Arcserve UDP Reviews

We use it to back up pretty much everything that we've got in our system. We've got a 13-terabyte license. We back up HyperV servers, files, and SQL. You name it, and we pretty much back it up.

The standard backup and restore feature is most used.

Its interface can be improved. I find it unintuitive.

It could have some integrations. It doesn't have some of the integration and some of the monitoring features that I would normally utilize. Some of the solutions have got integrations with different storage and things like that.

We've had ArcServe for as long as I can remember.

It is overall rock-solid. It does what it says it is going to do, and it does it well.

We're pretty small. We've been able to scale it out for what we needed to do with it. We could do multiple sites when we needed to.

We have only one backup guy who uses this solution. I pop in once in a while if he is not available and restore something, but overall, it is a one-man show.

It covers all our bases in the entire organization, and we aren't planning on expanding any further.

I have not dealt with them, but I know that the person handling the backups has not been super happy with the technical support on that side.

I don't recall using anything else prior to it.

It was pretty straightforward. We've had it for a long time. It was set up a long time ago, and it has been migrated over the years. The person handling the backups has spent quite a few months fine-tuning it.

The person handling the backups did it pretty much on his own. He also takes care of its maintenance. 

Its price seems reasonable. Its price is average as compared to the other products I've looked at. 

We have a three-year license right now. There are no other costs beyond the standard licensing fee.

I would advise making sure that you have your strategy planned. 

I would rate it a seven out of 10. It is a good, solid product, but it doesn't do anything special. It just does what it is told.

Our primary use case with Arcserve is as a backup solution.

We used Arcserve as a backup solution, but it wasn't very flexible. The UDP at Arcserve had multiple issues, and we could not go into granular details of retrieving backup information. For example, what backups existed during what time. We were not able to retrieve to satisfy our requirements. I'm not really satisfied with Arcserve. As a whole, the solution was not very promising.

The product could be improved. For example, on Veritas, you can see a particular file, when it was backed up, on what particular archive it exists, et cetera. We were unable to retrieve that specific information from Arcserve for our requirements.

There could be additional features added based on the practical concerns we had. If I have backed up a certain amount of data, I want to know, if I give the path of the data, how much of data has been backed up, and the sizing information with regards to data. That information could be included in the features.

I've been working with Arcserve UDP for about three years.

The stability of the solution is okay. We used it for some time, but it was not meeting our requirements properly.

We didn't scale the solution, so I'm unable to comment on the scalability of it.

We received support from the vendor who was technically assisting us, and it was okay, but we could not implement the requirements that we had. We weren't contacting Arcserve, but I'm sure the vendor consulted support.

The pricing is moderate.

I would rate the solution a four out of ten.

I would not recommend the solution based on our experience. It depends on the situation. If you just want VMware or backup, it's okay, but in an extensive manner, if you want to use backup technology and tools, then it does not have the flexibility. So I would recommend it if there is a general case. If not, I would say look for something else.

We use Arcserve UDP for the backup replication.

We are satisfied with Arcserve UDP. The most important feature that we use and why we choose this product is the RHA feature.

I have been using Arcserve UDP for approximately two years.

Arcserve UDP is stable.

I have found Arcserve UDP to be scalable.

Our customers are mostly midsize companies using this solution.

We have plans to increase the usage of the solution in the future.

There is a problem now with the support. Formerly, they had a head office in the country we were working in Turkey. However, they close the offices, and we have to receive support from abroad. It takes a bit of time to receive support.

We evaluated Veeam, but you chose Arcserve UDP.

Arcserve UDP is in the middle range of complexity. The interface can be developed a little bit more to be user-friendly.

The solution is priced well compared to other solutions.

I rate Arcserve UDP a nine out of ten.

We primarily use StorageCraft ShadowProtect for small and medium-sized businesses, backup servers, desktops, and public servers.

The ability to switch between different hardware platforms and utilization tools are some of this solution's most valuable features.

Physical and virtual servers are treated the same, and an image can be copied from one machine to another, whether physical to virtual, virtual to virtual, virtual to physical, or physical to physical. As a result, you can transition from HP to Dell, or from VMware to Hyper-V to physical.

A lot of their new technologies are not very good. 

The older products were fantastic. They invested in ShadowXafe, OneBox, and other companies, where they purchased hardware and attempted to reinvent product offerings that I do not use because they were difficult.

I have been working with StorageCraft ShadowProtect for ten years.

StorageCraft ShadowProtect has good stability, but ShadowXafe does not.

ShadowProtect does not scale as well as ShadowXafe.

ShadowXafe is an entire space where you can backup all of your virtual machines at once.

It's easier in large environments.

The technical support was horrible. That's why we switched. We've been drifting away from StorageCraft for a long time now, largely because of their support.

They are the worst support organization in existence.

They are assessed using metrics such as closing calls. They are difficult to connect with and even more difficult to reconnect with when you do. They are only interested in resolving cases as quickly as possible. They provide incorrect information.

There are only a few people that know certain products, and getting in touch with them is almost impossible. In general, it is extremely difficult to connect with anyone.

It was completely useless.

A few are good but most are not.

It was more a case of being difficult to reach them. They send you three emails in a row, and if you do not respond, the case is closed, which is frustrating. They don't seem to care about resolving the issue; instead, it appears that they are more concerned with closing the case in order to meet the quota.

