MSP360 Backup Reviews

I primarily use the solution for my personal backup.

I liked the feature that allows users to copy the archives and then to make the backups in volumes and targets in the public cloud. I can use it in Amazon, in Azure. We have some resources to put the backup in Rackspace, or in a lot more public cloud providers.

The initial setup is very easy. It's not overly complex.

The solution is stable.

You can scale the solution well.

Technical support is very helpful.

They have other products, for example, Glacier Explorer. It would be a good thing if it was all in the same tool and not in separate tools. There should be just two products in one.

The solution needs a better graphical user interface. It's a graphical user interface that is very old-school right now. They could give it a little more modern feel.

The solution needs more options to restore the machines in various environments and in the public cloud. We have options to restore in Amazon, however, the only public clouds on offer are really Amazon and in Azure. They should think about Google or other public cloud providers.

I've been using the solution for about three years at this point. It's been a while. I'm using it right now.

The stability is very good. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's quite good. The performance is reliable. 

I did not have any problems with scalability. I could shrink that data I was backing up. I could expand to another backup job separated as in folders. It's really, really very easy to scale. A company would have no trouble doing so.

I only use it myself. There aren't any other users.

I've used technical support in the past and I've found them to be very good. They are quite fast and very helpful. My problems were resolved. I'm very satisfied with the level of support. I'd rate them at a nine out of ten overall.

I was using some types of replication tools for copying the data and also 365's tool for storage of my data. However, I changed it due to the fact that I needed another place so that that all the data was really backed up in another separate location.

The solution is quite straightforward to implement. It's not overly complex at all. A company shouldn't have too much trouble with the setup.

The value for money is very good.

I'm just a customer and end-user.

I currently use the previous version of MSP when its name was CloudBerry.

I installed an agent in the configuration to back up the information on Amazon. I have about two terabytes of backups in Amazon Glacier.

I would recommend the solution. It's a very trustworthy solution.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten.

Cloudberry was chosen because it supports many back-end providers, peer-to-peer storage, client-side encryption, block level backup, and compression. The per client price is reasonable and it is well suited for SOHO and smaller shops.

This replaces a previous solution which is dropping support for peer-to-peer backup. With peer-to-peer, we can preseed a remote peer in the same city inexpensively as well as perform a fast recovery, if needed.

• Supports peer-to-peer backup using Minio, which has allowed us to easily pre-seed and maintain an off-site backup within driving distance, making tactical recovery of accidental file deletions easy.
• Supports a wide variety of back-end data storage providers. We use one of the big players for strategic backup in the event of a major infrastructure failure.
• Client-side encryption minimizes worries about data being captured on the back-end.
• Block level transfers have significantly reduced the amount of time for transfers over some other solutions.

The interface could use some updating. The product functionality is beyond the scope of understanding for most people without an IT background. However, the interface feels like it is targeted for end users who typically are looking for an all-in-one integrated push button solution. It would be better if the interface had a beginner mode and an expert mode.

For example, when editing an existing backup set, one has to go through a wizard-like interface with many screens even if you are only changing one thing.  The user is forced to keep clicking Next>Next>Next>Next>Next>Next> until you are finally able to save your changes. Experienced people would rather have all the information on a screen or two and be able to quickly get to the area they need to modify.

No issues so far. Although, we are just starting with it.

Our needs are small, so I can't say how well it will scale. There is a managed backup solution for larger installations, but I have not used it. I understand it enables remote management and monitoring, however it requires a connection to a Cloudberry server so it may not be possible to keep everything in-house. Watching the video on the Cloudberry website, it does not appear to be enterprise level, but more research would be needed.

I have only had one question that I emailed support. My question was addressed in less than 24 hours, even going back and forth a couple times.

I previously used CrashPlan, but dropped it due to Code42 discontinuing support of peer-to-peer backup and changing their offerings.

Setup was straightforward, since our back-end storage was already established.

If you do not have a storage provider already, this will add time as that will have to also be setup before Cloudberry can be used.

In-house implementation.

