OpenText Data Protector Reviews

Neutral

The key concepts with OpenText Data Protector include centralized storage management and integration with cloud environments. It supports big data backups and automation, and allows for asynchronous backups. Additionally, Data Protector offers a web console for remote access, so you don't need to rely on a specific operating system. The software can be installed on a Windows machine or operated via command line on Linux systems.

In one of the projects involving a database and UCMDB integration, we needed to manage a large database. We used the scheduling feature in Data Protector to automate backups. This involved setting up backup sequences, which could include full backups, incremental backups, or a combination of both, depending on the requirements.

One of the benefits of scheduling backups with Data Protector is that it reduces the need for manual intervention. Once you set up your backup schedule, you can configure notifications to alert you if a backup is successful, fails, or encounters errors. This setup can also involve batch files to manage the sequence of backups. Once scheduled, the system handles backups automatically, allowing you to perform ongoing tests and manage various backup types without constant oversight.

Recently, clients have raised concerns about the lack of comprehensive documentation for Data Protector. This has been an issue, especially when troubleshooting or integrating with other vendor-specific products, as they need detailed guidance for these integrations. Another concern is related to VM backups and snapshot backups. Some clients question the need for complete snapshots when they could use time-based backups or partial restores. In my experience working with clients in both India and abroad, I've encountered various scenarios where clients have different preferences for backup strategies.

I’ve worked on various projects for AMG Australia and in India, including a challenging migration of an IDP from version 6 to 10. The process required incremental upgrades through intermediate versions (6 to 8, then 8 to 10, and finally 10 to 11), which was quite lengthy. We’ve encountered similar issues with customers using versions as old as 5.5 or 6. We’re looking for solutions that might allow for a direct migration from earlier versions, such as 7, to the latest versions without going through all the intermediate steps.

I have been working with Data Protector for 13-14 years. We are using V11.3 of the solution.

We worked on snapshot backups where some clients needed zero downtime. In those cases, we recommended using different storage solutions, such as snapshot environments. For certain clients, this approach was suggested and successfully implemented.

I rate the solution’s stability a nine out of ten.

Data Protector is very user friendly. It is easy to scale.

We used to handle one backup server for one to five thousand clients. Now, with numerous VMs, if we try to maintain that ratio, we attempt parallel and concurrent backups. In this case, we encounter performance issues. Managing performance is crucial because we need the right documentation to ensure compatible servers can handle the number of clients. With five thousand clients, each with potentially multiple backups, whether full or incremental, the backups can fail due to CPU usage or time consumption if not managed properly.

I rate the solution’s scalability a nine out of ten.

Technical support for the APAC region was very poor. They often asked us to provide logs and other information, but the response times were very slow and frustrating. Many clients left because of this issue. When working with a client, we sought tech support, but unfortunately, the support was inadequate.

It is agent-based. I find it very simple compared to standalone servers and other systems. However, when considering APIs and integrations, particularly for big data solutions like Hadoop and Vertica, we need to ensure we have the right resources for successful integration. Although we are able to perform these integrations, we face challenges due to the lack of suitable documentation.

I rate the initial setup a nine out of ten, where one is difficult, and ten is easy.

Pricing is high compared to other solutions. If they offer suitable features and a compatible price, we can attract clients. If the tech support becomes good, the price becomes less of a concern. We need to regain client confidence, as many have moved away from Data Protector due to poor tech support.

Data Protector is available in three levels: entry level, mid-range, and enterprise level. For the enterprise level, we previously worked with the available infrastructure, but now we are moving towards cloud storage. With cloud storage, we may achieve better performance and can handle concurrent backups effectively, managing multiple backups on the cloud without performance issues or downtime.

They have certain built-in templates. Whenever a different type of backup is needed, they either replace the template or use a specific template and restart it. I was trying to convince the client that, similar to these templates, we are also developing templates that we can set up. For example, IBM is a competitor to Data Protector.

Everyone knows about Data Protector, but the major issue is the significant gap between support and the application. We need to emphasize that we offer good tech support and improve documentation. If we address these issues, we can convince customers to continue using DP, especially since many clients have shifted to cloud environments. We need to adapt our processes to focus on cloud solutions and present these alternatives to customers, rather than relying solely on existing infrastructure.

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

I use OpenText Data Protector as a backup tool.

The most valuable feature of the solution is that it provides users with a simple backup option. The advanced stuff, like the ones offered by Oracle and Microsoft, is just not as refined as OpenText VIM. OpenText Data Protector is quite good for simple file backups and has good compression features.

OpenText Data Protector is more difficult to use and configure than OpenText VIM. The user-friendliness of OpenText Data Protector has to be increased, and the complexity of the tool needs to be reduced. The product is just not easy to use. Teaching OpenText VIM to someone without experience is much easier, but it may take a week to do the same thing with OpenText Data Protector.

