OpenText Data Protector Reviews

ZDB, and instant recovery. Also, it will do both physical and virtual backups with Hyper-V and ESXi.

Using the backup storage snapshot functionality we are able to back up 2T databases and 2T file storage fast.

Hyper-V backups need improvement so they can do GRE.

I've used it for five years.

We have a very complex and unusual environment so it took a while to get things working.

Since we started using v5, stability has improved quite a bit.

This has also improved since earlier versions.

We have very good customer service.

We pay for premier support and it is great, but it's not so good if you just have regular support.

We used Tivoli and it did not work well in our environment. Data Protector was cheaper and would do what we needed to do.

It was complex. We had a consultant in for several weeks to get us working. We needed to get the ZDB type, and virtual backups working. The file system backups were no problem.

We had a vendor team, and the main person is still the most knowledgeable one I know for what we needed.

You get what you pay for so don’t skimp.

We had it included in a large purchase we were making at the time.

If you are just doing straight file system backups, this product is straightforward, but if you use any of the many features I would suggest getting help. The interface could be improved and it doesn’t have some things that other products do, but it would depend on what you need from your backups/restores and what your window is.

We use the solution for backup data protection of on-premises, in-cloud, and virtual environments. Also, we use it for the features such as production tab and recall tool.

The solution is easy to use.

The solution's customer support service needs a lot of improvement. Presently, they take a long time to resolve simple issues.

I rate the solution's stability as a four. We face challenges with it, and the support team has not been able to fix them.

We have 2000 users of the solution in our organization. I rate its scalability as a six.

The solution's customer support service for setup and ongoing issues could be better. 

The solution's initial setup was easy, but it took two months to complete the process because of its poor technical support.

The solution's support team executed the deployment for us. It was a time-consuming process.

The solution's price is more reasonable than the other vendors.

If the solution's customer service improves, it will stand out as the best product compared to other vendors. I rate it as a five.

We don't use Micro Focus widely. It's used as a backup-to-tape system. Overall, we have about five users because a couple of our clients use it as well.  

I like that Micro Focus keeps a separate catalog of our data. 

Many of our users complain about the GUI. You still need to rely on the command line interface. Because it originated as a Unix system, Data Protector is still a command line-driven solution, which makes it seem rather dated compared to systems that are built around a GUI from day one. It doesn't affect the functionality, but some people don't find it user-friendly.

I have been using Micro Focus for almost 20 years. 

Data Protector is stable.

Data Protector is highly scalable.

We don't use Micro Focus support often, but it has been pretty good when we needed it.

We also use Acronis Backup, but it's hard for me to compare because I don't have as much experience with Acronis relative to Data Protector. It's also one of those difficult situations because we haven't really pushed Data Protector to its limits. It has a lot of functionality that we don't use. We tend to use more of Acronis' functionality, so it would be unfair to compare them.

The initial setup is fairly straightforward because it was historically a Unix system. It takes about half a day to install. 

Data Protector has an annual license, and it's reasonably priced. 

I rate Micro Focus Data Protector eight out of 10. It's a highly stable solution that does the job. To use this product, you must comfortable with a command line interface, and many people today can't deal with anything that's not GUI. You need to be in control of the command line to use it properly. 

It works excellently only with Oracle.

It has a lot of undeveloped functions like window searching and patent searching, and within the main backup processes like VMware and Microsoft Exchange.

It's completely not user-friendly, and it has no built-in antivirus software. In my opinion, Micro Focus Data Protector is not an enterprise level solution.

I would like to see the quick search bar working without complexities and would like to see the building reporting. I would like to see it deny the architecture of the client and server and work directly via APIs.

I would like to see Micro Focus Data Protector be completely web based with fast HTML files. That would reduce a lot of installation time with all those script integrations and so on.

It would be good to have automation of the broken backups. For example, NetBackup had a great feature when the backup broke for some reason. It would automatically try to resume it eight or nine times and only then would give a fail error.

The stability depends on the environment because there can be some special cases where Micro Focus Data Protector is not stable at all.

The technical support from Micro Focus is terrible in terms of the quality and problem solving. For example, let's assume that something went wrong when running Data Protector in a large infrastructure environment with permanent backups going on. When we contact technical support, they will ask us to provide logs. However, if we turn the bug mode on it will affect all of the systems, and we simply will not be able to collect the requested logs for that purpose. So, it becomes impossible to provide the necessary log files because we cannot stop the critical backups.

