We performed a comparison between Acronis Disaster Recovery and NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Disaster Recovery (DR) Software solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Our customers use Acronis Disaster Recovery for data backup."
"Acronis Disaster Recovery has good scalability."
"The solution can be improved by including a load balancer."
"The backup and recovery options work flawlessly."
"One key feature is it encrypts your data at rest which is really good."
"Performance-wise, it works efficiently for backup and recovery compared to other tools."
"The most valuable features of the product for me are its backup and recovery functionalities."
"Patch management, backup, and disaster recovery have been the solution's most valuable features for our data protection strategy."
"Replication to the cloud is the most valuable feature. Deduplication and compression are also very important to us. We are in the process of adopting to the cloud. We are going to AWS and we are trying to do a safety technician call out with integration to the cloud. NetApp allows us to move some of the volume to the cloud, at the same time that we continue providing the cloud services that we have on premises."
"With NetApp, you can integrate malware scanning or malware protection. This is something valuable that is not offered in SaaS solutions typically."
"If you have a larger amount of data than normal in cloud, it is easy to provision and maintain. Waiting for the delivery of the controller, the configuration of enclosures, etc., all this stuff is eliminated compared to using on-premise."
"This solution has helped us because it is easy to use."
"The solution’s unified file and block-storage access across our infrastructure is invaluable. Without it, we can't do what we do."
"The most valuable feature is its exceptional performance and storage efficiency."
"The stability has been really good."
"We're using snapshots as well and it's a pretty useful feature. That is one of the main NetApp benefits. Knowing how to use snapshots in the on-prem environment, using snapshots on the cloud solution was natural for us."
"The documentation can be improved, this would have helped."
"I wish the Disaster Recovery system could do more, like integrating irregularity features and combining VLP functionalities."
"The cost is acceptable."
"The product should improve compute points."
"They could provide pricing models considering the requirements of various countries and organizations."
"In the future, I would like to see cross-platform support."
"Acronis Disaster Recovery should provide software information wherein I can change my setup to collect more information."
"The solution covers specific versions of Windows and Linux, and it would be good if other Linux versions or some special appliances could work in the Acronis Disaster Recovery environment."
"I would like to see more aggressive management of the aggregate space. On the Cloud Volumes ONTAP that we use for offsite backup copies, most of the data sits in S3. There are also the EBS volumes on the Cloud Volumes ONTAP itself. Sometimes what happens is that the aggregate size just stays the same. If it allocates 8 terabytes initially, it just stays at 8 terabytes for a long time, even though we're only using 20 percent of that 8 terabytes. NetApp could undersize that more aggressively."
"I rate the scalability a five out of ten."
"The product is more restricted with underlying cloud."
"When it comes to a critical or a read-write-intensive application, it doesn't provide the performance that some applications require, especially for SAP. The SAP HANA database has a write-latency of less than 2 milliseconds and the CVO solution does not fit there. It could be used for other databases, where the requirements are not so demanding, especially when it comes to write-latency."
"NetApp CVO needs to have more exposure and mature further before it will have greater acceptance."
"In terms of improvement, I would like to see the Azure NetApp Files have the capability of doing SnapMirrors. Azure NetApp Files is, as we know, is an AFF system and it's not used in any of the Microsoft resources. It's basically NetApp hardware, so the best performance you can achieve, but the only reason we can't use that right now is because of the region that it's available in. The second was the SnapMirror capability that we didn't have that we heavily rely on right now."
"I would like to see better integration with Active IQ."
"Not a perfect ten because it's not very efficient with upgrades and management."
Acronis Disaster Recovery is ranked 10th in Disaster Recovery (DR) Software with 10 reviews while NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP is ranked 1st in Cloud Software Defined Storage with 60 reviews. Acronis Disaster Recovery is rated 8.4, while NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Acronis Disaster Recovery writes "Easy to implement and provides good features like patch management and disaster recovery". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP writes "Its data tiering helps keep storage costs under control". Acronis Disaster Recovery is most compared with Arcserve UDP, Azure Site Recovery and Veeam Backup & Replication, whereas NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP is most compared with Azure NetApp Files, Amazon S3, Amazon EFS (Elastic File System), Google Cloud Storage and Portworx Enterprise. See our Acronis Disaster Recovery vs. NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP report.
We monitor all Disaster Recovery (DR) Software reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
