OpenText Data Protector vs Own Data Platform comparison

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

"I have used Micro Focus Data Protector for the file backup facilities. My primary use of the software is to backup file data."

"OpenText Data Protector is good for physical backup, specifically for physical servers."

"The most valuable features of this solution were the features we worked most with which were telemetry, and the scheduler."

"The initial setup is straightforward if you understand Data Protector."

"The tool's most valuable aspect is its ease of management. It was not complex. In terms of features, I can mention a couple of things. For example, if you need to restore a VM, you can do it with multiple streams in OpenText Data Protector, which is an advantage over Commvault, from what I've noticed, having worked with multiple tools. Another thing is the Oracle backups; configuring Oracle backups is much easier in OpenText Data Protector."

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

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

"The most valuable feature for our customers is the restore functionality."

"The Micro Focus Data Protector support is not as good as Veeam Backup & Replication's support."

"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."

"Recently, clients have raised concerns about the lack of comprehensive documentation for Data Protector."

"I would like to see a better user interface in the next release."

"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."

"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."

"The solution is not intuitive enough. I think they should work on the user experience and the graphical interface. These can be a lot better."

"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 anonymization feature can be improved."

"The licensing cost is too high."

"The licensing structure provides cost savings to business."

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

"We have many competitors who are pricing better, and we believe that our pricing is higher."

"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 product is cheaper than Commvault."

"Our licensing is on a capacity basis."

"The pricing is around $3,000 to $5,000. The charge additionally for support and to scale."