Dell NetWorker Reviews

Dell NetWorker is mostly used for backup solutions, and it was quite good and easy to work with.

Dell NetWorker's user interface is quite simple and very interactive. The solution's user interface is easy to manipulate or maneuver around.

The solution could be graphically better.

I have been using Dell NetWorker for five years.

I rate Dell NetWorker ten out of ten for stability.

Our clients for Dell NetWorker are mostly enterprise businesses.

I rate the solution ten out of ten for scalability.

It took a while the last time I tried to get support, but once I got connected to the support, it was quite easy. I had a few challenges in the beginning, but it didn't take long once the communication was established.

Positive

On a scale from one to ten, where one is difficult and ten is easy, I rate the solution's initial setup an eight out of ten.

It takes a couple of minutes to install the server and the agents, but the solution's deployment doesn't take long.

On a scale from one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive, I rate the solution's pricing an eight out of ten.

Dell NetWorker has supported our client's daily backup operations in a good manner. It's quite easy to use Dell NetWorker for disaster recovery processes. It is straightforward and requires a couple of steps, unlike other solutions where you'd have to go through too many options. Dell NetWorker allows me to examine the endpoints for data protection needs.

Dell NetWorker's deduplication functionality is way better than what we get on Veeam. The implementation of Dell NetWorker has positively affected our overall IT infrastructure performance. I would recommend the solution to other users.

Overall, I rate Dell NetWorker ten out of ten.

Dell NetWorker is a secure and backup service tool.

The solution offers time management, reduces operational cost and do multiple backups at a time.

The tool should integrate with other solutions, like, the tape library.

I have been using Dell NetWorker for one and a half years.

I rate the solution’s stability an eight out of ten.

300 users are using the solution in our company.

I rate the solution’s scalability an eight out of ten.

Dell support is better. Basically, in our region, no physical resources required to prevent such things. We need to go online supports, and time differences are too high.

Neutral

The initial setup can be difficult at times, especially when dealing with Data Domain port-based authentication. Managing where the Data Domain is located on the port side can be a particular difficulty. Deployment takes around two to three hours to complete whereas port installation take around two to three weeks. We have two users to do the implement and maintain.

We achieved 60% ROI in terms of money and time savings.

The solution’s pricing differ in some conditions. It offers perpetual licence.

I rate the product’s pricing a six out of ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive.

The Dell Networker's maintenance complexity varies. It can be easy in some situations and challenging in others. Overall, its functionality is generally good. However, when monitoring the system from another location, we encounter difficulties in handling certain conditions. These difficulties arise especially during installation and client configuration. Maintaining client-level configurations also have difficulty, particularly when communication between clients and the server occurs through different ports while only one or two ports are allowed by default settings. This further complicate the process.

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

The software is quite complicated and useful for large corporations using different information systems, like different databases and applications. NetWorker is good for many agents from different software applications. Dell has decided to launch a new software called PowerProtect, so they might close NetWorker in the future.

NetWorker, you can realize any architecture with NetWorker because it's a comprehensive solution. They have many agents for other applications.

NetWorker's major problem is its legacy software. Legato was the company that invented NetWorker in the early '90s, and in keeping the product line all these years, Dell has many legacy features that they cannot drop because their customers still use them.

These legacy features are a problem when it comes to integration. In supporting these features, it's difficult for Dell to implement new features because Many of them use kernels that are not optimal. This could be why they decided to launch a new product line.

I've used Dell NetWorker for about eight years.

Dell NetWorker is quite stable.

Dell NetWorker's scalability is good. My company has several thousands of users.

Dell's tech support was great.

We previously used Veeam, which was good for virtual infrastructure.

The ease of initial setup depends on your experience. The concept of NetWorker is slightly different from NetBackup, for example. If you have enough education about the product and understand the administration and installation procedures, it's quite easy. The time taken to set up the product depends on how complex the infrastructure is.

We use a license without a time term. We just need to buy additional support when needed.

In Russia, we have some problems with the presence of Western vendors here, so we have no support from US companies. I doubt anybody will increase the number of licenses or expand the installation because that involves support from the vendor.

I rate Dell NetWorker an eight out of ten. I recommend the solution.

We have used the solution largely for backups, including all our databases and UX machines.

The solution offers very good backups and has all of the basic features any other solution would have on offer. 

There's tight integration between Data Domain and NetWorker as well. Data Domain is an EMC product. They have very good integration between the two.

The initial setup is simple. 

Its stability is very good. 

The solution can scale. 

The web console could be a lot better. All the customers are dependent on a separate console server. If they want to access NetWorker, they need to have a separate console server to access the management window. I know they've come up with a browser-based management site in order to monitor day-to-day backups and to perform the administration or the setup within the web console. Yet, for the web-based console, they still need to do some improvements.

