Dell Avamar Reviews

We are mostly dealing with VX Rail, PowerStore, PowerMax, and everything. We are dealing with Dell PowerProtect, all the products, and Dell Virtual. We have been dealing with Dell Avamar for around 10 to 15 years.

It is very efficient in cyber resilience. Deduplication, automation, and everything is very efficient. It is multi-cloud enabled and has broad protections.

The software delivers flexible and efficient backup and recovery options through its cyber resiliency features.

Dell PowerProtect Manager provides insights in managing backup processes. Its encryption mechanisms are very efficient, helping to secure sensitive data.

Its integration with Dell EMC Data Domain is very good. It is easy to integrate with Data Domain. Multi-cloud options are enabled, and backup in cloud options exist in Dell Avamar.

It is a very good product. My only concern is that there is no tape backup.

For tape backup, we have to use Dell NetWorker.

They could add more features for cyber resilience and multi-cloud options in the next release to make it even better.

We have been using Dell Avamar for around 10 to 15 years.

The current technical support by Dell is very good. From this region, the EMEA region, it is excellent. I would rate it nine out of 10.

Positive

The initial setup is straightforward, but there are some tricky aspects. You have to configure it properly for it to work correctly.

We usually help our customers to implement it. We offer customer implementation and support afterward.

It usually takes three to five years to see ROI with Dell Avamar.

We recommend Dell Avamar only for enterprises with critical data. For other customers, such as SMBs (small and medium businesses), we recommend other backup solutions such as Veeam.

When comparing it with competitors, Dell Avamar is the best option on the market regarding performance and pricing. I rate Dell Avamar nine out of 10.

I use Dell Avamar primarily for backup and recovery.

The most valuable feature for me is the backup functionality. It gives large enterprises the comfort of knowing their workloads are being backed up.

There are instances where backups fail on certain applications, which is an area that could be improved.

I have worked with Dell Avamar for just a few months.

Dell Avamar is highly stable.

I rate Dell Avamar's scalability as a seven. It performs well in medium environments, however, in very large environments, there are issues with some workloads failing.

Customer service used to be good. Currently, I'm unsure of its quality, and I would rate it around five out of ten.

Neutral

The initial setup can be a bit challenging, and I would rate it a six or seven out of ten in terms of difficulty.

Dell Avamar delivers operational effectiveness for IT operations. However, the cost-effectiveness is relative to the specific needs of the organization.

I don't currently have detailed knowledge about the pricing, however, it is geared towards enterprise businesses and might be on the higher side.

I would recommend Dell Avamar to others. Overall, I rate the solution a 6.5 out of ten.

I use the solution in my company as a backup tool.

For improving the data backup process, Dell Avamar component was basically chosen because of the type of customer base that we work with presently. The upfront use of the tool was based on the fact that the customer's background was geared toward using such a solution. It is used by those who prefer Windows-based VMs, and so many were enticed to use the tool. Currently, Dell's benefit is precisely the IDPA component, which is a module package that comes in a combination. Secondly, it uses Dell Avamar's very fast and effective deduplication engine.

In terms of manageability, I would like to improve the product. The tool's interface is very much in a spreadsheet format. It doesn't have a subsystem structure around it with its own command sets and subshells that it works with.

To tell you the truth, Dell Avamar is used as a backup, and the way it is currently used in our environment is very static. We have a subset of clients for it, so we actually outsourced to another subsidiary of the business to do it for them on their behalf. If I think widely about it, reporting is an area with shortcomings requiring improvement.

I have been using Dell Avamar for twelve years.

It is a very stable solution. It is almost a legacy-based implementation of backups. It doesn't have a very good subshell, but it is actually a spreadsheet-based tool. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

The tool's scalability has not been a challenge in our environment yet because we use it for a static client base. I cannot comment on the scalability. My scalability is really associated more with the ability to store data, which includes the connectivity of the device structures and devices to Dell Avamar. A Dell environment with a Data Domain is a very good combination. Data Domain does duplication, and the LMR engine exploits it fully.

The tool's scalability is a five out of ten.

The tool is used by 2,000 endpoints and databases, and we deal with the backup.