I have some experience with NetBackup. It was more stable, user-friendly, and had the best support. However, the decision makers decided that Micro Focus Data Protector was the better way to go, and we had to switch.

As for the initial setup, it's perfect for small- and medium-sized companies.

The pricing is acceptable for enterprise level companies, but it's not acceptable for small- and medium-sized businesses. Micro Focus Data Protector is not an enterprise level solution, and it should cover small- and medium-sized businesses with acceptable prices.

I would advise you not to use Micro Focus Data Protector and would rate it at four on a scale from one to ten.

We primarily use the solution for our server backup and some Linux system backups as well as a backup for our SQL.

The main reason for usage is to protect our information. However, we've searching for new tools for increasing the volume of information and increasing platform protection. Unfortunately, Data Protector is not exactly the tool for that task.

The stability of the product seems to be quite good.

The solution isn't ideal for big data or large CRMs.

We have been lacking proper training on the solution. This seems to be a weak point of the product. They should offer better training for their users.

Other tools seem to be easier to use.

The solution should offer support for the backup of cloud platforms. The same system needs to work with replication and mirror sites, for example.

I've been dealing with the solution for five years or so.

The stability of the solution is quite good. There aren't bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze at all. It's reliable.

As this is an appliance, the scalability is limited to the sizing. There's only so much capacity that is possible.

It's difficult to get technical support and proper assistance for this tool.

I've only worked with this particular company for eight months and they've had the solution for a number of years previous to my start. I did not play a role in the implementation and therefore can't speak to how easy or difficult the setup or deployment was for them.

I'm not sure how many people the company used for deployment or how many are needed for maintenance.

I don't have any insights into the licensing or costs. It's not an aspect of the solution that I handle directly.

We're currently planning on changing out backup tools. At the moment we're looking at Veeam and Barracuda. We have some systems deployed by Spanish users and they already use Barracuda, which is why we are considering it. We're taking licensing costs into account, however, we're finding that the most visible difference is the user interface as well as the style of use - for example, how to backup and recover data.

We're just a customer and an end-user. We don't have a special relationship with this company.

I'm not sure of the exact version we're using. It may be some iteration of version six.

I'd advise new users to implement the solution using a support person and good documentation and to make sure they are putting the correct data policies in place.

In the past, it was quite a good tool, however, now, due to a lack of training, or due to having a lack of staff that is trained in it, it is likely much easier to have something like Veeam, which isn't as complicated of a solution.

On a scale from one to ten, I would rate this product at a five. In comparison, I'd rate Veeam at an eight.

We use Micro Focus Data Protector for taking backups throughout our entire data center, which includes backups for our SAP HANA, Oracle, and SQL databases, as well as for the Windows virtual instances which also require file-level, user data, and database backups.

Data Protector's granular recovery features make it easy for us to create and restore backups in an understandable and user-friendly manner. With granular recovery, any database or even just a database table can be restored at will.

The new dashboard that has been introduced is also very good because it allows us to easily visualize how many backups have been performed, showing the total number of TB used as well as useful information on our backup schedules.

Also, in terms of basic backup features, it has everything that most other backup solutions provide and the pricing is very competitive for what it offers.

Micro Focus are improving Data Protector with every new version and since we began undergoing training with the latest version we have not faced any real challenges yet. However, their support does need to be improved, in my opinion. In certain critical cases that we've had, they did not provide a satisfactory level of support.

I have been using Micro Focus Data Protector for the past ten years.

It is both stable and easy to maintain.

In terms of scalability, we're already using it throughout our entire data center. There are no limitations when it comes either host or data backups; you simply need to buy the appropriate licenses and scale up as required.

For any issues that we encounter, we escalate to Micro Focus' tech support. Unfortunately, their support does need some improvement because, in critical cases we've had in the past, I don't believe that they have provided adequate support.

Neutral

For me, setting up Micro Focus is straightforward when it comes to the Windows platform, but somewhat more complicated on Linux because I am not very accustomed to Linux. 

It will generally take one month for the planning phase, then another month for testing, after which we can implement it and move it into production.

Everything in terms of implementation is done in-house.

We are indeed getting return on investment from this solution.

Data Protector's pricing is very competitive and we have no issues in this regard. I would give it an eight out of ten in terms of pricing.

