Veeam is the only software that is a real comparison with Commvault or NetBackup. It's not really good to compare because NetBackup and other solutions are providing hardware also. So here I have software on one side from Veeam and I have some storage systems or disk systems from other vendors. For now, I have NetApp, but tomorrow it could be EMC, HPE or whatever. That's maybe one of the disadvantages of these vendors, but for me it's not a disadvantage, I'm okay with that.

Most of the time it is more flexible to not be dependent on any one vendor. We have used previous systems for about 15 years and most of problems are coming from the hardware, but NetBackup does not produce hardware.

Price does come into play during the evaluation. We have dealt with customers who evaluated products like Backup Exec, Commvault, Rubrik, Veeam, and Simplivity. There are quite a few that are in the mix. More often than not, depending upon the size of the customer, people pick Veeam a lot of times because of its price.

My company chose Veeam Backup & Replication over other products since it is quite simple to deploy and manage. My company delivers backup as a service for some of our customers using Veeam Backup & Replication. My company has implemented a legal infrastructure in our data center, and we use it to remotely manage the backup recovery process for some of our customers.

We evaluated three products, namely Cohesity and Rubrik, and after careful comparison, we opted for Veeam.

We tried using Micro Focus. Veeam Backup & Replication provides us with more than what we actually need, especially because of the application solutions it offers. Micro Focus, on the other hand, only focused on backup without additional application features.

I wish Veeam had their own cloud product. We are looking at a company called Infrascale, and I've seen that they have a lot of benefits over the other solutions we've looked at. I also want to look at Unitrends again because it was a pretty good solution when we were using it, but it had some drive failures. Plus, their GUI was all over the place.

With Infrascale, you can boot up your VM in their DR site, just like I can in vSphere, and log into it and look at it. A majority of our VMs are Microsoft Server products, so we could log into it and test that the data is there. That would make it great for testing our backups, which is something we need to do because our New York state auditors require that. It would make it so easy to test the environment, and it's not so easy with Veeam. You need a VMware and a vSphere environment in place to bring those VMs up, but here you don't.

Micro Focus Data Protector , Commvault backup , 

We have evaluated Commvault and they have a very fantastic rating compared to Veeam Replication. 

Before using Veeam I reviewed a number of backup solutions. These included Symantec Backup Exec, NetBackup, Falconstor, Acronis, Commvault and ArcServe.

I'm always researching and downloading information, and recently, I was looking at that Cloud Backup Report.

We've looked at other options. They're all pretty similar. With Veeam, the interface seems to be fairly easy to use and the price points are good. I don't know exactly what it is off the top of my head, however, I know that we've had several conversations about it being price competitive.

We evaluated other service providers, not other backup solutions. Other service providers came with HP Data Protector, NetBackup, and Commvault as solutions they offered.

I'd say that Commvault is a more comprehensive solution if I were to compare it directly to Veeam.

Based on my previous experience with Veeam, I didn’t evaluate anything else.

Some of our clients were using solutions like Arc-Serv, Backup Exec. There are a couple of clients who actually evaluated NAKIVO and Veeam a few years ago. There was one client that was comparing Commvault to Veeam. They eventually went with Commvault, but a lot of that has to do with the support of AS400 symbols. They were able to manage their backup costs and a number of different environments using Commvault.

A number of my clients moved from physical machines to virtual ones. They were using primarily Arc-Serv and Veritas Backup Exec, which proved to be a bit inadequate for new virtual environments. It was never seamless. It was never as straightforward as you would have liked. With NAKIVO, we found that it tended to be easier to deal with. Still, even though one of our customers did go with NAKIVO, after a couple of years, they actually moved onto Veeam.

We have looked at other solutions in the past - for example, VMware.

The difference is in licensing. Veeam is licensed via a virtual machine or a physical machine. Other companies have a different setup.

However, VMware is very easy to use in terms of functionality, and the console makes it easier to create jobs from a backup.

No other options were evaluated as we knew Veeam was one of the better solutions for Virtual Backup.

We considered other vendors but discovered that the Veeam Backup has establishment as a direct node-to-node connection and synchronization with other systems.

I'm using the Veeam Service Provider Console for centralized management of all VBR, and I created the cloud VBR for taking backups off configuration and managing them through the Veeam Service Provider Console.

