Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery vs Veritas NetBackup comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 11, 2024
 

Categories and Ranking

AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery
Ranking in Backup and Recovery
32nd
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
8.0
Number of Reviews
14
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Backup (23rd), Disaster Recovery (DR) Software (17th)
Veritas NetBackup
Ranking in Backup and Recovery
5th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
8.1
Number of Reviews
114
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the Backup and Recovery category, the mindshare of AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery is 0.3%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Veritas NetBackup is 4.7%, down from 5.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Backup and Recovery
 

Featured Reviews

Duy AnhMai - PeerSpot reviewer
May 30, 2024
Cloud-based solution enhances company backup but comes with high costs
We are using AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery for backup purposes in our company AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery is convenient because it is cloud-based technology. The strong points are the stability and scalability of the solution, as well as the convenience of it being cloud-based. The cost of…
N'GUESSAN E R - PeerSpot reviewer
Aug 25, 2023
Efficient data recovery and replication features
There is a big change in Veritas. In the past, we could easily change servers or appliances and continue working by restoring the catalog. We could change servers from Linux to Linux or Linux to Solaris and perform catalog restores to continue working. But with the new version, we are forced to engage Veritas' professional services, which is too expensive. Sometimes, we've received quotes exceeding $100,000 for a catalog migration. This expense was unnecessary in the past. For instance, we used to install a new release of Linux and simply restore the catalog, and the system would function well. But with the latest version, it's no longer feasible. For instance, if we want to migrate from appliance 5030 to 5060 or even just 5050, we are compelled to engage Veritas consultants due to the intricate data manipulation involved. This additional expense is quite expensive. In the past, these devices didn't even exist, and we could easily restore the catalog, resulting in a fully functional system. However, the new version demands expensive expertise for such tasks, which I find unacceptable for our clients.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The setup is pretty straightforward."
"CloudEndure Disaster Recovery is a fairly stable solution."
"We have never had any issues with scalability."
"Technical support has been very good. They usually respond quickly to our requests.​"
"The strong points are the stability and scalability of the solution, as well as the convenience of it being cloud-based."
"It provides our disaster recovery solution. It works fine in our tests.​"
"We went from an organization with minimal to no disaster recovery. I was able to spin up the disaster recovery environment with AWS rather quickly and meet business requirements."
"AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery is a robust and reliable solution for disaster recovery needs."
"It supports multiple, heterogeneous platforms."
"It has been around for so long, and it is very in-depth. It has a solution for everything that you can cover."
"The solution is easy to scale."
"The deduplication feature is useful. Deduplication and compression features are what I like about NetBackup."
"Its ability to cover a large spectrum of products and operating systems is invaluable. We evaluated other products but always found certain limitations like some products had only intel-based virtualization, while others had power servers."
"What I like most is it is a professional product. It supports all kinds of technologies, and I consider it one of the best backup products available."
"The most valuable feature is that it is basically a replica of our SAND data. We archive the SAND data for recovery, if there is an issue on the fence."
"The backup and restoration are 100 percent guaranteed."
 

Cons

"I set up a test, deleted the source, and went to fail it back, and it didn't work."
"Sometimes a server will get a bit behind. ​"
"The only thing I would like to see is, they don't have a formal ticketing system. There is no way I can go back and see what questions we had six months back, what issues we had, and how they were resolved."
"The product could be improved by incorporating more AI-driven automation for deployment and additional security features. These enhancements would make the solution even more user-friendly and secure."
"The failback could be improved. It should be more intuitive."
"The user interface, customer support, and the recovery time for the current customer query could use improvement."
"The cost of AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery is seen as expensive."
"Definitely there should be better logging. From a customer perspective I would like to see more logs on what is happening. If there is an issue, I would like to know what the problem is. Right now, we have to depend on the support of the vendor to check and let us know, because we don't have access to a lot of logging information."
"We are facing a challenge regarding the support for Docker and Kubernetes features. We hope for the possibility of directly backing up Kubernetes and Docker images without the necessity of taking full virtual machine backups."
"Technical support only gets back to us the following morning."
"The security and performance could improve with Veritas NetBackup. The security could be improved by protecting the data from attackers."
"Support for the solution needs improvement."
"Updates were not always consistent."
"This solution would benefit from a more friendly, web-based interface."
"The interface should be improved."
"The reporting of the backups could be better."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"CloudEndure Disaster Recovery is charging clients $20 to do the DR backups. It is an expensive solution."
"On a scale from one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive, I rate the solution's pricing an eight out of ten."
"Where the price adds up, there are CloudEndure licenses, then there is the AWS environment, and finally, there is the AWS storage, so cumulatively, it adds up."
"I rate the price of CloudEndure Disaster Recovery a six out of ten."
"It has saved us money from having to buy hardware for disaster recovery."
"The pricing is better now that they had come out with the Tier 2 which replicates a little less often. In comparison to what I would have been spending with any other type of solution, the pricing is fair."
"They license us on a per machine basis. We have a set number of machines, which we have licensed.​"
"I feel the product's pricing is a good value. Licensing is pretty straightforward."
"It was on a yearly basis. During the annual review, when we asked them about our licensing, they couldn't explain it. For example, we had reduced by a factor of 40%, but our license only dropped by 5%. We would then ask Veritas people if we've reduced this much and shut down these servers, why has our license changed so less? They were never able to give us a straight answer. They weren't able to say, "Well, you're using this, and this is more expensive." In many cases, as we reduced our capacity and what we were using with Veritas NetBackup, our licensing actually went up, and they were often unable to explain why."
"Pricing is expensive, so it could be lower."
"The licensing model for this solution is very powerful."
"Veritas NetBackup is quite expensive and licensing costs are fixed."
"NetBackup is expensive. They need to work on the pricing side. I find it comparatively on the higher side when I compare the terabyte backup costs."
"The price is okay."
"When we consider the quality and value of Veritas NetBackup, it is worth the cost."
"Veritas Netbackup offers affordable licensing."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Backup and Recovery solutions are best for your needs.
814,528 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
15%
Computer Software Company
13%
Government
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Government
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about CloudEndure Disaster Recovery?
CloudEndure Disaster Recovery is a fairly stable solution.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for CloudEndure Disaster Recovery?
The pricing of AWS is considered expensive compared to other options.
What needs improvement with CloudEndure Disaster Recovery?
The cost of AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery is seen as expensive.
What is the best next generation backup tool?
Assuming you have an onprem ecosystem which runs the VMware, physical systems on Win, Linux and Unix and run both traditional DB's and nosql DB's like mongo, then Netbackup (NBU) will be the right ...
What do you like most about Veritas NetBackup?
The most valuable feature of cloud integration is the ability to send data outside of your location. This can be achieved by integrating cloud tier options or other object storage solutions.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Veritas NetBackup?
The product is cost-effective, and I would rate its pricing as an eight out of ten. The pricing model is based on the amount of data transferred, making it manageable for us.
 

Also Known As

CloudEndure Disaster Recovery
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Agio, Cloud Nation, Limelight Networks
Beta Offshore
Find out what your peers are saying about AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery vs. Veritas NetBackup and other solutions. Updated: October 2024.
814,528 professionals have used our research since 2012.