The support from a Dell perspective had been a challenge for a long time in our environment. The support has not been in place with the ability to help the customers, and it is based on the mechanism that there is a need for users to go through a hierarchy of layers of technical support before they reach the right level of support. I believe it was Dell EMC's decision when they merged to put Dell employees into positions of looking at EMC structures, capabilities, and so on. So what happens is that when you call the support team, there will basically be a question and answer session, and the escalation part is for the customer to decide. We had problems with the support team, but of late, it has improved, and Dell EMC also used to follow the same support processes meant for Dell NetWorker. From the perspective of support, if you had a crisis, you had to walk through the structure to reach a specialist or an expert support skill before you could get the right feedback and the right results.

I rate the support a five out of ten.

Neutral

I have twelve years of experience with Dell NetWorker and Data Domain.

The biggest competitor of Dell stems from the fact that Dell's footprint is being moved into Commvault. By next year, you are probably not going to see Dell NetWorker and will be left with Commvault.

I was not directly involved with the tool's deployments, consisting of push installs and so on. I do know that the tool's deployment is associated with Dell Integrated Data Protection Appliance (IDPA), which is a version packaged together with Dell Avamar Data Domain Virtual Edition (DDVE), which was horrific. I think it took almost fifteen hours to get the deployment done because the package assembled was so big and so tight that there were just too many things to be done quickly in the package itself.

The solution is deployed on an on-premises version and with local implementations.

Dell EMC's technical support team completed the product's installation phase.

It is just logically understood that if you only back up five percent of the data, the payback comes in the form of savings in the ninety-five percent of the disk space you saved.

The pricing from Dell Avamar and Dell NetWorker side has been based predominantly on front-end terabytes. That is the option that we have been dealing with, and the front-end terabytes basically said the maximum backup capacity per client would last 65 days, and that was what the tool based the billing against. In an environment where you're using deduplication of what you are backing up, there are continuous changes based on the activity of the data. The deduplication part will depend on the consistency of your data changes. You could back up something on a particular day, and then you can back up something else on another day. Out of the front-end terabyte readings, your backup from the client side is taken because the front-end terabyte is based on your operating system capacity, and it is not how much data you have written into Data Domain. There had been a debate and disparity about how we are actually backing up only maybe one gigabyte out of ten gigabytes because of deduplication. We would rather want to be built on the one gigabyte than the ten gigabytes because the ten gigabytes is a fictitious number at the end of the day, whereas the real number is one gigabyte. Obviously, the front-end terabyte keeps on going up and down based on whatever the customer does at any point in time.

We predominantly make databases. One day, the database was big. The next day, they shrank it down because they had archived some files already. Then, tomorrow, there might be a big index change. So it's bad decompression, bad deduplication. Suddenly, you're writing more data in the data domain than what you've done before. So, it is not a static front-end terabyte capacity that you use. Every day you run it, that figure is different. At the same time, we argue that we want static numbers to be charged against.

We went through an RFI, RFP where we had to decide on replacing Dell NetWorker. We had a tender open where Dell NetWorker pricing was compared with Data Domain against another competitive product, and Dell's pricing was way off target. In this case, it was about three times more expensive than the contender. I cannot say that the pricing is good. I rate the tool's price as a three out of ten if one means expensive and ten means it is a cheaply priced tool.

I must say that a product similar to Dell Avamar at that point in time was IBM Tivoli Storage Manager. Within a time frame, a couple of things happened that caused IBM to make a big mistake. IBM's marketing mechanism around Tivoli Storage Manager basically blew up from my perspective. When IBM came around auditing the customers, the tool nailed the customers with huge penalties, which resulted in millions of dollars for supposedly not having licensed all the components and the features of Tivoli Storage Manager correctly. The customers were basically forced, based on the penalties and costs, to make decisions, and so it became an easy decision for them at the same time to change the technology platform, move to Dell EMC Dell, and then move to Dell NetWorker.

Deduplication is the reduction in network bandwidth requirement, first of all. It also reduces storage space requirements, which you benefit from as your infrastructure costs less. Your backup runtime is less as well if your network is a bottleneck in any way. It is a cost-effective solution. From a manageability perspective, it is not as user-friendly as the more advanced solutions, like Dell NetWorker, Dell Storage Manager, or IBM Storage Protect.

