Azure Backup Reviews

I use Azure Backup VM backups.

The most valuable feature of Azure Backup is the native backup capabilities.

Azure Backup could improve the backup data copies because they are not immutable.

I have been using Azure Backup for approximately two years.

I rate the stability of Azure Backup a seven out of ten.

We have two engineers that are using the solution in my organization.

Azure Backup has a medium scalability level.

I rate the scalability of Azure Backup a seven out of ten.

I have not needed to use the support from the vendor.

We previously used Dell Avamar prior to Azure Backup. We switched to Azure Backup because we were having to pull data back down to an on-premise hardware infrastructure and Azure Backup meant we didn't have to pull the data down through our express route.

The initial setup of Azure Backup took a couple of hours to complete. It was quick and straightforward.

We completed the implementation of the solution in-house.

There is a cost per terabyte for using this solution.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate Azure Backup a seven out of ten.

My rating was because the absence of immutability, a critical feature in our current backup system, is a limitation of its monitoring and reporting capabilities.

We use Azure Backup to backup and restore virtual machines as well as SQL Databases.

The only issue we have right now is the amount of time it takes to restore. When we attempt to restore a virtual machine, it can take hours. This is an area that could be improved.

The length of time it takes to restore is our main source of frustration. It would be beneficial to shorten the time it takes.

We had issues with shared storage in the past where it couldn't be included in the backup. Shared storage, or shared disc, wasn't available. I believe Microsoft promised to put it in their pipeline for improvement in order to add this, but I haven't double-checked. This was the issue with shared managed discs, and not being included in this backup scope.

If the shared managed disc could be included with the backup, it would be better.

I have been using Azure Backup for three years.

Azure Backup is very stable.

Azure Backup is a scalable solution.

We work with it all of the time.

Technical support is very helpful. I would rate them a four out of five.

Positive

The initial setup was straightforward. It was something that was easy for us.

It was completed within a few minutes. It can depend on the environment, but usually, it is fast.

The number of staff required for maintenance depends on the automation. We require more staff now, but we are working on the automation. Generally, it is relatively low. For the most part, it works by itself.

We operate in our own environment.

Licensing fees are paid on a monthly basis.

It's not an expensive solution. I am more than happy with the price.

We are working in our own environment, assisting KPMG users and firm members. We also have internal companies.

I am an Azure Architect.

It's useful, it works, and it's fairly reliable. The only issue right now isn't a big one, but our users sometimes need faster recovery, faster restoring of services, and faster restoring of data.

I would rate Azure Backup a nine out of ten.

The main use case is to back up the virtual machines.

It's part of the Azure cloud service. The solution is included in the overall price. 

The solution is stable.

The scalability has been good.

Technical support is okay. They do help you when you need them.

As I don't work directly with the solution (my team does), I don't have any notes for improvement.

Technical support can be slow to respond at times.

I've only been using the solution for two years. 

The solution is stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable. 

The solution is scalable. If a company needs to expand it, it's possible to do so.

Only the IT backups use the solution. That's just two people. No one else does. 

Technical support is okay. They are helpful, however, they are not always fast.

Previously, we only used Micro Focus Data Protector. We were on our data center on-premise. After the migration, to save, the machines to the Azure cloud, we switched from the VM backups to Azure Backup. The other backups are still running on Micro Focus Data Protector.

The initial setup is done by our cloud solution provider. While I'm not aware of the details. my understanding is that the deployment was quick and did not take long.

The solution is part of the greater Microsoft service. I am not sure if there is a separate license just for this. It's not an additional price. There may be more costs according to how much storage is needed. You have to do the backup to a storage account and the storage account costs a price per terabytes.

We are a customer with an enterprise agreement.

I do not backups myself. I don't know the versions we are using.

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

Our primary use case of Azure Backup is for data on our application servers. We host our ERP systems with SQL for backend software. 

We've been in partnership with Microsoft for more than 15 years. I'm the CEO and the CIO. 

Before we started using Azure we spent a lot of money at our various sites, setting one up as the main physical site and a second for disaster recovery. We had to invest a lot of money to buy hardware that needed replacing every two or three years. Switching to Azure has saved us thousands. The hardware is always updated and we're now able to invest more in our staff which is highly beneficial because it translates to satisfied clients.  

As a security setting, Azure is very detailed. We can add features on retentions and retain the backup for several days. The retention policies are very good. I like the notifications and multiple layers of security that the solution offers. It enables us and our clients to feel secure and you can install and connect your systems wherever you are. 

We're hoping the price of the solution won't increase in the coming months when Azure is due to review all its products. I think that what the product lacks now is an AI system; if we had that, we'd be able to more easily upgrade the hardware system.  

We've been using this solution for about seven years. 

We haven't had any stability issues. If the initial setup is done properly there won't be any issues with stability. 

The scalability is good. We have around 12 users in the department. Some of them provide techno support and others do testing on the system to check its abilities because sometimes it has too much load. 

Customer support is very good. 

The initial setup was straightforward. Deployment time depends on the size of the data.

