IBM Tivoli CDP for Files vs OpenText Data Protector comparison

"The restoration and infrastructure is extremely reliable."

"The initial setup was relatively easy."

"It is a stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten...The initial setup process for the solution is easy."

"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."

"Data Protector is quite simple and easy to deploy. The deployment is always the same. It's on a server, and the agents are deployed to the machines in a straightforward way. We have two engineers who deploy and manage all our backup solutions."

"It works excellently only with Oracle."

"I haven't experienced any crashes while using the solution...Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."

"This solution is quite stable because we have only three users."

"It's a good product that's pretty easy to use."

"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 challenge is that we can't restore a single file from the VM in the data process when we do VM backups. But with Commvault, you can restore a single file even if you have a VM snapshot package. That's one drawback of this tool. When we do VM backups, it should help us browse the VMs to restore a single file instead of doing the complete VM restore."

"VMware backup integration and cloud recovery is lacking."

"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."

"They should design the solution so that it is much easier for deployment and make the UI easy to use."

"The downside of the flexibility on offer is if you over-configure it, it may fail to function as some configurations may not match."

"Microfocus needs to build a partnership with other vendors in addition to HPE as far as cloud consolidation of backups."

"In general, you can say that Micro Focus Data Protector is behind in capabilities when compared with other backup solutions, such as Commvault, Symantec, NetBackup, but it is very strong for certain use cases such as array integration. We are using it in production even now. There should be some kind of cloud integration and archiving solutions. I think this is the area they need to focus on."

"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."

"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."

"The solution requires paying for a license."

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

"Pricing for Micro Focus Data Protector is reasonable."

"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."

"It is more affordable compared to other vendors."

"The licensing structure provides cost savings to business."

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

"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."