Carbonite Server vs Veritas CloudPoint comparison

"Easy verification of things is the most valuable feature."

"Technical support handled all our issues quickly and effectively."

"It does not slow down your computer or use a lot of resources as it works."

"I find the BMR/image and the recovery pieces are valuable."

"The solution is a free engine to help work with the container."

"It seems reliable and easy to use."

"The Granular Restore of SQL feature has been a lifesaver more times than I can count. One of the main reasons for looking at Carbonite was their support for platforms like AIX and AS/400 Series."

"The efficiency and convenience are excellent."

"The product is good for volume-level backups."

"I would rate Veritas CloudPoint a ten because it's done everything it says it'll do, and we've really not had many problems with it."

"The most valuable features are the indexing, the file-level restore, and the replications between regions."

"In the next release I would like to see an improvement in the auto failover option."

"The only thing that I would like to see improved is related to marketing. Currently, it is very difficult to find the right paper and stuff for me. Their marketing department should provide better information because currently, it is very difficult to find information on the internet. It was bought over by OpenText, and you won't be able to find a lot of information about this solution on their site. They should also provide training facilities for commercial purposes. Some of my colleagues recently went for pilot training, and they were technical. If I want to get trained, the training has to be more commercial. Currently, there is no such training for users like me."

"They do not yet have USB recovery but they are adding it in coming releases."

"The support for object storage isn't quite there yet. Its public cloud support can be improved. I would love to see the public cloud support for object storage, and it would be great, but what I always hear from the folks at Carbonite is that in a lot of cases, it directly competes with their cloud offering. So, I don't know when or where that will go or if that will go anywhere, but we are hopeful to see something. The dashboard is a little outdated. If they gave it a facelift and put some better design around their dashboard, that would be tremendous. I generally care less about the visual aesthetics of an application as long as it does what it needed to do, which is true in the case of this solution. We also have the Microsoft 365 platform. Because they're two separate platforms, I have to log in to my Microsoft platform to manage it, and I have to log into my Carbonite server backup platform to manage it. Having these two coexist together in one management console is really what we're looking for, but we went for it knowing this. We also knew that there would be some integration coming down the road. So, we're again hoping to see some of that coming in 2021."

"It could be a little bit easier or faster to be able to access data files without having to download anything."

"The stability has room for improvement."

"The Hyper-V backup has room for improvement."

"The product needs to improve its file-level or granular-level backups."

"I don't care for the pricing or capacity license model from Veritas CloudPoint because there are cases where we back up the same data multiple times, yet we still owe from a capacity standpoint based on how much data is managed in our backups."

"They are niche with the work that they do, but they should have more integration with NetBackup and the reporting is something they should be working towards improving."

"The pricing is between $120 and $150 per year."

"We pay 9,000 dollars per year for our license."

"Its price is reasonable."

"The solution is open source."

"When comparing to other solutions, the price is at par."