My company does the tool's maintenance, but during instances where the IDPA maintenance had to be done, upgrades, and so on, because of the very tight packaging of all the components, we normally call in the technical support from EMC to assist us or do it on our behalf. In our maintenance contracts, I think a stipulation and a price penalty are associated with your maintenance costs.

From our side, we split the maintenance part between four technical engineers plus the technical support.

My company is not at the stage where we can leverage AI. I personally frown upon it. From a group risk perspective, our customers have not accepted AI.

I would recommend it to the right user. As I mentioned, the user must have a particular background or expertise in a specific platform. For example, a Windows-based client might not align well with a Linux-based solution, and so on. The solution should match the user's technical exposure, capabilities, and preferences. For those users, Dell Avamar could be a good fit.

There is also a new product from EMC called PPDM. It is supposed to replace Dell NetWorker, but I don't see that happening. PPDM seems to have dropped too many important features. Dell NetWorker has built-in metrics that seem to have vanished in PPDM. While PPDM is supposedly more user-friendly and quick to interface, when it comes to backup and recovery, you expect certain indicators to be present, which have been removed from PPDM.

So, there is a lot of change in the EMC world regarding backup and recovery platforms. The solutions are nice, but, as I said before, the pricing makes it difficult to recommend universally.

I rate the tool as a six out of ten.

In Avamar, we work within the IT environment, integrating state-of-the-art solutions. Avamar is installed on appliances, and we initialize it using specific tools. If you're starting with the basic setup, you can install the OVA file within Dell's management center. For this solution, we utilize E-Lab Navigator.

In our system, clients often request image-level backup capabilities. These are highly valued, and it's recommended to use data packages for image-level backups. At the GaN Summit, it was also suggested that GANFAST services recommend high-level backups because they have a MELT library for our storage systems. So, based on the client's needs.

Without the proper setup, we cannot perform immediate or virtual machine backups; only high-level backups are possible. If Avamar could be upgraded to support immediate backups, it would be a significant improvement. Compared to other solutions, like Teams, which enables virtual machine-level backups, Avamar handles these tasks with more limitations.

I have been working with Dell Avamar as a reseller.

If you've obtained the necessary authority, such as from the Ethiopian government, Avamar can be integrated with other solutions like Datadog and Deepgram. Deepgram has also purchased additional protection tools for its certificate service. In this solution, Avamar is utilized within its data center, including integration with other systems. Additionally, Avamar is integrated as part of a broader strategy for the Ministry of Agriculture and the African Union, working with other solutions for redundancy in the virtualized environment.

Avamar is a very good solution. It stands out compared to other options, especially when we expand storage with Data Domain or other accessible storage systems. Even with ML Creative Labels, we can enhance tagging and improve storage management. I have worked with Avamar on four or five implementations, and I can confidently say it performs well.

The technical support provided is excellent. I'm currently dealing with some issues after finishing the network server integration. I'm also working on a network attack server. Additionally, I'm coordinating with the KBC team remotely.

Positive

We are working on projects related to shipping and logistics, specifically on the backup end. We also use Networker, which is very fast. I work closely with the sales team because we have a premium-level partnership. When we submit projects, we are often deeply engaged with the product.

We use the data domain most of the time. In that environment, it integrates well. Compared to other solutions, we work closely with the team to manage case-based solutions more effectively.

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

Neutral

The main use of Dell Avamar is as a backup and storage solution. 

Its deduplication technologies are the best in the market, currently. It helps organizations to reduce the storage requirements by eliminating redundant data.

One issue that can be highlighted is the migration challenge. If there is a need to move the data from one backup solution to another, it might be difficult since there is no option for a straightforward migration.

In this company, I've been using this solution for more than five years, but I have previous experience with it as well.

The stability is good. 

It offers scalability for both medium and large enterprises as it is able to handle growing data volumes. I would rate it eight out of ten. 

The initial setup and configuration is a bit complex and it may require vendor support and technical expertise.

I would recommend this solution as a good choice for medium to enterprise-level companies. It might not be beneficial to smaller businesses due to its high cost.