This is a good solution for smallish businesses and appears scalable to some extent. Enterprise level companies may find other solutions more appropriate. However, I do know that Cloudberry central management is possible using their managed backup tool.

I took a look at Duplicati and Arq, as well as CrashPlan's future offerings. Duplicati has real promise, but it is not stable enough yet and is a bit too fiddly.

The UI is pretty good. It's very simple. That is one thing that we like about this. It's very user-friendly.

There are some things that we don't like about it. That is why I was exploring alternatives in a hyper-scale environment. That is why I was checking IT Central Station.

We are in the process of moving away from this solution.

The RPO for any backup is higher when compared to the product that we are looking at. And it does not have very good scalability option. Whereas the product that we are looking at has full scalability. The product that we are looking at is in the hyper-scale environment.

I have been using this solution for five to six years. 

It's stable, but not agile.

We have 20 odd users because it's only the IT administration team who handles the software.

Their support is good. 

The initial setup is straightforward. It's not complex. It doesn't take more than two hours. It depends on your architecture. 

If your environment is small and you're not looking to scale too much, I would recommend this solution. If the environment is bigger and the environment is going to scale pretty fast, then this would not be the solution.

To improve this solution, they should improve it so that the backup restore is pretty fast. If I have an incident and I need to restore something very fast, I want to restore a particular virtual machine, maybe in an hour and that is not possible to do with MSP360. It takes time. 

I would rate MSP360 a seven out of ten. 

The problem for us was because we have an environment that is scaled up, and it becomes a little challenging to manage. One other challenge is that they don't have a central console. You can write this point as an improvement point where they have a central console or you can say the management isn't easy. 

We primarily use the solution for offsite backups that can be turned into temporary production machines if necessary.

The solution is appliance-free. In other words, there's no appliance involved; just an agent.

The product does not require a contract.

It's a very flexible product overall.

The initial setup is very straightforward.

We've found the scalability to be quite good.

The stability has never been a problem for us.

Technical support is very good.

We've found the price point to be quite good.

We could basically use just a more concise visual dashboard reporting on the status of the various machines. If they offered that, the product would be much better.

We would like to see more efficiency in terms of the amount of time it takes. It's my understanding that they have that in the works. It may already be happening. Their standalone non-cloud product already has it. They've told me it's coming. Right now, a nightly backup takes a few hours and it's being condensed into two hours soon. That's going to be much better for us.

I've been dealing with the solution for about a year, or maybe even a little longer than that.

The solution has been very stable for us so far. the performance is good. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable.

A company can scale the solution if they want to. It's not difficult to do. The product is capable of expanding as necessary.

We just have a handful of people on the solution. There aren't users per se.

We've dealt with technical support in the past and they have been very good so far. They are helpful and responsive. They seem to be knowledgeable. We are very satisfied with the level of support they provide our organization.

We did not find the initial setup wot be overly complex or difficult. It's easy. It's straightforward. A company should have no trouble with the implementation process in general.

You do not need to have a contract in order to use the solution.

The pricing of the product is very reasonable. I don't want to get into the specifics, however, I can say that it's amongst the more reasonable of any similar product that's out there. The bulk of the cost is the storage, not the software. The more storage you take, the more expensive it will ultimately be.

In comparison, Amazon, which I am using for storage, charges me about four times what this product costs me.

While the solution is set up for re-sale, I don't recall us having any formal agreements in place with the company.

We're using the cloud version of the solution and therefore it's the most up-to-date version available.

I'd recommend other organizations to try the product. We've been largely quite happy with it. It's easy enough to dive into.

Overall, I would rate the solution at a nine out of ten.

Our primary use case is that we have our confidential data which remains locally on the tape. But the public information which is required, which is for my system backup, including my photographs and all that stuff, we do on the cloud backup and I put onto the normal storage of AWS. This stuff we generally don't require for a long time, like photos. It can take a long time for retrieval but the cost is really low.

The feature that I have found most valuable is its online backup capacity because you don't have to do an entire back up again and again, it just does whatever you type in, you type a, it goes a, you type b, it goes b. It doesn't take an entire site up again and again. So that incremental and bit by bit backup is important, it is a nice feature here.

