We performed a comparison between Arcserve UDP and Dell NetWorker based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Backup and Recovery solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution has no limitations because it does backup for Linux and Windows."
"The most valuable feature is the duplication."
"The most valuable feature of Arcserve UDP is live replication."
"The ability to switch between different hardware platforms and utilization tools are some of this solution's most valuable features."
"The standard backup and restore feature is most used."
"The most valuable features of this solution are that I can by just one click, copy and paste anything that I would want. I do not have to restore the whole virtual machine."
"The most valuable features are the replication to the cloud and the deduplication."
"I would recommend it if there is a general case."
"The possibility of recovering up-to-the-moment data is very useful."
"The most valuable feature is NetWorker's integration with the data domain that transfers the data directly into the Dell appliance, so the data doesn't need to pass through the network. NetWorker acts like a pipe, allowing the data to flow directly from the database or the VMware environment to the data domain."
"It is the best umbrella, serving the best applications."
"The solution offers compatibility with many types of database systems. It is one of the largest backup solutions. Additionally, it gives important information about data domain systems with deduplication."
"I like that it's stable and scalable."
"This solution is really the best in the market! After evaluating other solutions, we automatically decided to use this one."
"Technical support is good."
"The solution is scalable."
"One of the biggest drawbacks of Arcserve UDP is that it does not have a single console, making it an area that needs to be considered for improvement."
"Licensing is an area that needs improvement."
"Arcserve UDP is in the middle range of complexity. The interface can be developed a little bit more to be user-friendly."
"The problem is just reliability. If the promises in the marketing material were realized in real life, it would be the perfect solution, but it's just the reliability issues."
"We cannot restore each user's mailbox. Each user's mailbox should be independently restorable. Also, this solution is very slow. If you select all of the servers, it runs for a long time... It needs to be faster. Finally, If anything happens to one server we should be able to switch to another server."
"The time to backup servers that sit in DMZ must be improved."
"Based on my experience, whenever we need support, there are difficulties with communication when trying to resolve the issue."
"Backups are very slow and time consuming."
"There are too many reboots and the software requires constant updating."
"It is not easy to understand and deploy. It is complex in nature. Simplicity is not there. When we deploy it, the customer always needs some training from us. To make it user friendly, there should be one agent that can be used to back up every product. Dell EMC NetWorker uses so many user agents. In PowerProtect Data Manager, you can just install its VM, import that VM into vCenter, and you can start to do backups directly from vCenter. However, in Dell EMC NetWorker, you always need one server, and from that server, you need to initiate all backups. You must know the interface and the CLI. It is not user friendly. It would be a great feature if we can deploy Dell EMC NetWorker on a virtual machine, like Avamar. The additional features that are required in Dell EMC NetWorker are already available in PowerProtect Data Manager and Avamar. Therefore, there is no need to enhance Dell EMC NetWorker. It would be better if they can just rename it to PowerProtect Data Manager or Avamar."
"The implementation process could be improved."
"The solution could improve by having more integration."
"In the next release, I would like to see better pricing and more integration with the other products in Dell EMC."
"Dell NetWorker could improve the GUI to include rack recovery."
"The front end of the solution could improve. The user-friendliness is lacking."
"Its console UI should be better. It should also have more out-of-the-box reporting functionalities. It should also have easier cloud integration. They have got cloud boost and things like that, but if you want to directly back up to the cloud, I'm not too sure whether you can do it. For example, you can easily send data from Commvault to AWS, Azure, or a container, but it seems to be not so easy in NetWorker."
Arcserve UDP is ranked 18th in Backup and Recovery with 41 reviews while Dell NetWorker is ranked 14th in Backup and Recovery with 73 reviews. Arcserve UDP is rated 7.6, while Dell NetWorker is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Arcserve UDP writes "Global deduplication, stable, and flexible licensing options". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Dell NetWorker writes "A stable tool that has an easy-to-use GUI that enables quick restoration". Arcserve UDP is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Acronis Cyber Protect, Dell PowerProtect DD (Data Domain), Veritas Backup Exec and Rubrik, whereas Dell NetWorker is most compared with Dell PowerProtect Data Manager, Dell Avamar, Veeam Backup & Replication, Veritas NetBackup and Commvault Cloud. See our Arcserve UDP vs. Dell NetWorker report.
See our list of best Backup and Recovery vendors.
We monitor all Backup and Recovery 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.