Dell Avamar Reviews

In our company, we handle five different types of data from VME, Windows, SQL and other sources. The complete backup of forty lead machines is implemented daily using Dell Avamar in our organization. 

A huge storage space needs to be bought with Dell Avamar, even when it's unnecessary for an organization. The upgrades of the solution are highly time-consuming; it takes 10 to 12 hours to upgrade Dell Avamar or Dell IDPA. The aforementioned upgrade arrives once a year, but it takes an entire day in our company.

I have been using Dell Avamar for ten years. 

The product offers satisfying stability. The disc failures with the solution are usually replaced within the next way with Archwap discs, and it doesn't affect the stored data. 

The solution can be easily scaled. When your solution is running out of space, you need to apply for a new license and it can be obtained in multiples of 12 TB options. Only one professional in our company uses the solution to manage the IDPA backups. 

Our company has availed tech support, they are quite helpful and efficient. The maximum turnaround time I have witnessed, depending on the issue, is two days; otherwise, the support team sorts my issues in minimal time. I would rate the tech support an eight out of ten. 

Positive

The solution isn't easy to deploy. Dell IDPA comes with numerous tools demanding several configuration requirements. Storage and index manager are inputted in separate VMs. There are multiple components during the initial deployment of Dell Avamar, but client migration and workflow onboarding can be implemented in a straightforward process. Agents need to be stored and new connections have to be found as part of Dell Avamar's deployment. 

The initial setup of Dell Avamar took about three months in our organization. The aforementioned long duration was due to the need to deploy the solution separately for backups and DR purposes and also for arranging network logistics. I deployed the solution with assistance from a Dell partner. 

It's an expensive tool. 

In my experience, Dell solutions are more user-friendly than Commvault. The deployment and management of Dell products are a lot easier than Commvault. There are a lot of complexities in Commvault, but the solution has multiple great features, including troubleshooting. 

The solution's ease of use simplifies the disaster recovery processes in our company. Once implemented, Dell Avamar performs as a complete solution. The advanced DR backup from varying locations is easy to recall using Dell Avamar.  

The backups are performed by the solution with superior stability. The product is easy to manage as frequent troubleshooting is not required and reliable backups are procured. 

The interface of the tool was quite bland previously; it was a Java console, but recently, it got upgraded to a WIP console. The WIP console is easy to comprehend and navigate in Dell Avamar. The product is more expensive when purchased as a stand-alone solution, but with Dell IDPA, the cost is reduced significantly as a suite of tools. With the IDPA bundle, a user pays for only the features used. Dell Avamar requires pre-purchase of the entire storage.

For example, with Dell Avamar, you might need to purchase 36 TB storage when you only require 16 TB. Dell IDPA offers a huge storage device, and payment needs to be made as per the license procured. I have a 96 TB storage solution with Dell IDPA, but I am licensed to use only as much as required; if I am using 12 TB, the cost for only 12 TB needs to be paid. I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

Potential customers should be aware that the solution is initially provided with 96 TB storage and can possibly be scaled further. I haven't faced any downsides or setbacks with the solution; it's quite easy to use.  

Our primary use case for Dell Avamar is backup and verification.

Dell Avamar has helped our organization by allowing us to do backups. We can tell machines to do backups in the application.

The most valuable feature for me is direct activity.

This solution could improve by introducing daily verifications and another repository.

I have been using this solution for about two years.

I would rate the stability of this solution a seven, on a scale from one to 10, with one being the worst and 10 being the best.

I would rate the scalability of this solution a five, on a scale from one to 10, with one being the worst and 10 being the best.

My impression is that their technical support is quite good.

I would rate the initial setup process a five, on a scale from one to 10, with one being the worst and 10 being the best.

My impression – and that of some other people – is that this solution is expensive.

I would recommend this solution to other people. 

I would rate this solution as a whole an eight, on a scale from one to 10, with one being the worst and 10 being the best.

The solution's performance is between satisfactory and good.

It's a stable product.

The solution scales well. 

The performance takes up a lot of resources, unfortunately. We'd like it to be less heavy.

I've been using the solution for four years. 

The performance has been okay. It's pretty stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

The solution scales well. That's not an issue for us.

We have five to seven users on the solution currently.

We do not have plans to increase usage.

We haven't contacted technical support recently. We want it decommissioned right now. 

We are using Microsoft Escort Server for the applications we try to develop. For the active directories and for SharePoint, for those solutions, we are using Microsoft Escort Server.

We are planning to bring on a new solution to replace Avamar.

Before, Dell Avamar, we did not use anything.

Compared to the solution we are looking at now, it seems pretty straightforward to implement. 

It doesn't take such a long time. Within an average amount of time, after you have the product, you can finalize everything within five working days.

Since we are a government institution, commonly, the setup process is actually done by the supplier.

You can get a three-year license if you like. You can subscribe for three years, and if you want a 30-month subscription for the support and service, you can also do that.

It can be expensive. 

We are not using the latest version of the solution right now. 

I would not advise people to use this product. 

