We performed a comparison between IBM Tivoli CDP for Files and NetApp SnapCenter based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Veeam Software, Zerto, Commvault and others in Backup and Recovery."The restoration and infrastructure is extremely reliable."
"It's all together managing both storage and backup, which makes it easier for troubleshooting issues and the automation part of it"
"The reporting feature has been particularly beneficial to upper management... When you do manual backups, you do not get the benefit of seeing successes and failures and how often you have to do restores. With SnapCenter, you get all of that."
"It has greatly improved our DR activity."
"It's integrated with VMware vCenter. You can also see the backups there and you can do a restore completely out of vCenter."
"It's very helpful because SnapCenter is already integrated with VMware Snapshot, so it's very easy to use."
"The way that it interconnects with VMware is really handy, because you can go right into your vSphere client, where you spend a lot of the day anyway, right-click on one of the VMs where you have backups running for however long, and you can restore either some files or restore the entire thing."
"The Exchange plugin is the most valuable because we have a lot of customers that use SnapManager Exchange and have to migrate to SnapCenter."
"Restoring and cloning are easy to do."
"We would like to have the opportunity to omit data from being backed up. For example, we have three virtual machines, each with three disks. When running the backup, it will automatically take each disk rather than allowing us to select what data we want backed."
"There is one area that needs improvement and that's in the alerting. When you set up your SMTP alerts, it only has - and I don't understand why - the ability to send an anonymous SMTP. It doesn't do basic authentication, which frustrated me for a while until I figured out that I'm not missing something. It's just not there."
"The UI, the User Interface, needs to be improved. It's not as clean or modern as it could be."
"I would like to see replication support between systems. Right now, it's kind of limited. We manage them separately from the storage system interface, not from SnapCenter. It would be nice if it was integrated into SnapCenter."
"Groups might be helpful for each site or data center so that we know a given data center has these resources while another data center has those resources. It's not always easy to group hosts by type."
"I want to see a few more features add that will help our team in managing solution better."
"The Dashboard view needs to be more compressed with better ease of access and drill-down features. They should also reinstate Linux filesystem backups of storage volumes (which existed in the prior version)."
"Plugins should be developed in shorter times. Performance generally could be a little bit faster."
"The documentation could be a little bit better so that we could handle more of the troubleshooting ourselves, rather than having to go through support."
Earn 20 points
IBM Tivoli CDP for Files is ranked 62nd in Backup and Recovery while NetApp SnapCenter is ranked 40th in Backup and Recovery with 24 reviews. IBM Tivoli CDP for Files is rated 9.0, while NetApp SnapCenter is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of IBM Tivoli CDP for Files writes "Restoration and infrastructure are extremely reliable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NetApp SnapCenter writes "A stable solution that is mostly used by banks and financial institutions". IBM Tivoli CDP for Files is most compared with Commvault Cloud, IBM Spectrum Protect, Arcserve UDP and OpenText Data Protector, whereas NetApp SnapCenter is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Cohesity DataProtect, NetApp Cloud Backup, Commvault Cloud and Veritas NetBackup.
See our list of best Backup and Recovery vendors.
We monitor all Backup and Recovery 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.
