We performed a comparison between AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery and Dell RecoverPoint for Virtual Machines 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."The initial setup is pretty straightforward, it's not complex."
"We have never had any issues with scalability."
"It provides our disaster recovery solution. It works fine in our tests."
"The solution is dependent on the network bandwidth. For example, if they have a bandwidth of 10Mbps the solution will run a little heavier. If the bandwidth is good the solution runs well."
"CloudEndure Disaster Recovery is a fairly stable solution."
"The initial setup is really straightforward."
"Technical support has been very good. They usually respond quickly to our requests."
"The most valuable aspect of CloudEndure Disaster Recovery is its instant block replication feature. This allows us to perform live block verification and eliminates the need to concern ourselves with recovery point objectives. This capability is particularly advantageous for critical workloads."
"The most valuable feature is that it is journal-based and you don't have to replicate a lot of data."
"Point-in-time recovery and ease of deployment are valuable."
"The installation is straightforward if the version you have is compatible with your infrastructure."
"It is a point-in-time restore, which is quite handy."
"The most valuable features are the data center recovery administration and the time of recovery."
"One of the standout features of Dell RecoverPoint for Virtual Machines is its real-time data protection capability."
"Continuous replication with lower RTO and RPO is the most innovative feature. Its tight integration with VMware for VMware VMs is also valuable."
"The workload can be moved directly if the disaster site is the main site."
"The UI could be a little sleeker."
"The bandwidth is a constant upload communication to the AWS DR environment, so if you do not have the proper bandwidth, it will definitely eat up your internet line."
"I have not seen any areas that need improvement at this time."
"The solution's network setup and a lot of the control tower setup could be improved."
"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."
"I set up a test, deleted the source, and went to fail it back, and it didn't work."
"The user interface, customer support, and the recovery time for the current customer query could use improvement."
"Sometimes a server will get a bit behind. "
"The solution is not easy to use. It's actually quite hard. If it could be simplified it might be better for the end user."
"It can have better integration. It would be good if, in addition to VMware VM, it can also support other hypervisors. I also want to see support for Oracle databases. As of now, it supports only SQL and Exchange. It would be good to also support other databases."
"The configuration process seems a bit challenging, and the installation takes a bit longer than expected."
"The solution could improve by being more easier to use. However, once you have used it for a while it becomes easier. Additionally, there could be better support and compatibility with management by having a command-line interface. This would be beneficial for the customers."
"It would be good to have a critical application on the customer side."
"In the next release of this software, I would like to see options that help to decrease the bandwidth required, such as compressing the data."
"I would like to have the HTML 5 interface working because it is currently not functioning with the VMware environment."
"I would like to see integration with EMC NetWorker in the next release."
More AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Dell RecoverPoint for Virtual Machines Pricing and Cost Advice →
AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery is ranked 15th in Disaster Recovery (DR) Software with 11 reviews while Dell RecoverPoint for Virtual Machines is ranked 10th in Disaster Recovery (DR) Software with 10 reviews. AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery is rated 7.4, while Dell RecoverPoint for Virtual Machines is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery writes "Free, easy to use, and offers good support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Dell RecoverPoint for Virtual Machines writes "It replicates workloads fast, but it wastes resources". AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery is most compared with Azure Site Recovery, AWS Backup, Oracle Data Guard, VMware Cloud Disaster Recovery and Zerto, whereas Dell RecoverPoint for Virtual Machines is most compared with VMware SRM, Zerto, Veeam Backup & Replication, Azure Site Recovery and Nutanix Disaster Recovery as a Service . See our AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery vs. Dell RecoverPoint for Virtual Machines report.
See our list of best Disaster Recovery (DR) Software vendors.
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.