrid, Baptist Health of Northeast Florida, Cash America, Piedmont Healthcare, RWGV, Arkansas Tech University, British Columbia Institute of Technology
Top Industries
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Comms Service Provider32%
Computer Software Company21%
Government9%
Manufacturing Company6%
REVIEWERS
Healthcare Company18%
Financial Services Firm15%
University9%
Insurance Company7%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company33%
Comms Service Provider20%
Financial Services Firm6%
Government6%
Company Size
No Data Available
REVIEWERS
Small Business31%
Midsize Enterprise13%
Large Enterprise56%
Find out what your peers are saying about Bacula Enterprise vs. IBM Spectrum Protect and other solutions. Updated: September 2021.
542,029 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Bacula Enterprise is ranked 41st in Backup and Recovery Software with 2 reviews while IBM Spectrum Protect is ranked 12th in Backup and Recovery Software with 31 reviews. Bacula Enterprise is rated 8.6, while IBM Spectrum Protect is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Bacula Enterprise writes "Easy to use, stable, and offers many tools and features ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM Spectrum Protect writes "Great stability, reliability, and scalability, but very difficult to manage and get support". Bacula Enterprise is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Commvault, HPE StoreOnce, Acronis Backup and Micro Focus Data Protector, whereas IBM Spectrum Protect is most compared with IBM Spectrum Protect Plus, Veeam Backup & Replication, Commvault, Azure Backup and Cohesity DataProtect. See our Bacula Enterprise vs. IBM Spectrum Protect report.

See our list of best Backup and Recovery Software vendors.

We monitor all Backup and Recovery Software 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.