We pay over $8 million per year in licensing fees for 365 and Azure usage. There is no additional cost for hardware but we train our employees and that is an added cost for us. 

We had a look at Amazon before going with Azure but we decided to go the whole way with Microsoft. These days, I'm not sure there's much difference between the two.   

It's important to know what you'll be getting from whoever provides you with the solution because it's important that support is included. This product has really helped me in scaling up my company. We love this solution and think everyone should have it. 

As a provider and a user, I rate this solution 10 out of 10. 

I use Azure Backup to backup Microsoft Domain Controller for my client. The need was to protect the domain controllers as they were critical controls for Watson Web. So, even if a hacker attacked the firm with a ransom through Watson Web, it would be possible to recover the data from Azure because the data would have been protected.

I like that it's a stable solution and their support is good. I think Microsoft's commercial force is superior.

They need to improve the frequency of the backup. You can only backup one to three times a day. It would be better to back up continuously throughout the day.

I have been dealing with Azure Backup for about five years. But I have more than eight years of experience in all cloud or Azure services, including Azure Backup and Azure VM Backup.

It's a very stable solution.

Microsoft technical support is okay. I never had any problem with it. Compared to Amazon Web Services, I think I like Microsoft's support. I just have to call them to obtain all the support that I need, and they are very proactive. They help you build solutions because they know that your business will grow and mature after helping you design the solution, provide you with tools and free licenses.

The initial setup is straightforward, but you have to think about the recovery strategy.  Implementing the two is quite easy, but you also have to think about the backup and the overall recovery strategy and what kind of recovery strategy you will use to backup and restore. I know it's easy for the most common use cases.

I believe Azure Backup is superior to AWS, and Google is a little bit more powerful for implementations.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give Azure Backup a seven.

Currently, I have Many Azure VMs for clients, and We are  doing the backup, disaster recovery, and tactical replication for all of them.

We install the backup stack for our clients. We explain the situation and have our technical team complete the installation for the clients.

With set up managed retention using the backup policy. We do retention, and we do security. 

The level of security is high on it.

Most of our clients used to have Mac storage in all of their offices, such as NAS (network-attached storage) by 20, or 30 terabytes. We have informed our clients, rather than keep their storage on-premises and risking it getting damaged with no disaster recovery, it would be better to synchronize it and move it to the cloud. Some of the clients will keep it on the cloud while some others have to keep it on-premises and on the cloud at the same time for direct synchronization.

The backup is configured as replication or synchronized between both of them.

When we install for the client, they have a full solution. All of their computers are connected to a single sign-on with Office 365. They all have a domain on the Microsoft cloud. Included with this we add Azure, all of their HR software, ERP, and accounting on the cloud. The add-on backup to the environment will be with Microsoft.

One of the most valuable features is security and connectivity to the data.

The hardware is nice. We configure the hardware and can choose anywhere from two cores to 56 cores. 

We configure the machines the way we want.

We are using two different types of technology. Side to side and tier to side. Recently, we sent an email regarding this issue. Maybe they could improve the fees. The cost is a bit high.

If we had 100 users, and we are using the backup on servers, it would be helpful if the user could know the level of synchronization that he has done. It can only be done by administrative forces. As an example, if I am the administrator and I have users getting data online, I can see what is happening. However, for the user, if they are experiencing some kind of failure with their data, they do not receive any notification and do not know. It will work, but it will need a lot of customization.

We would like to see some kind of notification given to the user that a file was not synchronized properly or what may have happened. What we are doing now is through a third party system where they will notify us if a file is not synchronized properly inside of his computer.

We have been using this solution since 2016, so it's been almost four years.

We are now using the latest version.

The solution is stable.

With our clients, there is a 95% success rate, for the remaining 5%, sometimes it's a problem with the network or a problem with the files.

If we give them a server and storage they need to choose a security method if they want to protect their data. They need to add more to be available inside their servers. If a client hasn't chosen protection for his data and his data has malware or any virus, it is not under our umbrella, they must choose their security methods. For most of our clients, we provide security for them.

This solution is scalable and it's easy. It's like you are using your computer folder. We will be mapping. We would map the file to the server. It's like a new folder, a C, D, E, or F. New storage inside the servers will be created.

One of the clients that we have now has 50 terabytes of storage. We have created another server on a cloud backup for these 50 terabytes. They have 100 users that are using this backup through file sharing.

We always get direct support. I am supported well.

We use to have SAN storage , attached to our physical server 

But after being shifted to azure , we felt the performance and security more 

You need someone with experience to complete the initial setup. If you bring in an engineer or a computer science person who doesn't have experience in Microsoft then he cannot do it. They might be able to install the Windows Operating Systems and Active Directory but they won't be able to connect to the VM online on the cloud. They need some experience. If someone trains them, they can get it in one day or maybe two.

In my experience, each installation with us can take 18 days if the client requests an on-premises deployment. If they need just a server to create a backup, we will create a virtual machine online, which will take one or two days.

It will take time for an on-premises installation because we will install the server locally. This includes the operating system, the links, and connecting them to the server and then to the cloud. It will work online or offline. This will take 15 to 18 days.

