We performed a comparison between Bacula Enterprise and OpenText Data Protector 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 works great and it provides you with several standard tools to restore your backup, even after a big failure."
"It is easy to scale Bacula Enterprise even if your system is growing tremendously in data and servers."
"The solution has extensive documentation and a very active community."
"Bacula is pretty stable."
"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 can be used in virtually any environment we have onsite."
"Deduplication implementation with CAPA is very good."
"The reliability of HP Data Protector is the most valuable feature for us."
"Ability to automatically detect and secure new data sources without requiring manual configuration intervention."
"The solution is easy to use."
"Backup of SAP/Oracle -- they are more robust than the competition."
"The solution is easy to use."
"The normal file system backup is easy to manage, and our success rate is quite high."
"Regarding scalability, it's unlimited with Data Protector. You can link multiple installations and let them work together. They can share backup devices. You have many possibilities with Data Protector. It's very proficient."
"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."
"The initial setup could be a bit easier."
"It could improve its interface or offer a specific screen for the manager of the company."
"We would like to see an improvement in the functionality of the GUI."
"A more user-friendly interface (GUI) can be developed."
"Easier setup and configuration, perhaps including a GUI, would be an improvement."
"We are looking for a unique interface that can rule both enterprise and open source editions. Such a thing does not yet exist."
"The product can be developed by including functionalities like DR, CDP, and SureBackup, which are currently unavailable in the solution."
"It can occasionally be inaccurate in its backup/recovery time estimates."
"The Micro Focus Data Protector support is not as good as Veeam Backup & Replication's support."
"The new backup systems are using new mechanisms for the recovery phases; for example, VM, recovery and testing the backup before recovering it. These features are not available in Data Protector."
"I don't like this solution so much because it's very technical and compared to Commvault and Veeam, it's not so user-friendly. The interface needs improvement."
"OpenText Data Protector is more difficult to use and configure than OpenText VIM. The user-friendliness of OpenText Data Protector has to be increased, and the complexity of the tool needs to be reduced."
"Integration with the market applications must be improved, such as MS Exchange, MS Active Directory, SAP and Oracle. Other backup tools are more efficient with the integrated backups."
"VMware backup integration and cloud recovery is lacking."
Bacula Enterprise is ranked 29th in Backup and Recovery with 9 reviews while OpenText Data Protector is ranked 23rd in Backup and Recovery with 99 reviews. Bacula Enterprise is rated 8.6, while OpenText Data Protector is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Bacula Enterprise writes "Very cost-effective and well organized with good compression". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText Data Protector writes "User-friendly, competitive, agent-based, and easy to manage". Bacula Enterprise is most compared with Bareos, Veeam Backup & Replication, UrBackup, Acronis Cyber Protect and Dell PowerProtect DD (Data Domain), whereas OpenText Data Protector is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Commvault Cloud, Veritas NetBackup, HPE StoreOnce and Symantec Data Loss Prevention.
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.