I also use Datto, which I recommend for large organizations, because they are more reliable, in terms of the restoration process. You can make a machine available for a client on the Datto machine as well as in the cloud. It also takes a shorter amount of time for recovery, whereas on Veeam, you must have additional space and additional hardware available to restore the full machine. They also have a limitation of file level storage. For example, if you are running VBR on a machine and restoring the file, you have two options: you can either restore the files on the original location first, or you can restore the file on the same VR machine. If you lost your original location and you're restoring files, then you must restore the files on one of those two locations because you can't store files on network parts or any external storage. Small organizations may have time to recover things or provide a solution. 

I was comparing Veeam to Dell DPS, and I was looking for information on products other than Veeam or Dell but were somewhere in between.

Another product is being used for backup. We did a PoC with Veeam, then bought it.

I had evaluated vRanger and Symantec backup products, both have come a long way since the evaluation but at the time of our Veeam purchase it was the product that had the features we needed.

We looked at Zerto and Acronis.

I have evaluated Cohesity. I have a demo version that they gave me.

We looked at vRanger, Unitrends, and Datto.

Yes. We also use Bacula, but Veeam proved to be faster and more reliable.

We tried Commvault also, however, it's not user-friendly and it's not as easy compared to Veeam. They have their own benefit, however, they simply are not user-friendly enough for us. Veeam is easier, and it's reassuring. We've saved money with Veeam as we've had to restore a few times now and we've saved so much data using it. That's why it's good. It's proven itself again and again.

I have also used Zerto for POC. I found that Veeam is good for backups, but it has a limitation. It's good for VM backups, but can be quite challenging for file backups and replication. Zerto is different, in that it's good for replication and it's simpler to use. The license is quite expensive though. 

We had a look around, but we decided on Veeam.

We did not evaluate them to the same extent since they did not pass our evaluation requirements.

We looked at AppAssure (DELL) and CommVault.

Yes. Storage Craft, Datto, UniTrends

We did not evaluate any other backup systems, we were on a tight timeline due to too many failing backups. We went with Veeam due to our consultants great experience with Veeam from other clients.

We did brief surveys of other solutions, but Veeam seemed to correspond with our virtual needs because 85% of our servers are virtual.

We did a minimal evaluation of other products as Veeam has been one of the top-rated backup solutions for virtual environments. The field of vendors specializing in virtual environment backups has been limited compared to standard backup solutions which made review of possible solutions much easier as well.

We were approached by Commvault and Veritas solution vendors, but for now, Veeam is good enough.

I have used TSM, Backup Exec, and Retrospect.

I have used and evaluated many backup and recovery solutions. Veeam came out on top for ease of use, reliability of job execution, backup validation, and speed of recovery in virtual environments.

Yes. Netvault, Vranger, commvault, and some others. I chose Veeam Backup after evaluating others because of it's reliability, ease of use and features.

The customer is the one that chooses the backup solution. For example, they will come to us and say "We want Veeam Backup and Replication", and then we provide the licenses to them.

We evaluated other options from VMware, Cisco Hyper-V and Nutanix. 

We looked at other solutions, namely Dell EMC Data Protection Suite (DPS), Veritas Backup Exec and IBM Spectrum Protect.

We looked at Veritas NetBackup, ArcServe, Veritas Backup Exec, CommVault, and one other that has since gone out of business. The name eludes me.

We have evaluated and currently offer other products to meet specific needs. But as a general offering for our customers who have mostly virtualized environments, and want an economical way to protect and leverage their backups, Veeam has the most robust and forward thinking feature set.

We did try Unitrends backup solution but really preferred Veeam’s offering.

Yes. Backup Exec and Zerto were considered, but Veeam was chosen for better recoveries and easier administration.

We evaluated ARC server and Capizec. We are a reseller and implementation company, so we handle both of these aspects as concerns the software of many different back up tools, but Veeam lags far behind the competition. The others use WAN and are our first choice. 

In comparison with Veeam Backup & Replication, the license form and attendant specs of the competitors make things quite easy. 

We were basically evaluating Veritas and Veeam. We've just been evaluating both of them.

We evaluated Commvault as a backup solution but settled on Veeam.