There are two main types of license, one being a perpetual license with a one-time charge and the other is a subscription license where you pay every year. With either type, scaling up is not a problem; you can just buy the appropriate license that is in compliance with your needs, and there is no limitation here.

We are currently evaluating similar backup solutions in the market such as those from Veeam and Veritas (NetBackup). 

At the end of the day, Data Protector is a user-friendly backup solution that is easy to integrate with any OS or database. Its main strengths include granular backup functionality and a well-implemented dashboard that tells you all the essential info such as how many backups you've run, how many have succeeded or failed, and how much space the backups are taking up.

I would rate Micro Focus Data Protector a nine out of ten.

file backup and VM backup 

Nops, MFDP Solution is outdated in termes of current backup and protection requirements and we are forced to move to another solution 

The world has changed, growth is happening towards cloud capabilities, and this product is not that developed. If you were to ask me what I like about Micro Focus Data Protector previously, I would say that this product is a single platform manager. At that time there was not any competition. You got the backup guaranteed even if it took some time, but in the they recovered the file. It was a really strong backup solution which contained a single license for tender services. But now the world has changed. There is instant recovery available but they're still an application based backup model. They didn't evolve.

Micro Focus Data Protector must improve its overall evolution record. They need to focus on hardware-based instant recovery, client recovery, and cloud abilities. Now there is no cloud ability.

Another thing they need to work on is that they still lack bare-metal VM and bare-metal recovery models.

The third issue they need to improve, and at the top of the list, is that with the RTO and RPO, we cannot come to a customer as an industry best. Because what happens when you sell is that recovery takes the longest time. This is the pain point in the solution, that it takes time compared to instant recovery.

In terms of additional features I would like to see included in the next release of Micro Focus Data Protector, I will be looking for instant recovery features and for better reporting. To sum up, instant recovery and cloud ability (backup to cloud, return to cloud and restore).

I have been using Micro Focus Data Protector in my current environment for about one and a half years and almost seven years total.

Currently, I can only give negative feedback because my experience in its current state is not up to the mark.

It is a traditional backup model. If you talk about file server and the official Windows database, it's a stable product.

But in the VM, nobody is looking for backup for the sake of backup, you are looking at backup for the sake of recovery. It's not frequent, but it happens, so any backup solution should not be focused just on what to backup but focused on how fast they can recover the data. That is the idea of Rubrik. The other competitors don't focus on backup, they focus on recovery. They talk about the instant recovery in backup, the RPO and RTO. When you talk about relation, the focus is towards stability and client complaints. And they still don't have their own dedicated hardware for the backup.

Nops

So I went from the Omni Backup to HP Data Protector to Micro Focus Data Protector. I have seen all three transition products. They have stopped developing. I don't know why that happened.

High in SA renewal cost for not future development 

Yes, at that time they are leaders in the backup

On a scale of one to ten, I would give Micro Focus Data Protector a three or three point five at the highest. If somebody wants to argue, I can go up to three point five, otherwise, three. It is very simple - they have not adopted the latest technologies. Micro Focus Data Protector works, but it's very slow and for the environment I'm running in there are better backups.

From a data protection standpoint, HPE Data Protector reduced our and our customer’s recovery time. It also gave them an advantage in the industry in that they are able fall back quicker.

Reduced backup times, and it helped with security mitigation from a data protection standpoint.

I don't use it today on a regular basis, but there are always feature improvements that our customers are looking for, such as more integration from an API perspective with different applications and cloud platforms. Also, broader integration to the ecosystem as it relates to the cloud and the application API.

We didn't have too many problems. It was fairly stable.

We contacted technical support a couple of times during upgrades, but I wouldn't say that the issues were anything out of the ordinary or systemic.

The initial setup was fairly straightforward. We did not have any difficulties.

There's always a bake-off process between competing products regarding feature sets, like Symantec. Customers typically go through a list of criteria as they relate to applications, and how they're trying to protect data, such as how it's encrypted at rest and in flight. These are decisions we all have to make. Other issues are whether there was encryption inflate, was it encrypted at rest, how many GO's did I need to protect that data, and what the replication scheme looked like.

With respect to HPE data protection, you need to do the mapping with respect to what you're looking for. From my own personal experience, HPE was a pretty seamless install from an operational perspective.

But, I never want to be involved in data protection again. It's a thankless job, but a necessary evil.