We performed a comparison between OpenText Data Protector and Symantec Data Loss Prevention based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Backup and Recovery solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution is easy to use."
"The feature that was most valuable was that we could restore one mailbox and we could do different backups for different databases."
"The solution allows us to be able to backup and exchange directly, to backup Microsoft exchange."
"The initial setup is very easy."
"Integration with HP storage is a very strong point for Micro Focus Data Protector. It is the best solution for general operations like backup and restore. Zero downtime backup (ZDB) is one very important feature, which is basically the integration with the storage array. It is a very strong feature. We're using storage with snapshots with this integration."
"It is a stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten...The initial setup process for the solution is easy."
"The most valuable feature is the capability to back up our SQL server."
"It's user-friendly and not overly complicated to configure."
"We work in the banking field. We deploy data loss prevention. Our branch protects our clients' data, credit card numbers, account numbers, and other confidential and sensitive data."
"The incident response options and reporting features are particularly strong, with the inclusion of Incident Classification Assessment (ICA) for integrated reporting."
"The data-at-rest features are the most valuable because they let us identify data infected with ransomware and prevent employees from being exploited through phishing attacks. If an employee is compromised, the attacker can access servers and deposit ransomware. This enables the attacker to exfiltrate data remotely using employees' credentials. It might be valuable data that could cause a business reputational and financial damage if stolen and publicized. It could also be credit card data or personal health information stored on critical servers."
"I like how I have the possibility to check different channels with the same policy set."
"It can prevent copying and encoding of HTTP data to various sites like Google, and Webex."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is endpoint security."
"The features I like most about this solution is the endpoint modules because it gives us the protection we need."
"The initial setup is easy."
"It's very expensive compared to Veeam and other similar solutions."
"The product can be developed by including functionalities like DR, CDP, and SureBackup, which are currently unavailable in the solution."
"VMware backup integration and cloud recovery is lacking."
"The online backups of Office 365 have room for improvement. This is now available for the Exchange Online part of Office 365, but we're still waiting for SharePoint Online, Teams, etc. We know that it's coming, but it takes time."
"People prefer Veeam because the interface is easier, and Data Protector is difficult in comparison."
"They should design the solution so that it is much easier for deployment and make the UI easy to use."
"We have a lot of requests for the Micro Focus team, particularly in terms of the Japanese data pattern, as it's not as good now. The Japanese data pattern accuracy of the Micro Focus Data Protector needs to be improved because there are a lot of false negatives and false positives. We are currently testing this and our product team has been communicating with the Micro Focus team."
"It can occasionally be inaccurate in its backup/recovery time estimates."
"The product's technical support services need improvement."
"We're not sure if there was an issue or a bug on the system recently because as of right now if someone sends out a compressed encrypted file, the DLP won't scan it."
"DLP could be improved by implementing a cloud-based console."
"There are some features that are not available which are required by every data loss prevention solution."
"The database is a problem for us, as it's running on Oracle and not everybody likes that."
"The upgrade process is convoluted. The server and database software must run in line with third-party providers like the Oracle database. If an Oracle database reaches the end of its life, then servers must be decommissioned, and you need to bring new servers online. When the maintenance packages are deployed to the management server, they don't get pushed to the detection servers. Each detection server must be manually installed rather than automatically made from a single server. If it's a large enterprise, you need to manually install it or use a GPO or some other technology, which I never use."
"It is very difficult to log in to create a support ticket because no one is available to support our queries."
"I would like to see an improved interface, with better documentation and integration with other products."
More Symantec Data Loss Prevention Pricing and Cost Advice →
OpenText Data Protector is ranked 23rd in Backup and Recovery with 99 reviews while Symantec Data Loss Prevention is ranked 3rd in Data Loss Prevention (DLP) with 53 reviews. OpenText Data Protector is rated 7.6, while Symantec Data Loss Prevention is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of OpenText Data Protector writes "User-friendly, competitive, agent-based, and easy to manage". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Symantec Data Loss Prevention writes "Consitent, accurate, and simple". OpenText Data Protector is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Commvault Cloud, Veritas NetBackup, HPE StoreOnce and Dell PowerProtect DD (Data Domain), whereas Symantec Data Loss Prevention is most compared with Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention, Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention, Digital Guardian, CoSoSys Endpoint Protector and Amazon Macie. See our OpenText Data Protector vs. Symantec Data Loss Prevention report.
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.
