Dell NetWorker Reviews

I feel that it is a good product. However, if its setup is configured correctly, it will work well but if it's not, it's a total disaster. I think that goes for any backup product. Coming into architectural design thinking, for example, we introduced a backup network. This has helped speed up our backup time and the time it took Windows to backup. That has made a huge difference without impacting reduction systems elsewhere that connects into the same systems. So the main thing would be to optimize scheduling and do the setup correctly, then it will improve the backup features. 

There are too many reboots and the software requires constant updating - just like Windows. I don't like that so I feel that it isn't very stable.

The technical support from EMC is 10 out of 10. I am really impressed by it. 

The pricing of this solution is very good.

I will rate this solution an eight out of ten, based on my knowledge and experience on it. In the next version, I would like it if Dell EMC could back up IBM. They call it IBMi, or the A400 system. That would be awesome for the networker. My advice to others would be that they should be very specific who they use to set up the software and make sure they check references for successful installations.

The backup software has been much faster since we've deployed the solution.

The system needs better integration with other toolsets.

Support could be improved. EMC also needs to offer more information for users online.

The solution needs more automation and more reporting, so we don't need to check everything manually.

We use the solution every day, for all of our backups. We don't plan to increase usage, but we do use it extensively right now.

I haven't had a good experience with technical support. It takes them a very long time to resolve issues.

We used to use HP DataProtector. It took too much effort to manage it, which is why we switched.

The initial setup was very straightforward.

We did the implementation ourselves.

It's approximate, but I believe we pay around $20-30,000 a month in licensing.

We did not evaluate other option before choosing this solution.

We use the private cloud deployment model of the solution.

Networker is a fine solution, but there are other more modern automated solutions on the market. We are considering changing to one of those. They take up fewer resources, which is why we are considering switching. I believe this solution is better than Data Protector, but there's another one, Rubrik, that saves a lot of time and effort.

We should have involved EMC with the implementation because it was difficult. I would recommend others consider this lesson that we learned from our attempt.

I would rate the solution seven out of ten.

Most customers are integrated with the hypervisor environment. It's a mix between VMware and Hyper-V. The database and integration with the database is SQL and it has since changed to Oracle. This is mostly what we are using to unify everything.

The solution has minimized the recovery time objective, and the recovery point objective, the RTO and RPO. Most customers are looking to minimize downtime. The solution has helped ensure this.

The backup and configuration for the virtual environment have been the most valuable features, especially with VMware.

The operating system could be improved. The interface could also be much easier.

The stability is very nice.

The solution has very good scalability.

Technical support is good, but it depends on the time zone. I've noticed that some areas offer better support than others.

The initial setup isn't straightforward or complex. It's somewhere in between. Deployment took about two weeks.

I did the implementation myself.

The pricing is mid-range. It's not the cheapest, but it's not too expensive.

We are using the on-premises deployment model.

I would rate the solution eight out of ten.

It's not easy to integrate. We have to read a lot of documentation in order to configure the solution. 

We have a Hyper-V installation, with a mixed Linux environment.

We have an on-premises deployment.

Configuration for Hyper-V needs to be improved. Our original configuration did not work because of an issue that differed between versions.

We are able to do direct backups, but analyzing the logs is not straightforward. There are a lot of things that have to be done from the client-side in order to locate and identify errors. This should be made easier.

This solution should support part-loaded data.

I would like to see support for the enactment of errors, where the error should be very clear-mannered, on board, with NMC control only. When some backups fail, we investigate all of the possibilities and sometimes have to enter the admin from the client-side. We then have to render the log and investigate that. If it is a Microsoft issue, for example, then we will contact Microsoft. This entire process needs to be enhanced.

As long as all of the requirements are met, this is a very stable solution. It is used for our daily operations.

Scalability of this solution is very good. We have approximately four hundred employees using this solution.

Technical support for this solution is very good. They are nice people and whenever we need support, they turn up and investigate. Within an hour they will start an investigation.

The initial setup is a little bit complex, but it is very good. In terms of configuration, you have a basic administrator account. If you are going to be configuring Hyper-V or another technology then you have to have an admin account for those, as well. Without a proper administrator account, you will not be able to perform backup and restore functions.

There are also other things to consider, such as the network port and user compatibility. Hyper-V has issues to consider with respect to configuring the backup.

My advice to anybody who is researching this solution is to first check to make sure that your environment is stable, and compatible with this product. Even before doing a POC, the environment needs to be considered. Once any incompatibilities have been ruled out then a POC should be done, where everything needs to be tested.

This product can be complex and difficult to understand, but once you have some experience it is very good.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.

We used the on-prem version of this solution. Our primary use case of this solution is for backup and recovery software. 

The deduplication needs improvement and it could use better integration. 

It's very stable. 

NetWorker has very good scalability. 

They have good technical support. They had good solutions for any problems I had. 

We are in the process of switching to Commvault. It was a business decision, not a technical problem with NetWorker. 

This solution might be a bit complex for an end-user but it's a great solution for a technical person. 

I think it's a very good solution. 

I would rate it an eight out of ten. No solution can be a ten. 

It's a very good solution if you are using an Oracle-like environment. It's a very good, very powerful solution, but at the same time, it's a legacy solution. That's why we moved from NetWorker to Commvault.

They need to improve their level of support.

The software also isn't user-friendly like Commvault or Rubrik. The solution errors and management aren't so good in comparison.

The solution is very stable, especially if you are using a RAC environment.

The scalability of the solution is okay.

I was very dissatisfied with technical support. It's one of the reasons we switched to Commvault.

The setup was very difficult. 

We used an integrator for the implementation.

We use the on-premises version of the service. We were also using a legacy solution from EMC.

In terms of recommending the solution, it would be my third choice, behind Rubrik and Commvault. There are newer versions, which are hyper-converged, but I would have to seriously evaluate them before I could recommend them.

I would rate this solution five or six out of ten.

We use this solution for disk storage, and to administer Save and Restore functionality in our client's data center.                                                             

When it was required that data had to be restored for our customer, it was accomplished successfully and this has kept our end users satisfied.                                                    

Stability of NetWorker is very good.

We would like support for tape space reclaim, using either the same or another pool.

NetWorker uses only a stage directed to a clone pool, which is not enough to recover space on the tape.

Our primary use case is for our critical servers. We have servers across Unix and Linux environments. We back up our critical servers daily, some are scheduled and some are done manually. 

It has deduplication capabilities, where you have two similar data sets. This helps to speed up backup processes because it takes a shorter amount of time to do a backup because it has the deduplication feature already. Though, you have to buy this deduplication software separately from the license.

The security features need backup and encryption. It would be nice if they added this feature. I would also like to be able to decrypt when restoring the security features. Hackers can sense these vulnerabilities today, and we need to have our enterprise prepared. 

Overall, it isn't intuitive enough. It is a bit complex and not evolving with the technology. 

The stability is 80 percent out of 100. It hardly goes down. When there are issues, we can check the logs and see how to resolve it. We have never had the whole system fail. 

It is pretty scalable. This is not an issue. 

The response time of the tech support is swift. The support is fantastic.

The initial setup was straightforward. The configuration was not difficult. We used user guides which helped us with best practices. 

When choosing a solution, I always consider:

• Support
• Availability of parts
• The technology of the solution.