I have been using OpenText Data Protector for four years. I use OpenText Data Protector 10.91. I work as a team leader of the storage server team in my company.

I haven't experienced any crashes while using the solution. The tool is stable, but it's a pain to configure. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.

Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a five out of ten.

OpenText Data Protector is complex to configure correctly, but the areas concerning the data and compression are good. Once you get the product to work, it works, but it's much too complex to configure and troubleshoot, as it takes a lot of time and energy, making it not so efficient. Once the tool is configured in your environment, it provides good backup and compression features.

In my company, we use OpenText Data Protector as a backup for our servers, and we have a team of 20 people to take care of the data backup using the tool. My company doesn't use OpenText Data Protector as a backup for our client's computers.

In my company, we have scheduled the process related to backup, which makes the tool run daily around 30 to 40 times.

There is only a little bit of the tool's documentation available. The tool does have a service desk, but the support desk is not too fast to respond. I rate the technical support a five out of ten.

Neutral

I use OpenText Data Protector along with OpenText VIM. OpenText VIM has evolved a lot, while OpenText Data Protector hasn't changed much. OpenText VIM has now added features that were missing in the tool earlier. My company does the consolidation part on OpenText VIM while trying to get rid of OpenText Data Protector.

I rate the product's initial setup phase a three on a scale of one to ten, where one is difficult, and ten is easy. The product's initial setup phase is complicated.

The documentation quality provided by OpenText Data Protector is not as good as OpenText VIM.

The solution is deployed on an on-premises model.

The solution can be deployed in two weeks, though it was already in place and a part of our company's environment.

My company requires two people to manage the product's deployment phase.

My company runs a managed service desk, and we have been managing the tool on behalf of one of our clients for the past three years. My team manages the product's setup phase.

In my company, we don't have dedicated people to maintain the tool, but we have an expert within a team who is the most experienced person with the tool. In general, in my company, we don't have a full-time role to just look after OpenText Data Protector.

I wouldn't recommend the solution to new users. Instead, I would suggest that new users go for OpenText VIM. If you already use OpenText Data Protector in your environment, then you may consider continuing with it. For new users, it is pointless to choose OpenText Data Protector.

I rate the overall product a six out of ten.

Primarily, we've been using it for backups. We've focused on backing up volume groups and files on both Linux and Windows machines. While I'm not certain if it supports VM backups, that's where our main focus has been.

There was an incident that occurred at some point, and our final option was to perform a restoration using a recent backup. In this case, we utilized Micro Focus to restore certain database files, and it proved to be quite beneficial.

It's user-friendly and not overly complicated to configure. It also seamlessly integrates with the other products in your library.

It might be unfair, but when I compare it to Veeam, I find that Veeam is more advanced. I've used Veeam more extensively than Data Protector. Data Protector, in my opinion, has a rather dull interface, especially when compared to Veritas and Veeam. I'm uncertain if it supports virtual machine backup and restoration. If they could enhance this aspect, they could gain more support from end users.

I have been working with Data Protector for two to three years. 

It is quite stable and I would rate it a nine out of 10.

It is scalable up to five users, but beyond that I have no idea. 

The decision to switch was made by the management team, and I don't have all the details on what criteria they considered. However, I believe they wanted a solution that could support Linux workloads in addition to our primary usage of Veritas for Windows backups. The switch was motivated by the need to cater to both Linux and Windows workloads.

It is easy to setup and I would rate it a seven out of 10.

I would overall rate it a seven out of 10.

From my experience, I can say it's not a highly complex solution. It's relatively user-friendly. However, as I mentioned before, its graphical interface is not very visually appealing, and I think others might find it uninteresting as well. But in terms of functionality, it performs the necessary tasks adequately.

Due to some management issues, we're moving to Data Domain.

The solution is easy to use. The management of the product is also easy.

We faced some certification issues after we upgraded to version 10.2.

I have been using the solution for around 16 years.

The tool is stable. I rate the stability an eight out of ten.

I rate the tool’s scalability a seven out of ten. Our clients are medium-sized businesses.

The initial setup is easy. I rate the ease of setup a nine out of ten. The deployment takes around half an hour.

The licensing cost is too high. It costs us a lot when we migrate with the appliance.

We have migrated the solution with an appliance. We are in a transition phase to use Data Domain. I recommend the solution for its ease of use. Overall, I rate the product a nine out of ten.

We use the solution mainly for backup and recovery of all our infrastructures. Also, we are using Veeam for this purpose.

Regarding features, the solution is highly stable when it comes to taking backups of our enterprise infrastructure, such as Linux, Oracle, and SAP.