Again, to backup online, for the server and Active Directory, it will be one day to complete.

We are using a file-shared backup; one for on-premise and one on the private cloud.

Our clients are seeing that it is cost-effective.

The fees are a bit expensive. When clients see improvements and see a product out of the box, clients will not look at the price, but the price could be lower. 

Support payment works by the level of partnership and the number of shares.

As a gold partner, we have more than 50 hours of support per year and this is more than enough. With the 50 hours, I get a one hour call. If I have a problem and I call, they have one hour to call me, and I have unlimited calls if I need them to call me after 24 hours or the next day. 

As gold partners, we generate the licenses for our clients and we pay monthly. Our clients pay annually or make two payments per year.

Sure , like any solution we just make evaluation and testing 

That’s what we have done before starting with azure backup 

Before doing a backup or getting any cloud solutions, you must first check the environment and the systems. Most companies will have computers in a workgroup. Each must have its own domain and Active Directory. 

You will have to do the know-how technologies inside the company for the basic configuration. Then they can choose and start. You know longer have to use storage that will stay inside the office because anyone can unplug it and take it with them.

With a cloud solution, you can specify which MAC address, user, environment, or region can get the data from the server.

I have been using Microsoft for 16 years. I am very familiar with all of the Microsoft technology.

Now they have the cloud, Microsoft Office 365 and Microsoft Azure, so we transfer and we have been awarded the digital technology transformation three times.

We are a cybersecurity company that cares about security for our clients.

As a gold partner and CSP partner, we have our portal. If a client needs 100 Azure servers then I can create them directly for him, without having to contact Microsoft or anyone. I can create them and the charges will come to me monthly. Also, I can choose the mode of payment, be it monthly or annually. There is also the rebate and the cashback that will come with yearly or monthly billing.

I don't see any problems with Azure. It gives our clients peace of mind. Data is important.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.

I have created a virtual machine that I use as a testbed to validate the Azure backup and restore functionality.

It is mainly used for backups, which are a key part of any organization's structure. Azure Backup has definitely helped us to reduce the downtime. Whenever something goes wrong, we can fix and restart it within no time. Azure Backup has increased the productivity of our connection, and on top of that, it has helped to reduce the operating cost of our organization.

The feature that I have found the most valuable is that it is easy to create a backup by using Azure Backup. 

It also has a good user interface and nice features for sending notifications when any backup fails or there is a change in the status of virtual machines. 

I once tried restoring a Linux environment, and the size of the Linux VM or the data disk was really huge. It took a really long time to restore the environment and send the data from the storage to the disk. It took around 25 to 30 minutes, which was much longer than I anticipated. They can improve the duration of such restore operations.

In the next release, it would also be good if they could reduce the duration for transferring the data from their storage to the actual storage while creating a virtual machine. They can reduce the duration or increase the data transfer rate. 

I have been using Azure Backup for the last ten months. 

It is really stable. There were no problems with its stability.

Its scalability is very good.

I have interacted with their technical support. I have no complaints. They are neither so good nor so bad. 

I previously used an Oracle solution and worked extensively with Oracle Database. The way to take a backup and do everything else was different from Azure Backup.

The initial setup was easy. To install it, you just choose an agent, and that agent is automatically deployed.

It is a bit costly initially, but it is well worth it in the long run, especially for fighting against a number of threats, such as ransomware, which the IT industry is facing.

It is really a valuable product. Most of the organizations nowadays, especially in North America, prefer Microsoft products over the Linux environment. There are, however, some people who use the Linux environment as well. 

Overall, I would rate Azure Backup an eight out of ten. It meets the day-to-day requirements of most of the IT people, and it can be automated. 

The primary use case is for restoration purposes, disaster recovery, and to back up our normal processes for example restoration.

If any virtual machines go down then we can just recover from the previous restore point.

The most valuable feature is the ease in which it backs up our data. I would say that the process is quite simple.

The compression rate is not as good as some competing products, so it needs improvement. We have read that the compression rate is 20%, whereas Commvault is 60% to 70%.

We have a concern with the backup when were are working with VMs that are running in Barracuda Firewall because it usually fails. This is a prominent issue. If I have 100 VMs then two or three of the backups fail.

I have been using Azure Backup for approximately five years.

This solution is stable.

We have not had much experience the scalability or integration with other solutions.

We have more than 10 clients and we have approximately 500 individual machines.

We haven't contacted technical support because we have not had any issues.

Previously, we did not use any other solution. We have been using this one from the beginning.

The initial setup was quite simple.

If I have to configure a backup for one virtual machine it only takes five minutes.

This solution doesn't require any maintenance. If we have a problem Microsoft handles it.

We completed the implementation and we have not used a vendor or integrator to assist us

I am not aware of the pricing, as it is handled by the accounts department.

Currently, we are evaluating Commvault. I have read that it is good. We will consider other solutions that may be available with better facilities.

The setup is a very simple and easy process, it's easy to learn and use, and it is not very complicated to configure. Overall, it's a simple process.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.