IBM Tivoli CDP for Files vs OpenText Data Protector comparison

"The restoration and infrastructure is extremely reliable."

"Performs the backup properly and protects our data."

"The initial setup is very easy."

"Deduplication implementation with CAPA is very good."

"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 most valuable feature is the capability to back up our SQL server."

"The normal file system backup is easy to manage, and our success rate is quite high."

"It is very easy to use and the interaction with various systems is very handy."

"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."

"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."

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

"We faced some certification issues after we upgraded to version 10.2."

"We have a lot of requests for the Micro Focus team, particularly in terms of the Japanese data pattern, as it's not as good now. The Japanese data pattern accuracy of the Micro Focus Data Protector needs to be improved because there are a lot of false negatives and false positives. We are currently testing this and our product team has been communicating with the Micro Focus team."

"This solution is not scalable."

"The product can be developed by including functionalities like DR, CDP, and SureBackup, which are currently unavailable in the solution."

"The interface has been the same for many years and needs to be updated"

"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."

"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."

"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."

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

"Our licensing is on a capacity basis."

"The license for the solution is very expensive compared to the other products in the market."

"Data Protector's pricing is very competitive and we have no issues in this regard. I would give it an eight out of ten in terms of pricing."

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

"It is fast, reliable, and its licensing policy is great."

"Pricing for Micro Focus Data Protector is reasonable."

"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."