The documentation could be better. I find the solution is not properly documented. If you want to set up a SharePoint, there are certain steps to be followed, which I have to discover myself, I have to find out myself, which was not found in those installation setup guides. That's something I would suggest. We have already passed this suggestion to Dell EMC, letting them know that there are a few steps missing. The documentation was not properly maintained or properly updated. Previously, the older documentation was good. However, it seems that now, when they update and move forward it's not properly documented.

I've been using the solution for ten years. 

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

The solution can scale. We only need to get an additional license if we want to do a scaling of our infrastructure. We just need to buy the capacity we need. We can just upgrade the RAM in case it needs additional resources also. We can even deploy another NetWorker server. 

Scaling is purely based on capacity. You don't have to buy it per server either as most of the servers are virtualized. As you have the socket license and the capacity license, then you can actually deploy a new server.

We have more than 1,000 users on the solution right now. 

We've used EMC, Veeam, and Rubrik.

We do have Rubrik and I set up Rubrik a few months back, and it's working fine. 

EMC, in terms of cost, is more expansive. I would definitely go for NetWorker instead as, when you compare it with the Veritas NetBackup, NetWorker is cheaper. Rubrik is cheaper than NetWorker, however, with  Rubrik, we're only using it to back up our VMs. For the other kinds of workloads, such as Exchange or SharePoint, we are still using NetWorker.

The initial setup is not complex. It's straightforward. Once you have all your prerequisites ready, then you are good to go.

As integrators, we are able to handle the initial setup. We handled the setup ourselves mostly in-house. 

I don't have any information on the ROI.

We'll have the solution for about five years. I can't say how much it will cost in total. 

We are users and integrators as well. 

My advice would be to have, once you have started to use it, something more on the Windows-based tools. If you see the commands, all those commands are as if you're running a query. The underlying structure of NetWorker is a skill database, so it's actually running on a skill database. Mostly you'll be running some queries, or querying commands to get the reports using the command prompt. For someone who is familiar with Windows, they'll find it very easy to use.

I'd rate the solution a nine out of ten. 

I use the solution in my company as it is a product that has been sold to many customers, especially to those who need a foolproof, solid, and stable backup and restoration solution.

The use case for Dell NetWorker has been for customers with at least 60 to 75 machines for which they need a backup tool, and after that, it can go up to a couple of thousand machines. The product is useful for those who require a working solution without much technical fixing needed to make it work. The tool's restoration part is the most important, which allows users to check if the restore part is working properly with Dell NetWorker's help. The aforementioned reasons prompted me to continue selling the product to our company's customers.

The most valuable feature of the solution is a function in Dell NetWorker that works if the data that you are supposed to restore is resilient. If the data you want to restore is incomplete, then it has some functionality that will restore everything that is okay and skip the part that is not okay, so you get almost everything back.

Based on my experience, it was tricky to get support when I started working with the tool. The support is an area with concerns where improvements are required. Once the product starts working, users get good support.

I have been using Dell NetWorker since 1997.

It is an extremely stable product.

The scalability part of the product is very positive since you can scale it up or down as much as you like without any limitations.

In Sweden, where I used the tool, there were around a hundred users.

It was tricky to get the support to start working on your problem, but once you get to contact them, they offer professional help quickly.

I had technicians and engineers in my company to take care of the setup part of the product. The setup process of the product was straightforward. 

The product's setup phase can be completed in a day. My company hands over the product to the customer once they learn how it works.

The product can be deployed on an on-premises model. It can be deployed in the cloud or on-premises.

Earlier, users had to make yearly payments towards the licensing costs of the product. The licenses were expensive, but users used to get the best device to use.

My company did evaluate other products like Backup Exec, NetBackup, and IBM Tivoli Storage Manager against Dell NetWorker. My company chose to work with Dell NetWorker because of the backup and restoration speed that it offered, along with stability.

During my experience with the product, it did not have the deduplication feature in it unless you bought Dell EMC Data Domain and hardware appliance.

It is a really stable product and is one of the best solutions in the market. Based on my experience, the product has no limitations.

Dell NetWorker released a new version many years ago to cover a new operating system's latest version, but it didn't work. My company had to face a lot of problems with our customers until Dell acknowledged the problem and the fact that there was a need to do a little bit more work. The aforementioned area consists of the details of when I faced some issues with the product.

The benefit of having Dell NetWorker in infrastructure was to ensure that there was a backup and restore environment that was stable, worked well, and could deliver when needed.

I rate the overall tool a nine out of ten.

I use the solution in my company for data protection, backup, and system restoration.

The tool's most valuable feature is its ability to recover the data.

The tool should be more streamlined and have the possibility to set up a backup for a bunch of clients who are different in nature. You have a few SQL servers with different credentials for backup, but you have to specify a single object for each of them because you have different credentials. The tool should have something similar to IAM tools and allow integrations with fiber channels and some IAM solutions so that it can be streamlined, resolving the problems with the management of the access to databases and backup.

