IBM Tivoli CDP for Files vs OpenText Data Protector comparison

"The restoration and infrastructure is extremely reliable."

"Micro Focus Data Protector is stable."

"What I like the most about this solution is that I can change and access the Oracle backup file."

"We bought it when it was a very simple product with a clear license structure, and it just did what we needed it to do."

"The dashboards in Micro Focus Data Protector are very good. They are similar to the dashboards in Veeam Backup & Replication."

"If others have a similar environment like we do, then I would suggest this solution for them."

"The command-line interface is user-friendly and well documented in the reference guide."

"Backup of SAP/Oracle -- they are more robust than the competition."

"From a data protection standpoint, HPE Data Protector reduced our and our customer’s recovery time, and it also gave them an advantage in the industry in that they are able fall back quicker."

"We would like to have the opportunity to omit data from being backed up. For example, we have three virtual machines, each with three disks. When running the backup, it will automatically take each disk rather than allowing us to select what data we want backed."

"The Disk Agent feature is pretty basic, for instance, with the included wildcards."

"Every time there is a backup running, I cannot predict anything, so I cannot say if it will back up the first time."

"There have been some issues."

"Micro Focus Data Protector must improve its overall evolution record. They need to focus on hardware based instant recovery, client recovery, and cloud ability. Now there is no cloud ability."

"The GUI needs to be easier to administrate. Also, it should have better access to more materials to help understanding the product (like the difference between INCR and INCR1, etc. and how it works)."

"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."

"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."

"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 expensive, but it's worth for it due to the volume of critical information within our database. We are currently paying about $22,000 per year."

"In Data Protector, if you need extra features, you need to buy the agents for these features. Some of the features are Terabytes, some of them are agents. There's some complexity in the pricing and licensing."

"The pricing is acceptable for enterprise level companies, but it's not acceptable for small- and medium-sized businesses. Micro Focus Data Protector is not an enterprise level solution, and it should cover small- and medium-sized businesses with acceptable prices."

"The licensing structure provides cost savings to business."

"They have two types of licensing, one is for storage capacity and the other is client licensing. The capacity licensing here is a bit expensive."

"The licensing cost is too high."

"The pricing is neither too expensive nor very cheap."

"Avoid using many LTO drives; when using fewer drives, the price will be extremely good."

"Pricing for Micro Focus Data Protector is reasonable."