We evaluated Veritas Backup Exec, Acronis and many others, but Veeam was clearly better. That is the reason why we switched.

Micro Focus Data Protector has the advantage of supporting legacy operating systems like HP-UX or IBM X. Veeam doesn't have that. I prefer Veeam in terms of its VMware.

We compared our existing solutions to Veeam.

We looked at a bunch of stuff, we thought it had the best integration with VMware. Lots of people liked it, and we rely heavily on peer reviews, as well as talking to colleagues and other people we know.

• BackupExec
• ArcServe

Yes evaluated vRanger and PHP backup and also Symantec. No one met the requirements.

We decided on Veeam because we were much more integrated into VMware core and you didn't have to script yourself out of alot of tideous tasks to get things working.

Veeam worked out of the box and was a tight close match to what we knew Windows-wise.

We also looked at Carbonite.

Between Veeam and Veritas Backup, Veritas is a unique product in several aspects. When you want to transfer your data over SAN, backup is needed and the solution in some environments is very important because window time is limited for them. When it's a huge amount of data that takes five or six hours a day to transfer, we have to use the SAN backup feature. In this area, Veeam isn't as good as Veritas NetBackup. 

When you want to use this feature with Veeam, you have to share a lot of storage and many customers refuse this way of using the SAN backup feature. You can miss it easily. Many customers prefer compromising their source of data than using a SAN backup. For this reason, like IBM TSM, Veritas is one of the best.

I haven't properly evaluated Commvault, however, I've attended webinars on the solution and have a bit of familiarity with it.

We saw more than a 10% compression ratio compared to Acronis Backup 11.5 tested earlier. I did it in March 2016 with a sample of 20 virtual machines and helped me complete a thorough test between various candidates (Veeam and Acronis were the finalists).

Based on my experiences with other backup software, we headed straight for this option.

I have used and evaluated many backup and recovery solutions. Veeam came out on top for ease of use, reliability of job execution, backup validation, and speed of recovery in virtual environments.

We had considered other solutions, Symantec and VMware, but eventually decided to go with Veeam due to their very good reputation on this segment.

Not really Veeam is far and away the market leader for virtual environment. I have looked at vRanger and Appassure.

At that particular time no as Veeam was and still is the market leaders with backup of virtual servers, other companies are playing catch-up.

Yes, I evaluated CommVault. Veeam was much better priced for the features we needed.

We wanted the best software in the market and the best software for what we needed is Veeam Backup Replication. We did not compare other solutions, we only selected the best-reviewed solution.

Several licensing schemes are available.

We looked at Acronis, NetBackup, and Backup Exec.

We did not evaluate other options.

We did not evaluate other options. We knew what we wanted.

We also looked at Symantec Backup Exec.

No other options were evaluated.

The main difference when comparing this solution to competitors is that Veeam is a company which has a single product, Veeam Backup Replication. Other companies have many products and Veeam can focus on a single product; this is their main advantage. They are pioneers in their domain. They are the leaders.

We started thinking of the new systems. We surveyed from IT Central Station and several other portals that are available online. We got the reports and we did the contact with the vendors.

We evaluated Veeam ONE.

Over the years we have seen more Hyper-Visor backup products hitting the market, and those I have tested still fall behind Veeam, but to be honest I don’t bother testing them much these days as Veeam ticks most, if not all, of the boxes that my clients require.

Arcserve, Symantec, Unitrends, and VMware.

We are partners of HP and Symantec, but we prefer to offer Veeam to our virtual environment customers.

Yes. We also evaluated Barracuda’s cloud product.

Before choosing this product, I evaluated products of Symantec and Acronis.

We were evaluating Spectrum Protect Plus, but we are not really using it and we are not selling it.

We tested VMware and Veeam solutions, and we chose Veeam for this project because our client is a public institution and required a very stable solution. Veeam is more stable than VMware, and our client preferred Veeam.

I wasn’t part of that project, but I believe at the time we also looked at AppAssure and Veeam was more flexible for us and more economical too.

Only a VMware backup solution.

We have experience in many backup solutions, including IBM Tivoli, Avamar, and Zerto. They have their purpose but are more specialised/complex and mostly more expensive.