It is a great fit for enterprise-level businesses that are operating with large volumes of data. Compared to other solutions, it provides the best value for the cost.

Overall, I am highly satisfied with Dell Avamar. I would rate it nine out of ten.

We position Avamar as a backup for the VMware environment.

The ease of backing up virtual environments is great. It is very easy when you want to restore back to the original state.

The only concern is the cost. The price is a little bit higher than we would like. Many people prefer to use something like Veeam as it is cheaper compared to Avamar.

I have used the solution for more than ten years.

Data protection is very stable, I would rate it nine out of ten.

Avamar is very easy to scale. I would rate it eight out of ten.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

Positive

It is very easy to set up an Avamar solution. I would rate the setup a seven out of ten.

The pricing is not competitive enough.

Many people prefer to use something like Veeam because it is cheaper.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

We use the tool to create backups of every system we have in the infrastructure.

The solution works well. The tool’s ability to restore files discretely is useful. We can restore specific files of a specific server. We do not have to restore everything.

The licensing price must be reduced.

I have been using the solution for more than five years.

The tool is stable.

We have never had any problem with scalability. We have backed up many terabytes of data. We have more than 1000 users. We have a lot of servers and VMs in the company.

When we have any issues, we receive professional support. We get the optimal level of engineering support we require.

Positive

When we moved to PowerProtect, we were very pleased with the performance of the backups of the VMware infrastructure. It was disappointing when we faced difficulties using PowerProtect with SQL. We also faced problems with the infrastructure. We had a lot of files, and PowerProtect could not handle it. So, we switched to Dell Avamar.

The solution is costly. Competitors are less expensive. However, Dell Avamar is the right tool if we want to protect our critical systems and receive proper engineering support.

I will recommend the product to organizations that are providing critical services. The solution requires maintenance. The maintenance is not complex, but we must apply all the required fixes. We must follow the things recommended by the vendor to guarantee that we are aligned with the service provider's guidelines.

People who want to use the solution must find a good partner. The product is good. It must be implemented well. The tool protects us against risks that could cost us millions if we have a problem. Overall, I rate the product a nine out of ten.

We use the Dell Avamar solution to backup endpoints, including desktops and laptops. We also use it to back up virtual servers using Dell Avamar. With this server, we take backups of all the employees' desktops and laptops. We haven't encountered any backup and restore problems with Avamar. If we will need any support, we will get it from Dell.

We have divided our infrastructure into two categories: server infrastructure and endpoints. We create endpoint backups in Avamar while the server backups are stored in the cloud.

The Dell Avamar tool is easy to configure and highly reliable for backup. It requires little maintenance, not like Commvault. Commvault has a very tough UI and requires much more team effort to configure and install on both the server and client ends. Avamar is a simple and straightforward backup system. The backup performance is also good. There is no resource pressure on the clients during backup. The duplication feature is precious for reducing backup time.

The UI is quite old. We've been using this UI since last year, and they haven't changed it. It would be better to update the UI periodically and create attractive dashboards from an administrative point of view.

I have been using Dell Avamar for 7 to 8 years.

The product is stable. We haven't encountered any recovery issues either.

The solution's scalability is excellent because the new box has a complete set of hard disks. Dell Avamar provides a single license to increase the hard disk capacity, making it easy to scale. We have around 1500 endpoints and are using two instances of IDPA to back up all these desktops and laptops. Whenever we require data, we retrieve it from the Avamar box. It's a good and reliable system for backup and restore.

Whenever we require support, we get it promptly and properly.

Positive

Previously, I also used Commvault alongside Avamar. Commvault is very challenging to configure. It is resource-intensive, whether as software or an appliance. Unlike Dell, they don't offer their own OEM box but rely on other servers. If clients purchase their servers and storage, Commvault only provides the software for installation on those systems.

Furthermore, Commvault blames server or operating system quality issues, adding to the complexity. I encountered numerous problems with Commvault. Avamar is more satisfactory since all support responsibilities fall under Dell, simplifying the process compared to dealing with multiple vendors. This centralized support from Dell has been reliable over the past seven to eight years.

The initial setup is easy. We’ve been using it long, so it's not too complicated. It takes no more than eight working hours to initially deploy the solution, at least for installing servers.

