We performed a comparison between Azure Backup and Reduxio [EOL] based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Veeam Software, Zerto, Commvault and others in Backup and Recovery."It's easy to deploy."
"The solution helped us use R2 RBO to back up frequently."
"The initial setup was very easy."
"There is only one feature, and that is the backup."
"I have no issues with the stability at all. So I don't necessarily care about the stability of the product. I look more at whether or not can I recover. And I haven't had a failed recovery yet. I've got no failed recoveries of all my years."
"You can select the tiering for your backup and manage your cost."
"It's stable."
"The most valuable features of Azure Backup for us are its flexible retention options and the ability to recover to a second region with geo-replication and read access."
"Reduxio offers a very simple, elegant user interface (design) to manage it."
"The whole product is based on point-in-time restore capabilities built into their storage appliance, and no one else I know does that."
"The pre-processing dedupe engine they have instead of post-processing."
"Improves the response of the VMs by having the most used portions on the flashcache."
"The unit has been running at 100% without an issue."
"By using the BackDating option we can restore volumes based on time. It also reduces volumes and maintenance time."
"The machine has been easy to use."
"Instant recovery through its continuous data protection."
"The solution is still in its infancy; it's not a mature product yet."
"It can be further improved by continuously meeting its compliance requirements."
"We have a concern with the backup when were are working with VMs that are running in Barracuda Firewall because it usually fails."
"I would like to have the option to increase the frequency of the backups. Azure Backup does backups on an hourly basis, but I would prefer it to take backups more often."
"Azure Backup is limited to certain workloads. It would be helpful if Microsoft focused on enabling backups for Oracle and other unsupported databases."
"I believe more options could be available to understand better what's happening in the system. Additionally, automating the client updates and connector updates would be beneficial. Updating the connector from time to time can be challenging, and it could be made more transparent and straightforward for users. Moreover, another drawback lies in the time it takes to test full data backup recovery. Deploying a full recovery takes longer. We need to allocate a longer period for complete data recovery to establish the environment again."
"Azure lacks sufficient solutions for a particular scenario, we may need to resort to using third-party applications. In such cases, these applications can be employed to facilitate backup, replication, and the efficient utilization of internet connectivity and bandwidth. They enable us to effectively manage and transfer data while ensuring optimal utilization of network resources. However, it would be a benefit if we did not have to use third-party applications for these operations."
"We faced some issues synchronizing the information in Azure when the storage was changed."
"The ability to look at data at a file level would be useful, as well as the ability recover at that level. Right now, you can only recover whole volumes."
"The only thing that I would point out would be the basic administration management of the machine. Everything has rights, meaning that there's either all control or no delegated control. So to sum that up, it would be a feature request for delegated management in the administrative console."
"Integration is needed with other virtual vendors like VMware, Veeam, Hyper-V; that integration needs to be deeper, not just the way that they're using it now. I know that it's under development, but I think this is one of the disadvantages, for now, as a young company. They have to work with the other players on the market."
"Maybe it should come in stainless steel, just like its DeLorean time machine predecessor."
"Scalability. Reduxio has only one product, they don’t have an option, for now, to expand the storage product."
"The latest release limits web access to the admin console via Chrome only, and that's a bit of a hassle. Would definitely prefer something less restrictive there."
"I am waiting for the vSphere Plug-In with individual VM level control."
"Scalability is a little unusual. We came from the NetApp world where, if you needed more disk space, you just added more drives into the chassis, whereas with Reduxio, if you need more disk space, you have to buy a new chassis."
Earn 20 points
Azure Backup is ranked 9th in Backup and Recovery with 51 reviews while Reduxio [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Backup and Recovery. Azure Backup is rated 7.8, while Reduxio [EOL] is rated 9.8. The top reviewer of Azure Backup writes "Straightforward to set up and manage and allows us to monitor all backups in one place". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Reduxio [EOL] writes "Its access speed and now its recently released features makes Reduxio not only an equal, but also better than your older version SANs". Azure Backup is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Rubrik, Commvault Cloud, Acronis Cyber Protect and Veritas NetBackup, whereas Reduxio [EOL] is most compared with .
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.
