Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Mimecast Incydr vs OpenText Data Protector comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 11, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Mimecast Incydr
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
78
Ranking in other categories
Data Loss Prevention (DLP) (20th)
OpenText Data Protector
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
5.8
Number of Reviews
102
Ranking in other categories
Backup and Recovery (26th)
 

Mindshare comparison

Mimecast Incydr and OpenText Data Protector aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. Mimecast Incydr is designed for Data Loss Prevention (DLP) and holds a mindshare of 2.4%, up 1.6% compared to last year.
OpenText Data Protector, on the other hand, focuses on Backup and Recovery, holds 0.9% mindshare, up 0.6% since last year.
Data Loss Prevention (DLP) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Mimecast Incydr2.4%
Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention8.9%
Varonis Platform6.5%
Other82.2%
Data Loss Prevention (DLP)
Backup and Recovery Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
OpenText Data Protector0.9%
Veeam Data Platform7.6%
Commvault Cloud4.4%
Other87.1%
Backup and Recovery
 

Featured Reviews

Chuck_Mackey - PeerSpot reviewer
Director, Cybersecurity Consulting at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Provides comprehensive visibility and protection, helps in identifying the gaps in security, and comes with excellent onboarding support
In a couple of instances, we had a little bit of trouble in getting it distributed throughout the organization. We ultimately managed to do it, but they talk about it being a pretty simple process, and it became a little laborious. It would just turn away. The agents were not being distributed. It was just churning and churning and churning. When we were looking for specific categories of data, it was getting bogged down, but that was not even so much Code42, although some of it was their issue. It really has to do with the overall infrastructure and what the organization is prepared to do. If the infrastructure or the networking is a little hinky or you don't have a really finely tuned network infrastructure environment and your patches aren't up to date on your servers and your endpoints, it could get a little sticky. Other than that, it was okay. We really didn't have much problem beyond that. It took a couple of days to sort that out, but it was no big deal.
reviewer1751496 - PeerSpot reviewer
Project Manager and Technical Consultant at a computer software company with 201-500 employees
Provides effective backup for physical servers and needs improvements for cloud compatibility
We use OpenText Data Protector for Oracle database backup and some applications that run for database security OpenText Data Protector is good for physical backup, specifically for physical servers. It is effective for direct backups to EMC library or storage without using a repository. However,…

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"It had the ability to preseed by sending in a data drive and could restore by sending the user a data drive."
"Code42 Next-Gen DLP is scalable."
"Works in the background and users are able to perform restores."
"It required very little ongoing maintenance once setup."
"Low system overhead, setting retention policies, ease of use"
"The solution is very stable. Very rarely do we have any issues with it. We don't have to deal with bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. We find it to be reliable."
"Backup and recovery have been great, but I love having the ability to keep the hybrid type build which they offer."
"Risk factors can be adjusted for all intricate details."
"I like that it supports HPE UNIX servers since many backup solutions do not - this is the main reason why we chose this solution."
"I haven't experienced any crashes while using the solution...Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"It's supports Unix, Linux, all of the OS's. It's very stable software."
"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."
"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."
"The reliability of HP Data Protector is the most valuable feature for us."
"The initial setup is very easy."
"What we find most valuable in Micro Focus Data Protector is that it provides Japanese data protection, for example, it protects information such as the full Japanese name, address, etc."
 

Cons

"What I think could be improved is how I get support."
"Reporting could use an overhaul. It is very limited."
"I think one we can improve is the compression."
"​Due to recent changes that effectively abandoned an entire segment of their user base, I no longer trust nor can recommend Code42 products."
"You can't always filter out data that you'd like to."
"The application, written in Java, required far more system resources on a Client than other solutions."
"I would like to see more flexibility on privileges, perhaps create another kind of admin for regions. Also, I would like the ability to access logs without having to be on the actual device or a super-admin."
"Java, please get rid of Java."
"In SAP restoration, we faced issues with changing the SIDs and changing the path for every backup object. It is quite a lengthy process to do that."
"The Micro Focus Data Protector support is not as good as Veeam Backup & Replication's support."
"I'm uncertain if it supports virtual machine backup and restoration. If they could enhance this aspect, they could gain more support from end users."
"I do not think that this solution is relevant in the current IT market. They have not upgraded their features and functionalities which makes it difficult for them to remain competitive."
"Faster VEAgent Restores"
"The interface has been the same for many years and needs to be updated"
"It's very expensive compared to Veeam and other similar solutions."
"OpenText Data Protector is not user-friendly, especially for cloud backup."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It was expensive. It was more expensive than Eureka, and it was more expensive than Barracuda Backup, but what we got was a full team. They didn't come in and nickel and dime us. They provided the assistance we needed. They didn't say that they need to charge us for something or it is going to take another statement of work. It was all bundled into it... We pay for the software maintenance. It is probably 18% or 20% of the license fee for rev releases."
"They were the best solution and surprisingly enough, the cheapest."
"It used to be a good solution for SOHO in particular as it had unlimited storage for a reasonable price. However, their pricing model has changed and they are now primarily targeting enterprise users."
"It is 100% worth the cost to get and keep the support, especially when setting it up."
"The pricing is reasonable. It's my understanding that the cost is about $7 for unlimited storage in the cloud per server."
"Our licensing is on a capacity basis."
"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."
"The pricing is neither too expensive nor very cheap."
"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."
"Avoid using many LTO drives; when using fewer drives, the price will be extremely good."
"The licensing cost was not annual. We didn't pay any license. We paid when we deployed and we didn't pay for anything after that. There were no additional fees after the initial payment."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Data Loss Prevention (DLP) solutions are best for your needs.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
12%
Performing Arts
7%
Computer Software Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
6%
Performing Arts
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Comms Service Provider
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business24
Midsize Enterprise24
Large Enterprise30
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business28
Midsize Enterprise22
Large Enterprise61
 

Questions from the Community

What is your primary use case for Code42 Incydr?
Data Leakage Protection on large scale environments. This can be to protect against leakage on endpoints and servers that consist of highly classified or propriety information. It can be added on a...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus Data Protector?
The solution is expensive as it requires purchasing all features without the option to negotiate based on client numbers, unlike Veeam which offers flexibility in pricing.
What needs improvement with Micro Focus Data Protector?
OpenText Data Protector is not user-friendly, especially for cloud backup. It lacks functions and facilities compared to Veeam, which offers more user-friendliness for virtual machine backups. Ther...
What is your primary use case for Micro Focus Data Protector?
We use OpenText Data Protector ( /products/opentext-data-protector-reviews ) for Oracle database backup and some applications that run for database security.
 

Also Known As

Code42 Next-Gen DLP, Code42 Next-Gen Data Loss Protection, Code42 Forensic File Search, Code42 Backup + Restore
Micro Focus Data Protector, Data Protector, OmniBack, HPE Data Protector
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Adobe, Okta, Samsung, Taylormade, Boston University, Lending Club, North Highland, Stanford University, Ping Identity, Qualcomm, Pandora.
GSK Vaccines, Repsol, Vodafone Group, Siemens AG, Medium Enterprise Transportation Services Company
Find out what your peers are saying about Mimecast Incydr vs. OpenText Data Protector and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.