New users may need some support from the OEM side. They won't be able to install it themselves. They will require support to set up the server independently for the first time. After that, it's smooth sailing.

In Italy, we gathered all the requirements for the hybrid-based network card, bandwidth, and switch points. After that, we prepared a questionnaire with their support partner for the number of IP addresses in the LAN, which is around 20-22, and DNS records in the DNS servers. There were multiple things required to set up this deployment. After the initial installation of the servers and configuration, we began deploying the policies for the data sets, retention periods, and grouping for backup schedules. These configurations are one-time activities.

The ROI of Dell Avamar is good. Nowadays, ransomware and other malicious activities are increasing. Therefore, investing in a backup solution for your data is crucial. Your data must remain secure during destructive events, and you can easily retrieve it. We have encountered situations where a server or machine has gone down, and we have successfully recovered the data using Dell Avamar. Thus, We are delighted with its effectiveness. Furthermore, it is not expensive for us.

The product’s pricing is a bit high.

The solution is very easy to maintain. Whenever we receive any alarms from the Avamar box, we report them to Dell, and the support person helps us resolve the issues.

I recommend this solution, especially for your endpoints' data. Backing up servers, in addition to endpoints, is crucial. Nowadays, it's important to back up your servers on the cloud. This solution is very effective for your endpoints.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

Our clients have found Avamar to be effective for their backup and disaster recovery needs. It serves as a comprehensive data protection suite, meeting the requirements of all virtualization platforms.

Dell Avamar has significantly streamlined our data deduplication and backup processes across the board. When it comes to reliable backup solutions, we occasionally integrate Data Domain and Isilon, including Isilon RCS, into our backup strategy alongside Avamar.

Integrating and managing Avamar with other systems in our IT environment is highly straightforward.

The deduplication technology has significantly improved our storage efficiency, thanks to its embedded nature. It's a combination of hardware and software features working hand in hand, complementing each other. This synergy, based on deduplication and data compression, often results in impressive ratios, such as a 32:1 reduction in data footprint within the tenant domain.

All the features in the system are highly valuable.

The only missing component is the option for bare-metal backup. Performance can sometimes be affected when tools are utilized for tasks like backup or deep archiving.

I have been using it for approximately ten years.

As a distributor and solution architect, scalability is crucial. We carefully assess and size our solutions, aiming to outpace competitors by addressing all potential challenges. Our solutions are meticulously designed to be intelligent and innovative, staying ahead of the competition.

It is renowned for its technical support, prioritizing direct engagement with customers rather than focusing solely on sales and marketing. Their support is known for being responsive and effective.

In our distribution model, we offer a range of solutions from IBM, Veeam, Veritas, and Dell, tailoring our recommendations to the specific needs of each client. Whether it's hardware, software, or support services, we prioritize post-sale support to ensure customer satisfaction. Our focus is on delivering comprehensive support services that encompass all aspects of the customer experience. Veritas is a solid product, but it tends to be on the higher end of the cost spectrum compared to Dell.

The deployment process is remarkably easy, thanks to the tools provided by Dell EMC. The Solve Desktop guides us through each step, offering scripts and facilitating feedback, ensuring smooth execution. Whether it's a third-party backup appliance or a backup appliance, setup can be completed within five to ten minutes. However, concerns arise with policy scheduling, integration, and customization for applications and databases, which may require additional time. The time required for the entire deployment process, including installation and configuration, typically ranges from two to three days in complex environments. This duration can vary depending on the number of certified individuals with experience in the specific tool, database, or third-party product integration. The expertise and understanding of the engineer implementing the solution play a significant role, as it's more about the person's knowledge and skills rather than the product itself. A single engineer is capable of handling the implementation. Maintenance is straightforward, and I haven't encountered any glitches in the past.

Dell's pricing structure is not overly expensive. It operates on a frame-based license system, primarily utilizing front-end capacity or CPU-based models. Currently, there are no core-based licensing options available.

There are three key pillars to consider when making recommendations: price, product reliability and performance, and support. Price comparisons are crucial in today's global market, while product features and performance also play a significant role. However, the most crucial factor is support. Overall, I would rate it nine out of ten.