In the previous version, the initial setup required the installation of several tools in order to get things working properly. Many of those tools have been combined in the new versions.

The new version is supposedly easier to use, but there is still a lot of fine-tuning to be done, which they may have corrected by now.

Pricing is most likely comparable. Some are more costly than others. They are somewhere in the middle, in my opinion.

ShadowXafe is the new software they have developed, that they have been focusing on it for the past couple of years. ShadowProtect is the older software.

I worked at StorageCraft for seven years. I was responsible for their technical sales. I am familiar with their products, as well as their competition. 

I was on my own for almost five years, using their product and others to do backup recovery as a service for businesses. I use StorageCraft as well as some other vendors to fill in the gaps where they're weak. Because my job at the end of the day is to do a restore for companies.

I resell items, but mostly just implement, and manage their service. In most cases, I pay a monthly fee for whatever software we use.

We still have customers and use StorageCraft. We started using ShadowXafe, but it nearly destroyed my business. For older customers with older products, I reverted to the older version, and Beam for a few others.

If I had to rate ShadowXafe, I would say a two out of ten.

I would rate StorageCraft ShadowProtect an eight out of ten.

We have many servers at our branch head office that are on our premises. A few of those servers and many other user systems are completely being backed up by Arcserve UDP. Approximately 75% of the backups are handled by Arcserve UDP.

There are many backup options available in this solution. For example, you are able to do backups of servers, email, OST files, and users. This is a complete backup solution which is very good.

The solution can use a lot of bandwidth when the scheduling is not done, it should auto-schedule itself. For example, if there are 50 users connected in the network at 12 o'clock and the backup is not scheduled. At this time the network offices are going to have performance issues when it is doing a backup. Having a feature to auto-schedule a time when the network is not being used often would be beneficial.

The solution has a deduplication feature but while sending the data over the network it is not utilizing this feature. This could be improved in the future.

I have been using this solution within the last 12 months.

Approximately two years ago in the previous version of the solution, it was not stable. However, in the new releases, it is quite stable and we have increased the user count from 100 to 250.

The solution is scalable, we have 250 users using the solution.

The customer support has been responsive to the issues we were facing, such as bandwidth usage. They have been very good and helpful to our needs.

The initial setup was not complex and was straightforward.

There is an annual license required for this solution and it is priced well.

We have evaluated other options.

My advice to others is if they want a comprehensive solution where they can do backups of their servers, applications, emails, and user systems Arcserve is a good choice.

I rate Arcserve UDP an eight out of ten.

The most valuable feature is the duplication.

Customer service and support need to be improved. Based on my experience, whenever we need support, there are difficulties with communication when trying to resolve the issue.

We have also had trouble with the tape sorter.

We have complaints about the simplicity of this product. They have the agent-based and agentless setup options, and there have been issues that meant we could not utilize Arcserve after a catastrophe with our network.

We have been using Arcserve UDP since 2016.

The price of this product is high and it should be lower.

I would rate this solution a six out of ten.

We are a solution provider company, and I work with vendors to find products for my customers. This is one of the solutions that we provide and have customers working with.

This solution is used to perform backups of servers, including information from the cloud.

We have experience with the on-premises and hybrid-cloud deployment models, including Microsoft Azure cloud.

The most valuable features are the replication to the cloud and the deduplication. 

The encryption and password protection options are very good.

Taking a snapshot level backup with this solution is very slow compared to other products. The speed of this needs to be improved.

In the most recent version of premium plus the replication has been removed, and it should re-added to the solution. It is a big selling point.

It would be nice to have more features included with the ransomware protection.

The interface needs to be more user-friendly.

The stability of this solution is good.

Scalability of this solution depends on the licensing.

Technical support for this solution is very good.

We used to provide Veeam Backup, as well as Acronis. The pricing for continuous replication is higher than for this solution. 

This initial setup of this solution is straightforward. The deployment takes two days, maximum. One person can handle the deployment and maintenance.

We perform the deployment of this solution for our customers.

Normally our customers purchase the premium plus license, rather than the standard one, which provides more options.

This is a good solution because it offers multiple hybrid options. The same product can support local backup, cloud backup, and backup a server to the cloud as well. It is a complete portfolio available in a single product. When comparing to other products, all of the options are available.

I would rate this solution a six out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for backup purposes.

It's more the convenience of the solution than an overall improvement to our organization. I can restore online and check that it is working alright as well.

The backup is the most valuable feature. It also makes storage very easy.

The only problem with the solution is that when I change the drive capacity, it has to do a full backup. It's a problem when I have five servers to backup. When I only want to change the size of the drive, I have to do a full backup that can take one week.

The stability is very good.

The solution offers good scalability. I don't have plans to increase the usage at this time. Only I am using it.

I've never had to call technical support, so I can't speak to the service level.

Previously, we used NetVault. It didn't have all of the solutions we needed for the VM, so we switched.

The initial setup is easy; it wasn't complex. Deployment took about three hours. You just need one person for deployment and maintenance.

I did have help with the implementation.

The licensing we have is a yearly contract. I don't think there are costs beyond the standard licensing fee.

I am using the on-premises version of the solution.

I like the solution; it's working well for us.

I would rate it eight out of ten.