The evolution off of tape is one that we have looked to do for a long time. We've had BTLs pitched that have never been viable solutions. We took knocks for overlooking those back then, for cost or other reasons, but it has paid off that we didn't invest in one of those platforms that we would now have to get off of. We kept tape around for a long time. 

Yet, now, we can move straight to a disk-based solution with the container pools, which is working well, and we are looking into cloud.

Comparing IBM Spectrum Protect with other solutions involves considering specific details that can often be subjective. We conducted a thorough analysis of different enterprise platforms and found no major differences between them, whether in terms of features or performance. 

Ultimately, the decision often boils down to factors such as price and local support. IBM excels in these areas, having a strong presence in the region for over thirty years and a robust partner network. The choice among the top three vendors we considered was closely contested, with price being the deciding factor, as their offerings were very similar in features.

We also evaluated Commvault.

There are a lot of other tools that are better than IBM Spectrum Protect. These tools offer ease of use. Spectrum Protect is not easy to administer. Other solutions are UI-based.

I evaluated a solution from Quantum, though I can't recall its name.

I evaluated Time Navigator and NetBackup.

I have evaluated Veeam.

We are currently reviewing Veeam. After we have installed it, we will know more about it and some of the similarities.

We evaluated EMC Avamar, which we were using. We were using TSM (previously TSM, now Spectrum) in our data center, but not in our remote sites. We actually moved away from them five years ago, because Avamar was better. We evaluated Veeam, CommVault, NetBackup, and others.

This solution was in place when I arrived. However, we are currently in the process of migrating to Veeam but this is a cost consideration rather than one of functionality or performance.

There was a call for tender for an overall storage renewal, and IBM easily won out versus its competition. 

We looked at Veeam and Rubrik, but right now, we have the two best products. We have Commvault and Spectrum Protect. Each one of them are the best at different things and each have their weaknesses. During the last two years, IBM has put out a lot of different features which have impressed us. We may be able to reevaluate some product comparisons now. As long as IBM continues to roll out new features and adjusts a lot of other customer issues out there in the industry, they will continue to stay one of the top products.

We had another product brought in to take care of the other side of the Microsoft servers and VMs. They thought about dragging us into that as well and getting rid of Spectrum Protect. I said, "We don't need something that complicated. Spectrum Protect is a perfect fit for what we need."

NetBackup was previously running, but they have moved to Commvault, and I said, "There is no way that I am going to CommVault. It is too expensive and complicated. Spectrum Protect is not expensive, and it is simple to use." 

Even some of the people in our group, like our DBAs and non-technical people, can restore some stuff themselves via Spectrum Protect. They don't always need me. That is how simple it is. That is what I like about it.

We are always looking at different solutions. For example, we are looking at Cloud Work, Cohesity, and Rubrik. We're very early in the process of evaluating them, so we don't have clear differentiators yet. It's too early to discuss a comparison of features.

Other market competitors include EMC NetWorker, Veritas (Plus Edition), and Veeam (for virtualization).

Spectrum Protect is often compared with Commvault and EMC for overall backup solutions, then against Veeam, and Rubrik for virtualization platforms.

NetBackup was on my shortlist. Back then, they were not running on Windows and they ran on Unix. I was not a Unix guy for too long, and I wanted to feel comfortable with the OS. I came from a mainframe background. It's more flexible, and it can back up a cross-platform backup to any platform. That's a good feature, and they have it. You don't need a different backup solution and a different OS for each platform.

We always look at alternatives, but there are certain things you do as a strategy because you want a certain standardization and there are things you do as a temporary setup for a project or two projects. So we have both actually. We have a lot of products and there is always an alternative to them.

Before choosing IBM Spectrum Protect we evaluated solutions from EMC, from Commvault, and from Veeam. We selected IBM because it meets all our requirements and we have been using it for a long time. Shifting to a new technology comes with the price which includes support, training, development, et cetera. So that's why we continue to use IBM.

I do not know who else was evaluated when we were looking for a solution.

Now, we have NetWorker, Avamar, and Spectrum Protect. So, we have two and a half too many backup products.

We evaluated Commvault, NetBackup, and Axiom (until they were purchased by a competitor). We also looked at Rubrik. We prefer Spectrum Protect, and even though we have looked at its competitors, we have never switched.

NetBackup.

For vendors, I want good technical support, but I also want honest sales people. I want somebody who is going to tell me the straight truth, and whether or not it's a product that I should buy. I don't want it similar to selling me a car or something. I want somebody who will be honest with me.

I would also like a product that scales and is reliable. It should be able to handle the amount of data that we backup every night. I go back to being reliable.

Typically, the competitors have been EMC or Commvault. Those are the most common ones that we have run into. 