Backup data to S3: Use Backup Plan wizard to create a block-level volume snapshots on a Windows
workstation or backup individual files and folders. With the wizard You can also:
• Create a schedule for your backups
• Encrypt data with a user password
• Configure retention policies
• Setup intelligent bandwidth consumption
• Windows, macOS, and Linux supported

As for what can be improved, some reports could be simplified so that you know how much backup you have done and what your backup details are. That report is available but it is very tough to get. I would like to know "today I have just uploaded 35 MB, tomorrow I have loaded 10 MB so my trend of backup is increasing." Sometimes it is not required but still I backup anything and everything. If I have the simplified reports available, then it is very easy for me to just find out.

In the next release, we need more analytics, like in machine learning and artificial intelligence. That includes how much data is going to be restored, what is the next step, how much inner data for this is going to uploaded. So the intelligence aspect should be more involved in the next release.

I have been using Cloudberry Backup for around the last six to eight months.

I have not encountered any issues with stability, it's easy.

It is a scalable solution, it is easy. Right now we have 100 plus people using it on a daily basis. We update daily.

We previously used NetWorker. But that was a feed backup, not a user backup or a cloud backup. We were searching for a cloud-based solution.

The initial setup is very simple.

For a user, it might not take more than 10 minutes.

I implemented on my own. It is just a small file. You just need to run it up and policies are already defined so it doesn't take much longer.

There is no maintenance. If there is any patch update, it is just updated online.

We did evaluate Druva before choosing Cloudberry, but the problem with Druva was that it doesn't have a local India data center to hold data and the regulator has come out saying that your data should not leave the country.

One thing that I would recommend is first of all to do a classification of your data. That means that before each backup has to be done, most of the time people need to clean up their data. They just want to do a backup. If there was a feed backup where there would not be much cost when you go to the cloud backup, no doubt it is would be easy to handle backup retrievals and all, but everything here increases the cost. When we restore the backup, there is a cost associate because we're using the link and all this stuff. There is also a cost to retrieving it. That means the people first have to do the housekeeping of the data before it goes onto the cloud backup. The data classification has to be in order before going to the cloud backup.

Next is that you need to know where your stored data is being stored before storing it, whether it is in India or in Singapore or in the US. This you need to make sure. 

Next is an SA link. That means your agreement about how much time it takes to retrieve, how much it takes to upload, etc. And finally is your internet speed, your internet bandwidth - what bandwidth you are using. Because once you do the cloud backup, your internet bandwidth has to be increased. So these are the things which you need to take care of.

On a scale of one to 10 - I would rate Cloudberry Backup a nine.

Backup of several computer on a LAN consisting of a mix of Windows 10 and Linux to replace CrashPlan, which is leaving the personal market. Cloudberry Backup meets this basic requirement.

Cloudberry Backup is a replacement for CrashPlan, which is leaving the personal market. I needed a easy to implement backup solution for Windows and Linux. So far, Cloudberry meets my general expectations and may turn out to be an improvement over CrashPlan.

General ease of use and performance of the Windows version. In this regard, Cloudberry Backup is a significant improvement over CrashPlan, which was my previous backup solution.

The Linux GUI leaves a lot to be desired. It lacks many of the features of the Windows version and is buggy, but it is still usable.

We primarily use the solution for backups, in our virtual machines and our local physical computers.

The backup is the solution's most valuable aspect.

The interface is very user-friendly.

The solution is simple to use and easy to configure.

We quite like the solution. For us, it's been a great solution.

It would help if the solution had deduplication. They may be planning to add it in the future.

The graphics are looking a bit old and should be updated.

We've been using the solution for about one year.

We haven't had to contact technical support yet. We find the solution very easy to use, so we haven't required any assistance.

The initial setup is straightforward. We found it very easy to implement and configure.

We handled the implementation ourselves.

I've used Nakivo in the past. It's used exclusively for virtual machines whereas CloudBerry also covers physical appliances.

We use both public and private cloud deployment models.

Having a backup is necessary. Every user of IT infrastructure needs to have a backup, and this is a good solution to implement because it is so easy and straightforward.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.