I’m not a specialist of EMC Avamar, but I think that Avamar is more universal (backup of NAS for example), but it is way more expensive and complex than Veeam. I didn’t evaluate any other commercial solution.

Lets just say that Veeam B&R met or exceeded what the competition provided.

We also evaluated the product of StorageCraft but, I would say, is too young.

Yes, HP and Symantec.

Wasn't anything on the market at the time that really could compare to this.

At the time we had been looking at various solutions that were coming up for backup and restore of virtual environments; WMware's own Backup solution is the first to come to mind. We strongly considered this but were debating pricing and it was at this time we discovered Veeam and it seemed to be the answer both technically and financially.

Veeam is definitely one of the market leaders and is the preferred choice.

I evaluated Symantec Backup Exec 2012 and Unitrends UEB.

Each solution has its own points that are good but in cost-optimization, Veeam is a good price and it is very easy to deploy for both us and our partners.

Fortunately or unfortunately, I did not look at other options.

I have tried a few other products, some of them are meant for multi-platform (virtual and physical), or as a native backup solution. We ended up with Veeam as we are a fully virtualized environment and the features and product capabilities have met our requirements.

We did, but I cannot disclose names.

We looked at a couple but it was cheaper to just go with Comvault across the board and pay one fee.

No.

Yes, VMware backup solution, Acronis, Symantec

We did evaluate other options before adopting Veeam.

No other options evaluated.

• vRanger
• Backup Exec

Before choosing Veeam we have tested two products Unitrends backup, VMware VDP

VMware VDP was evaluated and the product was not stable, unreliable, came with multiple limitations in terms of space and physical/virtual infrastructure size and not fit for scalability. There were issues while restoration.

We did not evaluate other options.

We looked at EMC NetWorker and Veritas NetBackup.

We were evaluating Arcserve for the virtual environment. However, Veaam has better adaptability towards the virtual environment.

For only virtual backups I have evaluated TSM and CommVault. Veeam is by far the solution that delivers a complete set of features for a small price. And the administration is much more easy.

None.

We did not evaluate any other product.

We also evaluated Veritas Backup Exec.

Being a system integration organization, we work with other backup & replication solutions, but after evaluation, we found Veeam to be a better solution for x86 virtualized environments.

For most customers who don't have budget issues, we usually recommend Commvault. One of the reasons that we recommend Commvault is the ability for the corporate division to use it globally. I find Commvault has a better R&D team and can accommodate most hypervisors currently on the market. The latest one that Commvault supports is Nutanix AHV which has added value to its product portfolio. With the growing popularity of hyper converged systems, this decision is timely. However, Commvault price is high, and can be very expensive if you're going with their Capacity license. I just hope Veeam product team will include AHV compatibility in the next release.

I've tested CA ARCserve High Availability (formally XoSoft) IBM FastBack (formally FilesX) and Double-Take Availability.

We have evaluated other solutions but Veeam is the best for virtualization.

Veeam clearly stands in the middle, somewhere between simplicity and richness. I have proposed and designed backup solution based on many other products such as EMC Networker or Netbackup, but Veeam suits many customers' needs.

No other options were considered.

No, but the pricing was key.

None, this is a competitive upgrade purposed by Veeam.

No.

Yes, Avamar.

We also use Altaro Backup for some small customers. Altaro also works great for its price.

Yes, we evaluated SRM.

Like I previously mentioned, we are using a very old database and even that database company didn't provide support. I tried to replicate it over WAN, and now by using Veeam, it works great. It was running on my regional site which had standalone VM with local storage and that's why Veeam worked fine compare to SRM.

I also looked at Avamar, Symanted and TSM which are better for tape management and data retention management, but expensive. Veeam however, is the easiest way to manage virtual infrastructure backup, and the cost is better, when compared with some other solutions.

We also looked at Nakivo.

No. We did not do an evaluation.

We try to use both Symantec Backup Exec and CA Arcserve.

I tried Symantec system recovery, but Veeam is really faster and user friendly.

• Acronis
• BackupExec

YES, Avamar and Tivoli.

I have used all flavors of backup solutions since early 1990s, this is by far the most advanced yet and easiest product to use.

Yes, CA ArcServe, TSM.

Unitrends

We evaluated Availl software, because of their Wide Area File System technology.