We performed a comparison between Bacula Enterprise and N2WS Backup & Recovery 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 most valuable features are the special plugins such as SAP HANA databases, Microsoft SQL, and various types of virtualization."
"It brought many advantages - such as the learning curve being very light."
"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 is easy to scale Bacula Enterprise even if your system is growing tremendously in data and servers."
"Bacula is pretty stable."
"It can be used in virtually any environment we have onsite."
"Provides easy, one-click functionality and flexible backup policies and schedules for AWS workloads."
"The product is successful with the SMB market."
"The backup and restore functionality is very easy to use and manage."
"The most valuable feature is the ease of use."
"The backup and recovery are the most valuable features. So, our developers can work with confidence."
"The recovery time is fantastic and proven. Also, by providing a simple interface, the solution lowers the cost."
"N2WS Backup & Recovery is very easy to use and configure backup for AWS instances."
"The initial setup is easy."
"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."
"It could improve its interface or offer a specific screen for the manager of the company."
"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."
"The initial setup could be a bit easier."
"A more user-friendly interface (GUI) can be developed."
"We are looking for a unique interface that can rule both enterprise and open source editions. Such a thing does not yet exist."
"The GUI has room for improvement."
"It's a global feature that the customer thinks they don't have enough tools to manage, to copy, to delay, and to classify the object file in the backup directory. So they need more tools to manage files in object directory."
"The GUI could be slightly improved."
"The solution has the option to take backup on-prem servers, but it's not very efficient."
"The UI is a little dated and hard to use. Some of the buttons are a bit small. You have to go into the menu to get the settings you want."
"More documentation would be helpful, especially some step-by-step documents for recovery scenarios."
"There is room for improvement in stability."
"Additional features I would like to see are the ability to restore to different vendors, AWS and Azure, and/or the ability or take the information out of the AWS cloud."
Bacula Enterprise is ranked 30th in Backup and Recovery with 9 reviews while N2WS Backup & Recovery is ranked 37th in Backup and Recovery with 8 reviews. Bacula Enterprise is rated 8.6, while N2WS Backup & Recovery is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Bacula Enterprise writes "Very cost-effective and well organized with good compression". On the other hand, the top reviewer of N2WS Backup & Recovery writes "A highly stable and easy-to-use solution that can be used for backing up EC2 instances". Bacula Enterprise is most compared with Bareos, Veeam Backup & Replication, UrBackup, Veritas NetBackup and Acronis Cyber Protect, whereas N2WS Backup & Recovery is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, AWS Backup, Rubrik, Veeam Backup for Microsoft 365 and Clumio. See our Bacula Enterprise vs. N2WS Backup & Recovery report.
See our list of best Backup and Recovery vendors and best Cloud Backup 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.