What is probably most interesting, more recently, customers have been having conversations with me around some of these newer backup applications which are more web scale architected, like how Spectrum Protect Plus is designed. This has been a different conversation, because the customers' focus is more about ease of use, and less about flexibility and scalability. Therefore, this has been a little bit of a shift, because they have simplified so much, and what they have is their infrastructure.

I do not know who they evaluated.

The competitors are Commvault, Veeam, or any of the other major backup players who are out there right now. It is a zero sum market. Everybody is bidding for the same customers.

We previously evaluated NetBackup , eVault, and ArcServe.

We also evaluated NetBackup.

We evaluated other data protection products like Veritas.

We chose IBM because we had IBM in-house. This was the main reason, and also because Spectrum Protect would integrate with the IBM products better.

Customers will look at other vendors in the enterprise backup space: Commvault, NetBackup, Veeam, and other similar solutions.

Most of my customers have already been Spectrum Protect customers. Therefore they are happy with the product. The new implementations that I have done, they have generally chosen Spectrum Protect for its scalability and reliability.

We look for stability when first considering solutions. IBM, overall, brings the greatest set of solutions that can tackle a customer's storage needs. This is not just from a data protection perspective, but through the whole lifecycle of managing their data. IBM has a full spectrum of solutions they can bring for customers' needs.

No.

Our customers always evaluate other vendors. Customers are sometimes using Veeam Backup for their virtual workloads. They may also be using some other tools from EMC. However, Spectrum Protect is the only tool that can work throughout all their technology and platforms. Therefore, they do not need separate tools for separate technologies. Spectrum Protect is the only tool which helps them do this.

IBM is most compared to Veeam Backup because there are a lot of virtualized workloads in our Clients. It is also compared with HPE Data Protector and Veritas. These are the solutions that our customers evaluate. 

I have seen a lot of other backup products out there, and they are good. However, Spectrum Protect seems to encompass a broad range of things, and you can pretty much put it anywhere. You can tie it into your backup network or backup needs.

Our clients tend to compare it with NetBackup.

When Spectrum Protect is not suitable for a customer's environment, we always recommend backup replication solutions. Backup replication solutions are much easier to manage as they don't require a steep learning curve. Backup replication solutions are a great fit for small to medium-sized businesses, but for large corporations, large enterprises, or large companies, my choice is Spectrum Protect.

That was really too long ago to be of any use. However, I would suggest that at scale today, only Commvault and now Veeam, would be the products to compare it against.

We are actually looking for different solutions right now.

No.

Most of my customers are coming from old NetBackup type of environments. What I see a lot more now is Commvault, and these two being the other two main competitors.

Our customers also look at Commvault and Veeam.

I have used HPE. 

I have also used NetBackup. NetBackup seemed a little more intuitive, but it did not do near as much. This will do a lot more.

I tried other products, but some of them were not suitable for enterprise class.

In principle, and whenever I can implement this product, if a customer is reluctant or has many Windows servers I choose products that are configured/installed almost entirely via a graphic interface, such as Commvault.

I have used a couple of different backup products. As a business partner, our customers do choose other backup products. Generally, I find I have less trouble with Spectrum Protect than I have had with the other backup products.

Mainly, the competition is Commvault, if they are looking at the functionality that Spectrum Protect is offering. There are some customers who go with Veeam. The reason that they go with Veem is because they have a desire to go there. When they already want to go that way, it is difficult to position Spectrum Protect as an alternative. I am really keen to see how Spectrum Protect Plus might compete with Veem in the marketplace.

A long time ago, we also evaluated Legato NetWorker (now EMC NetWorker).

This was before my time with the company.

Before choosing this product, I evaluated CA Arcserve, Veritas NetBackup, and HP Data Protector.

No, none.

Currently, we have moved away from Spectrum Protect, and towards Rubrik. Rubrik has been my product of choice over the last two years, at least. Even with the recently released updates that give cloud-based protection, I still don't believe IBM Spectrum Protect is up to par with the likes of Rubrik. Of the customers who still use IBM Spectrum Protect, we only have three left—there used to be a lot more. 

I was with a different organization. We were using Symantec products.

I do not know who else was evaluated.

We seriously looked at Commvault. We also looked at Veeam and another third-party.

The main competitors usually evaluated: EMC and Commvault. 

We compared it to NetBackup. In the end, for design and cost optimization, we chose IBM Spectrum Protect.

No other options have been considered.

EMC Avamar and Cohesity were also in the PoC.

Vendors who tend to appear on customers shortlists are Veeam, NetBackup, and Commvault.

We evaluated Arcserve and CommVault.

We looked at NetBackup, Backup Exec, and there were a couple of other ones that we looked at.

I have evaluated NetBackup, Commvault, Backup Exec, Legato, Avamar, and Rubrik.

No.

EMC and one other.

Symantec Backup Exec.

I think it makes sense to think about Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization because Red Hat has better backup.

• Commvault
• NetBackup
• Networker