Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Backupify Google Workspace Backup vs Bacula Enterprise comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 3, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Backupify Google Workspace ...
Ranking in Cloud Backup
52nd
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.9
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
SaaS Backup (29th)
Bacula Enterprise
Ranking in Cloud Backup
17th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
10
Ranking in other categories
Backup and Recovery (24th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Cloud Backup category, the mindshare of Backupify Google Workspace Backup is 0.3%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Bacula Enterprise is 2.3%, up from 1.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Cloud Backup
 

Featured Reviews

IM
Inexpensive, easy to configure, good support, and it is easy to scale up when needed
The most valuable feature is the interface, which is very nice to work with. Whether you're working on the appliance itself, or you're working on the cloud, it is basically the same interface. It got to the point where when we needed to recover a file, we didn't look at the backup solution anymore. Instead, we went right to the Datto Backupify. Using Backupify took our time to recover from probably four days to 20 minutes. With this device, you're capable of logging into the interface or through an IP address to access the data that is stored on it. Recovery can be just a matter of spinning up a virtual machine or doing a full bare metal recovery, replacing the entire hardware-based server.
Davilson  Aguiar - PeerSpot reviewer
Very cost-effective and well organized with good compression
It could improve its interface or offer a specific screen for the manager of the company. A managerial user who wants more information beyond the operational technician should be able to access it. It could include greater transparency regarding the volume of data trafficked on the network, as well as the expectation of deduplication. A more practical strategy could come with a backup policy model as a suggestion for both large and small companies. A simple suggestion is to visually implement the backup time as far as your physical media.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The most valuable feature is the interface, which is very nice to work with."
"The most valuable features are the ease of use and the fact that users themselves can self-provision and recover."
"It is easy to scale Bacula Enterprise even if your system is growing tremendously in data and servers."
"It works great and it provides you with several standard tools to restore your backup, even after a big failure."
"The solution has extensive documentation and a very active community."
"It can be used in virtually any environment we have onsite."
"Bacula is very solid, very stable, and very scalable."
"Bacula is pretty stable."
"It brought many advantages - such as the learning curve being very light."
"The most valuable features are the special plugins such as SAP HANA databases, Microsoft SQL, and various types of virtualization."
 

Cons

"The device does not allow you to do multiple backups over the whole environment."
"Not a ten because there's always room for improvement."
"Many features have been converted to commercial licensing, which restricts their availability."
"The initial setup could be a bit easier."
"Easier setup and configuration, perhaps including a GUI, would be an improvement."
"We would like to see an improvement in the functionality of the GUI."
"We are looking for a unique interface that can rule both enterprise and open source editions. Such a thing does not yet exist."
"Bacula needs a graphical user interface because, for administrators, the command-line interface is okay, but for the average user it is not very easy."
"A more user-friendly interface (GUI) can be developed."
"It could improve its interface or offer a specific screen for the manager of the company."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The costs were about $1,000 USD to buy the unit in the first place, and then between $250 and $300 per year for support."
"We have a perpetual license."
"This is an open-source solution."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Backup solutions are best for your needs.
850,236 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
19%
University
9%
Educational Organization
9%
Retailer
9%
Computer Software Company
20%
University
10%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Bacula Enterprise?
Bacula is more expensive than various other solutions. It’s almost completely commercial now. Products like Veeam software are much more expensive.
What needs improvement with Bacula Enterprise?
Many features have been converted to commercial licensing, which restricts their availability.
What is your primary use case for Bacula Enterprise?
The last scenario in which I used Bacula was for a customer who needed some open-source tool which could support encryption at that time. We managed to convince the customer to use Bacula to deploy...
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Two River Technology Group
NASA, SwissCom, Navisite, Turner Studios, Bank Austria, Caixa Bank, SdV Plurimedia, Leibniz University Hannover, Zeta Global, Tricore, NetLog, Siemens, LocaWeb, wbsGo, itesys, Queens School of Computing, Escrypt.
Find out what your peers are saying about Backupify Google Workspace Backup vs. Bacula Enterprise and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
850,236 professionals have used our research since 2012.