Maybe it depends on the case of the organization. The performance is a big issue for us and maybe the support service. If the supplier is enough to provide support to the end user, I might maybe recommend to others, however, it needs a capacity built internally and maybe in the market. That's the big issue with it. Otherwise, if any users have skills to manipulate using it, utilize the resource, I would recommend it. 

I'd rate the solution five out of ten.

When Avamar started out, it used to be for a small to medium environment, but now it's done a lot of changes and it's a good backup solution, especially within your VMware environment.

The most valuable feature is the integration with Data Domain and your VM stacks. One of the good new features is that it integrates with Azure and AWS, and it has the potential to scale out into multiple cloud platforms.

If you don't have DPA, the reporting features are not as user-friendly, so reporting is something that they can improve on.

I've been working with Avamar for close to ten years. 

The solution is very stable. 

If you have Data Domain integrated, the solution is scalable. 

I would rate the tech support for Avamar as a nine out of ten. 

The initial setup is a bit complex, especially if it's a new installation, but once you get the hang of it, it's pretty smooth. 

The length of the deployment depends on your plan, what you need to back up, and if you order Oracle and whatever else you need beforehand. Worst case scenario, it would probably take a week to set up, but if you have all your ducks in a row, it'll be maybe two days, max.

It is not difficult at all to maintain. 

I have previously worked with Networker and Data Domain. I also worked with PPDM. When I logged calls with PPDM, there was always an issue and it would take a day or two for support to come. I don't know if it was a skill issue, but the guy would usually take the information and go and discuss it with guys at a higher level and then come back to me a day or two later.

This is a great product and the integration is easy with other solutions, like the cloud or Data Domain, and it's scalable. I think to some extent Networker used to be the big brother, but now Avamar is taking over that space.

I would rate this solution as a nine out of ten. 

Dell EMC Avamar is a backup solution. It has integration with the hardware that Dell has and you can backup many things, such as snapshots.

I have using Dell EMC Avamar for a few years.

The stability of Dell EMC Avamar is very good.

Dell EMC Avamar is scalable.

We have 80% of our clients are using this solution. Most of our clients have Dell hardware and this is why they are using Dell EMC Avamar.

I have found the support from Dell EMC Avamar to be not as good as Veeam. The time it takes to receive support could be improved. However, once we have the support the agents are knowledgeable and helpful.

I have used Veeam previously.

Dell EMC Avamar is a little bit more complicated to set up than the Veeam.

There are licensing costs for Dell EMC Avamar and it is paid annually.

I would not recommend this solution to others.

I rate Dell EMC Avamar a five out of ten.

We use Dell EMC Avamar for backing up the data on the endpoint devices of the users.

The performance of Dell EMC Avamar is good.

I have been using Dell EMC Avamar for approximately 

The stability could improve, a lot of scheduled backups failed at one time.

We have approximately 5,000 users using the solution in my organization.

The support from Dell EMC Avamar was decent.

The initial setup is complex.

We used a consultant to do the implementation of the solution.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate Dell EMC Avamar a seven out of ten.

Dell EMC Avamar is a very complex product. It took a lot of time for the IT admins to get trained on how to use it. It is not very user-friendly, and we won't be using Avamar anymore.

It needs a lot of improvement in terms of how the backups have been configured, and the reporting is too complex. There are a lot of improvements that should be done in the reporting feature and how the endpoints are getting added to the console. These processes need to be a little more simplified. It is not that easy to get an immediate report based on our requirements. It is too complex. We have to write some scripts and things like that. There are predefined scripts, but they aren't very user-friendly for the customer.

We have been using this product for more than six years.

The stability is okay.

If you want to scale up again, you have to buy a complete appliance. There is no option for just scaling up for the mid-phase entities. Only the larger entities would be able to afford that kind of complete appliance scalability. In terms of scalability, I'm not a fan of Avamar.

We haven't used Veeam before, but we are currently replacing Avamar with Veeam now. We are still in the process of switching.

The cost is high.

I would rate this product 5 out of 10.

We primarily use the solution as a backup. Avamar is used to back up our production workloads. Production workloads include Oracle, EBS, SharePoint, file and print service, other application services.

The stability is good. We have found that the performance is excellent.

The product is easy to use.

The installation process is pretty straightforward. 

The solution could be a bit easier to use in the sense that they need to make it simpler to backup products and restore items.

I've been using the solution for more than three years. 

The solution is very stable and the performance is reliable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable. 

Whether or not we will scale the solution depends on the business. If we have a requirement to do so, then definitely we'll expand it. If there will be year-over-year growth and if it will be 10%, we're likely to expand and will need to scale.

If you need to add more capacity, you will need to pay for it.

The installation process is straightforward. That said, it would require an engineer from Dell to do it. We ourselves cannot do it. We don't have the knowledge necessary.

We needed two engineers to handle deployment. 

Installation was quite fast. It took about four to five hours. After that, the configuration and other policies, that took about two days.

We had Dell assist us with the implementation process. 

This is a capacity-based license, it's a one-time payment.

In order to increase capacity, you need to pay more. You also can expect more maintenance.

The pricing of the product seems to be less expensive than other options, however, I can't speak to the exact cost of the product.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten. We're quite happy with its capabilities.

This product is for production users. We do not backup user backups; it's only for the production workload.