We performed a comparison between Cohesity DataProtect and OpenText Data Protector 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."It offers an easy, quick backup and restore of files and VMs. Also, the "Google-like " search for files is awesome."
"It makes our administrators' lives much easier to combine backup, archiving, and services like hosting file shares in one central system with only one user interface."
"The spin-up of a VM within a test environment for backup testing along with quick restores."
"The most valuable features of Cohesity DataProtect are SpanFS and the handling of hybrid workloads."
"I have found that the speed of restores, especially files and folders, are extremely fast. This bodes well for us, and our end users are always amazed at how fast you can get them their files."
"It is also very easy to determine which VMs are being backed up and which ones aren't. This is helpful to make sure nothing is being missed."
"It's completely reliable and easy to restore."
"Cohesity DataProtect is a reliable solution for performing backups within a suitable timeframe, and its forever incremental model is particularly effective for the customer's needs. Additionally, the solution handles instant recovery and file-level recovery from a VMware image backup seamlessly."
"The solution is easy to use."
"Integration with HP storage is a very strong point for Micro Focus Data Protector. It is the best solution for general operations like backup and restore. Zero downtime backup (ZDB) is one very important feature, which is basically the integration with the storage array. It is a very strong feature. We're using storage with snapshots with this integration."
"The feature that was most valuable was that we could restore one mailbox and we could do different backups for different databases."
"The command-line interface is user-friendly and well documented in the reference guide."
"Data Protector's granular recovery features make it easy for us to create and restore backups in an understandable and user-friendly manner. With granular recovery, any database or even just a database table can be restored at will."
"I like that it supports HPE UNIX servers since many backup solutions do not - this is the main reason why we chose this solution."
"The dashboards in Micro Focus Data Protector are very good. They are similar to the dashboards in Veeam Backup & Replication."
"Micro Focus Data Protector's most valuable feature is its interaction with the fiber share. It is easy to use, we use it to back up without any problem to VTLs, and can use the Fiber Channel that is still the TCP."
"Cohesity DataProtect can improve in the area of databases. We have had some challenges with both Cohesity and Rubrik being able to effectively back up in a timely manner the SQL Oracle workloads."
"This solution is only compatible with a limited number of storage arrays, including Pure and Cisco Hyperflex."
"The support is pretty bad."
"The solution's dashboard or UI can be enhanced and made more user-friendly than its competitors."
"Many of the reports are basic, at most, and at times we had to open a support ticket to help find or develop a report for our needs."
"Microsoft Exchange online mailbox backups would be fantastic."
"Reporting is one area that isn't as robust as it could be."
"Initial setup can be complex if you need to change IP addresses. Hopefully, they improve that in a future release."
"The technical support was very slow."
"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."
"Microfocus needs to build a partnership with other vendors in addition to HPE as far as cloud consolidation of backups."
"Many of our users complain about the GUI. You still need to rely on the command line interface. Because it originated as a Unix system, Data Protector is still a command line-driven solution, which makes it seem rather dated compared to systems that are built around a GUI from day one. It doesn't affect the functionality, but some people don't find it user-friendly."
"It's very expensive compared to Veeam and other similar solutions."
"The product can be developed by including functionalities like DR, CDP, and SureBackup, which are currently unavailable in the solution."
"In terms of what can be improved, I would say integrations with MongoDB. We use MongoDB and we need to go to scripts to do backups. We need more integrations."
"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."
Cohesity DataProtect is ranked 9th in Backup and Recovery with 67 reviews while OpenText Data Protector is ranked 23rd in Backup and Recovery with 99 reviews. Cohesity DataProtect is rated 9.0, while OpenText Data Protector is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Cohesity DataProtect writes "Easy to use, offers good scalability and responsive support ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText Data Protector writes "User-friendly, competitive, agent-based, and easy to manage". Cohesity DataProtect is most compared with Rubrik, Veeam Backup & Replication, Commvault Cloud, Dell PowerProtect DD (Data Domain) and Veritas NetBackup, whereas OpenText Data Protector is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Commvault Cloud, Veritas NetBackup, HPE StoreOnce and Symantec Data Loss Prevention. See our Cohesity DataProtect vs. OpenText Data Protector report.
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.