If I compare products from HP to Micro Focus, I do not see a lot of development in Micro Focus like before. The product can be developed by including functionalities like DR, CDP, and SureBackup, which are currently unavailable in the solution. However, one also needs to consider that Micro Focus is used by enterprise-sized businesses that don't care about many features. The solution's data protection features and scalability could be improved.

I have been using Micro Focus Data Protector since March 2020. We are using Micro Focus Data Protector 10.03 and 11.03. My company is a consultant who provides the solution to its customers

It is a stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

Micro Focus is not as scalable as Veeam. Also, I have many customers working on Micro Focus Data Protector.

I remember that many of the cases of our customers that were highlighted to the customer support team remained unresolved for a week. Actually, Micro Focus needs to invest more resources because the product is sold from company to company.

The initial setup process for the solution is easy. 

The time taken for the deployment depends upon the infrastructure. If you have a lot of servers and storage, a lot of effort is needed to take care of the integration part of the solution. Veeam's deployment process is easier since it has a better user-friendly GUI. But, again, it depends on what the customer exactly needs.

Our company only needs staff members while carrying out any upgradation or migration processes.

The license for the solution is very expensive compared to the other products in the market. There are two types of licenses. Now, they are forcing all the companies to go for their capacity license, which is very costly. If a company is growing, it will require more of the solution, and the company will have to pay more.

I would recommend Veeam over Micro Focus Data Protector. Overall, I rate the solution somewhere between six to seven out of ten.

We use the OpenText Data Protectoras an enterprise backup solution. It performs backups for various company setups, including servers and storage systems.

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.

Automated backups run on their own schedules, which happens automatically as planned.

The challenge is that we can't restore a single file from the VM in the data process when we do VM backups. But with Commvault, you can restore a single file even if you have a VM snapshot package. That's one drawback of this tool. When we do VM backups, it should help us browse the VMs to restore a single file instead of doing the complete VM restore.

I've been working with the product for a couple of years. Throughout this period, I haven't been focused on just one tool; I've worked with multiple solutions.

The solution is stable. 

The product is a scalable enterprise solution. 

The tool's support is good but not the best. 

Neutral

The tool's deployment is simple. To implement the OpenText Data Protector solution, we first assess the size of the data and the number of servers that need backup. Based on this, we estimate the requirements for setting up the tool framework, including the media servers.

We allocate the necessary space and RAM for these servers. Once this is done, we proceed with the basic installation of the server, add the licenses, and configure the backup services.The initial setup may take around two hours, but the full deployment duration depends on the number of servers that need to be integrated and set up for backup.

The process doesn't require many people or resources. One person can easily handle the setup. If it's a large enterprise, a few extra hands might be needed, but the initial setup can be managed by one person.

The cost-effectiveness of the data protector solution depends on what the customer needs. If it matches their requirements, it's cost-effective. However, if they need more features, they might have to buy extra solutions, affecting cost-effectiveness.

The product is cheaper than Commvault. 

The tool  is easy to manage and offers centralized management, a major advantage. You can use one console to manage multiple locations. We don't currently use AI in our strategies, but we may explore it in the future. Integrating AI with OpenText Data Protector could help ensure that our backups are clean and free from cybersecurity threats or corruption. This would enable us to perform clean restores whenever necessary.

I rate the overall product an eight out of ten. 

Typically, our clients utilize OpenText Data Protector for Oracle firewall backup NDMPs and, more recently, for HANA. I have undergone training where OpenText explicitly stated their support for SAP HANA. Thus, we have a client base for whom we provide data protection using the Data Protector tool.

Every feature is important in data protection. Every feature plays a vital role. There's nothing particularly about it. 

It is easy to understand and implement. It is also easy to upgrade. These are the main challenges that we face, but OpenText Data Protector makes it quite simple.

In SAP restoration, we faced issues with changing the SIDs and changing the path for every backup object. It is quite a lengthy process to do that. We have to change that individually on every object. We have also provided an enhancement request to the OpenText team.

The backup process for SAP Oracle could be improved. When restoring, the need to alter SIDs arises, particularly in scenarios involving server changes or out-of-place restores. This leads to a requirement for modifying remote checkpoint settings and initiating the restoration process. The situation becomes more complex and time-intensive when dealing with a large number of files.

So, improvements are needed for the backup of SAP Oracle, especially for situations involving CPR codes

Another area of improvement is support. There's room for improvement in terms of the support we receive from the OEM or the technical support team.

The reason for seeking improved support is mainly due to extended response times. Mostly, I've encountered situations where an engineer has to wait until the end of their shift before passing the issue to the next level of support. This process takes too much time to resolve any issue. Unfortunately, we frequently do not receive dedicated support from the Micro Focus team.

Another area of improvement is stability of the application on Windows.

I have worked with this solution for more than two years. We currently use the latest version.