The features of the tool meet my requirements. I have no such new requirements in the tool, so I cannot say what needs to be added to the product for me at the moment.

The tool should be more streamlined and simplified to create a backup to receive objects.

I have been using Dell NetWorker for twenty-five years. I recommend the tool to my company's customers.

It is a stable solution.

It is a scalable solution. You can use the tool on one computer, but at the same time, you can use the same binaries to make a system that will protect thousands of them.

Everybody wants the response time to be less or zero, but no support team can meet such expectations. I rate the technical support an eight and a half out of ten.

Positive

I have experience with Tivoli Storage Manager, HPE, NetBackup, and Dell Avamar. Dell NetWorker is the best option in the market if you know how to implement and use it. If you know how to use it, the tool is very good.

Considering my twenty-five years of working experience with the tool, implementing it is easy. The implementation phase of the tool can be easy for beginners because the product has an interface that is quite okay. There are a lot of wizards now, so it is more streamlined from the point of view of how to create the protection policies and so on, making it an easy process.

The solution is deployed on an on-premises model.

I am not a customer of the tool, so I never paid the price for the tool. My customers or end users use the tool because they pay for it.

The tool's automation is very good because you can automate all the traffic to run the backups. We don't want to run the backup but prefer to restore the copies of the backups to the client's systems. You can use the system easily and customize things to meet all the requirements from the point of view of automation. The tool is a very flexible system for both automation and protection.

I think there is no integration with any AI-driven management tasks. AI is more or less very popular nowadays, but I think there is nothing like it in the tool.

I recommend the tool to others, especially to those who use Dell Data Domain. If you plan to use the tool on one computer and then go to thousands of them, then I won't recommend it to you.

The integration of the tool with third-party products is fine.

I rate the tool a seven out of ten.

This is a very good product. The administration is very good when it comes to backup scenarios. However, maintenance and support are very difficult. The creation of jobs and backups could be easier.

It helps improve the jobs of administrators. It can make things more compatible from an end-user perspective. 

The most valuable feature is the Dell EMC-based product backups. We were using Dell storage, and it offered good compatibility with it. 

The solution is stable.

It can scale.

Technical support has been helpful. 

The end-user experience is not good. They need to improve the product to make it easier to use. We're missing that right now. 

The integration with Hyper-V needs to be better.

They need better compatibility with Exchange backups. 

It is difficult to set up.

While the stability is good, the troubleshooting is hard.

I've been using the solution for seven or eight years. 

It is stable. I'd rate it eight out of ten. There are no bugs or glitches and it doesn't crash or freeze. 

It is a scalable product. I'd rate it eight out of ten. It extends well. 

Technical support is very good. 

Neutral

I've also used Veeam and Microsft DPM. Veeam and Microsoft are very easier to use. They are also less expensive.

The initial setup was not straightforward. It is complex.

We had two people managing the process. 

We have not noted any ROI.

The pricing is relatively high compared to Microwsft DPM and Veeam.

I'm not sure which version of the solution I'm using. 

New users can try it. It is good when it is in the right landscape. In certain cases, it could be a very useful tool.

I would rate the solution eight out of ten.

I primarily use NetWorker to back up over 1,200 virtual machines and over fifty databases. 

NetWorker's most valuable feature is recovery, including the policy-based backups that can be configured.

Currently, the NetWorker server only supports the Windows server bare-metal recovery, so an improvement would be built-in support for Linux and UNIX BMR. In the next release, NetWorker should include support for container backups and Kubernetes.

I've been using NetWorker for over ten years.

NetWorker's stability and reliability are very good, but it still needs monitoring by external software solutions to be maintained properly. NetWorker requires monitoring by the backup administrator to check for failed backups, and it also sometimes has issues pop up that require patching.

NetWorker isn't scalable - you can't add more nodes to it, although you can add some data zones. If you want to add environments to NetWorker, you have to deploy more standalone solutions. 

I'm very satisfied with Dell's technical support. It's very easy to open an SR and get support from them, and whenever we open a request, we get a response, and they ensure our issue is resolved.

The initial setup is a little complex as you have to deploy a virtual machine or  NetWorker on a physical server, depending on your architecture and environment. However, once that operating system is deployed, the NetWorker installation is quite simple. The deployment takes about half an hour, but the integration with the virtual machines and the environment takes two to three weeks.

We used a partner team.

I'd advise anybody thinking of implementing NetWorker to look at their environment, virtualization solutions, and infrastructure requirements and then decide how their environment should be designed. They should also consult with the EMC architect who will be designing the data zones and will be responsible for migrating their environments. I would give NetWorker a rating of seven out of ten.