Compare Global-active Device vs. Lumen SafeHaven
Views
42
Comparisons
26
Reviews
0
Average Words per Review
0
Rating
N/A
Views
97
Comparisons
69
Reviews
0
Average Words per Review
0
Rating
N/A
Find out what your peers are saying about NetApp, HVR Software, Dell EMC and others in Data Replication. Updated: February 2021.
465,623 professionals have used our research since 2012.
SafeHaven, SafeHaven DRaaS, CenturyLink SafeHaven
Depend on the global-active device feature of Hitachi Storage Virtualization Operating System (SVOS RF) to ensure continuous operations across multiple locations. Simplify data consistency, availability and protection. Up to three-site geographic protection supports the strictest service levels. Provide your business with the solution trusted by 87% of Fortune 100 financial companies.
CenturyLink SafeHaven DRaaS offers an efficient way to protect your enterprise data and production systems - easily and affordably.
Learn more about Global-active Device
Learn more about Lumen SafeHaven
BMW Group, Datev, Turk Telecom, Tel Aviv Stock Exchange
Seattle Seahawks, tipico, serco
Find out what your peers are saying about NetApp, HVR Software, Dell EMC and others in Data Replication. Updated: February 2021.
465,623 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Global-active Device is ranked 20th in Data Replication while Lumen SafeHaven is ranked 10th in Disaster Recovery as a Service. Global-active Device is rated 0.0, while Lumen SafeHaven is rated 0.0. On the other hand, Global-active Device is most compared with , whereas Lumen SafeHaven is most compared with Azure Site Recovery.
See our list of .
We monitor all Data Replication 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.