The stability is poor, especially the application which we run on Windows. It is not that stable, so we do some issues with the application. 

I would rate the stability a four out of ten. 

Our clients are normally enterprise-level businesses. So, we have approximately 30 clients using this solution.

There have been instances where Micro Focus helped us resolve cases, but most of the times, we handle the issues ourselves due to the prolonged response time from their team, sometimes taking several days.

Neutral

I would rate my experience with the initial setup a nine out of ten, where one being difficult and ten being easy. 

It is very easy. 

The deployment process typically takes around one or two hours.

To deploy the solution, you initiate the process by right-clicking in the admin interface. The deployment can be done manually or set up for automatic deployment. Information confirmation is a key step, and the solution is then automatically deployed. 

The pricing falls somewhere around seven out of ten, where one being cheap and ten being expensive. It's neither too expensive nor very cheap.

Usually, I work with the standard license rather than a capacity-based one.

I recommend it because it's simple to use, easy to understand, simple to operate, and simple to implement. The backup stability is commendable, even when dealing with NDMP and SAP Oracle backups. Based on my experience, I would suggest Micro Focus Data Protector to our enterprise clients.

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

We use Micro Focus Data Protector for taking backups throughout our entire data center, which includes backups for our SAP HANA, Oracle, and SQL databases, as well as for the Windows virtual instances which also require file-level, user data, and database backups.

Data Protector's granular recovery features make it easy for us to create and restore backups in an understandable and user-friendly manner. With granular recovery, any database or even just a database table can be restored at will.

The new dashboard that has been introduced is also very good because it allows us to easily visualize how many backups have been performed, showing the total number of TB used as well as useful information on our backup schedules.

Also, in terms of basic backup features, it has everything that most other backup solutions provide and the pricing is very competitive for what it offers.

Micro Focus are improving Data Protector with every new version and since we began undergoing training with the latest version we have not faced any real challenges yet. However, their support does need to be improved, in my opinion. In certain critical cases that we've had, they did not provide a satisfactory level of support.

I have been using Micro Focus Data Protector for the past ten years.

It is both stable and easy to maintain.

In terms of scalability, we're already using it throughout our entire data center. There are no limitations when it comes either host or data backups; you simply need to buy the appropriate licenses and scale up as required.

For any issues that we encounter, we escalate to Micro Focus' tech support. Unfortunately, their support does need some improvement because, in critical cases we've had in the past, I don't believe that they have provided adequate support.

Neutral

For me, setting up Micro Focus is straightforward when it comes to the Windows platform, but somewhat more complicated on Linux because I am not very accustomed to Linux. 

It will generally take one month for the planning phase, then another month for testing, after which we can implement it and move it into production.

Everything in terms of implementation is done in-house.

We are indeed getting return on investment from this solution.

Data Protector's pricing is very competitive and we have no issues in this regard. I would give it an eight out of ten in terms of pricing.

There are two main types of license, one being a perpetual license with a one-time charge and the other is a subscription license where you pay every year. With either type, scaling up is not a problem; you can just buy the appropriate license that is in compliance with your needs, and there is no limitation here.

We are currently evaluating similar backup solutions in the market such as those from Veeam and Veritas (NetBackup). 

At the end of the day, Data Protector is a user-friendly backup solution that is easy to integrate with any OS or database. Its main strengths include granular backup functionality and a well-implemented dashboard that tells you all the essential info such as how many backups you've run, how many have succeeded or failed, and how much space the backups are taking up.

I would rate Micro Focus Data Protector a nine out of ten.

I provide Data Protector as a solution to my customers, but I have fewer clients using the product these days. 

Data Protector's GUI is the most useful feature.

The GUI could be updated. The GUI hasn't changed since version 6. It's on version 10 now. The reporting could also be better. Also, while Data Protector is excellent for backing up physical hardware, it needs more features for backing up VM images because many environments use hypervisor. 

It's not as good as some of its competitors. One image backup job should be able to restore the file or database level, but Data Protector has to create three separate jobs.

I have been using Micro Focus Data Protector for more than five years.

Data Protector is stable.

Data Protector can scale up, but I have never used that feature.

I rate Micro Focus support six out of 10. In the past, I contacted Micro Focus support frequently, but most of my customers stopped using Data Protector. I had a good experience with their team five years ago, but their technical support has gone downhill since then.

Neutral

Setting up Data Protector is straightforward. I rate it 10 out of 10 for ease of setup. 

I rate Data Protector six out of 10 for affordability. I don't know the exact cost, but the Micro Focus license is expensive compared to other products like VM. You can back up VMs for free.

I rate Micro Focus Data Protector six out of 10 overall. I would recommend something besides Data Protector. It isn't competitive with other products and doesn't support replication features. So it's less competitive with other products in the market. So I wouldn't advise.