Veritas Backup Exec Reviews

We have been deploying this solution for our customers. They use it for the backup of their physical and virtual servers.

We are using its latest version. We recently renewed it for a customer.

It is a simple and flexible solution to work with.

The deduplication feature can be improved.

I have been using this solution for almost five years.

It is a stable product.

It is scalable.

Their support is good.

It is a bit complex, but it is a good solution to work with.

The deployment duration depends on the size of the project. For a big project, it takes around 7 to 10 working days to deploy it and do all the configurations.

We deploy it for our customers. The number of people required for the deployment depends on the project. It could be a one-person team, or it could be a five-person team. It is based on the complexity and the size of the project.

In terms of maintenance, two people can easily manage a setup of about 50 servers.

Its ROI is good.

Its price is a bit high. There is only the standard fee. There is no additional fee. 

You should have the right skill set because these are complex projects. If you have the right skill set and the right partner with you, it is easy to implement. You should check that the partner or the team you are engaging for this project is technically certified and experienced to handle such a project.

I would rate it an eight out of 10.

We use Veritas Backup Exec mainly to backup virtual machines (about 120), and also Exchange mailboxes (about 1500).

I have found the overall features of the solution very good.

There is the option to backup to the cloud (we don't use it for now).

I have experienced some errors. From time to time the backup of one VM fails.

I have been using Veritas Backup Exec for approximately 15 years.

Overall the stability of the solution is good.

The scalability of the solution is very good.

I am the only one really using the solution in my organization. But I have 2 other colleagues able to do most of the tasks required when I'm away. 

The technical support is good.  It does not take too long to receive an answer. 

Positive

I have previously used another solution, Arcserve.

The installation is very easy.

In house.

The price of Veritas Backup Exec is fair and we pay annually for the license. Compared to other solutions, such as Veeam, it is less expensive.

For a time we were, long ago, we were using both Acserve and Backup Exec (it was physical
servers at the time, some servers were backed up with Arcserve and others
with Backup Exec). We decided to simplify this and kept the best of the two.

I recently was asked to evaluated Veeam. My conclusion was that for our needs Veeam did not bring anything that backup exec was perfectly able to do, and Veeam was significantly more expensive.

Veritas Backup Exec is a good solution. It can take a little time to get used to the GUI, but once you've understood how it works, it's really great to use. You can quickly do what you want to do, or get the information you want. 

I rate Veritas Backup Exec an eight out of ten.

We primarily use Veritas Backup Exec for backup.

Compression is the most valuable feature.

Technical support could be better. In most cases, we must learn and resolve issues on our own. There is no training provided, and their technicians are unaware of the features that are available.

We have been using Veritas Backup Exec for one year.

So far, it has been stable. However, in order to prevent problems, you should use their most recent platform.

In terms of Scalability, we haven't done much with it. I'm not sure how scalable Veritas is because we only have three or four sellers on one site. 

We have multiple sites, and each one is managed by a different Backup Exec.

Technical support needs improvement.

It is difficult to find a technician, or even a knowledgeable person because most of their technicians are not well-versed in their product.

Veritas was already in place.

We installed Veeam for a new client a few months ago.

The installation of Veeam was hectic. It was difficult at first, and the process took longer than we had anticipated.

It required a lot of other applications. It has several dependencies, even at the client.

The initial setup is intermediate. You should at least be familiar with it before you install it. It's not easy.

We completed the installation with the assistance of a consultant.

The price is reasonable for the features it offers.

We are resellers. We offer products for our clients as well as installation.

I would rate Veritas Backup Exec a seven out of ten.

Veritas is used for standalone servers. such as physical servers We also use it for backups.

Veritas is good for small environments.

It's a good product.

In one console, you will see a variety of things. In my opinion, it should be simple and straightforward. It is currently a little complicated. 

It is not straightforward to click the drives. 

Even assigning the tapes to the media pole is difficult when compared to Veeam.

Some of the steps, are to assign, create a set, then a media set, for example.

In the future, their console should not be complicated. For example, When you compare with Veeam it has multiple columns on one side itself where you can browse all of the features. With Veritas, it is not like that at all, it goes to the next window, then the next window, and continues that way to view the features.

Veritas Backup Exec is a stable product.

The scalability of Veritas Backup Exec is good.

Technical support is adequate, but it could be improved.

We are also using Veeam and Symantec.

Veeam is completely different when it comes to virtualization, such as virtual machines.

We use Veeam for the majority of our backups.

If I had to rate Veeam, I would give it a ten out of ten.

It is not an expensive product.

I would rate Veritas Backup Exec a six out of ten.

I use the solution daily for daily backups and weekly for full backups and monthly for the stuff that gets sent off-site.

As far as if we need to restore a file, the solution absolutely has improved the way our organization functions. It saves us a lot of time. We're backing up all of our servers with it.

The backup potential of the solution is very good. It's protected us in the past very well and allowed us to get up and running after an attack with minimal loss.

The product needs to be consistent. Within the process itself, a lot of times it will hang on the jobs and you have to then restart all the services to get it to release. The job rate sometimes just randomly will tank. Therefore, you have to stop jobs and restart them in order to get them back at a quicker pace. Those are probably the two worst features. 

Something within the software itself isn't quite right. There may be a bug or glitch. It will work fine for weeks and then all of a sudden it just tanks.

I've been using the solution for about 12 years, however, it's my understanding that the company itself has likely used it longer.

We've found some sort of bug or glitch in the solution that makes it a bit unpredictable. It will work fine for weeks and then all of a sudden it just stops and takes a dive.

That said, it's pretty stable. I would probably say, it is at least 90% stable. It's that 10% where the job rates have a little bit of a problem. I was hoping that this newest version would be better, however, it has the same issues as older versions.

The solution's scalability is actually getting better. I have not tried to go into the virtual world with it, however, it says that the product can do it. I've not tried it due to the fact that we're using the other products for it, and have Veeam for a virtual solution.

There are three of us that would potentially could go into the product to use it. That includes a network administrator and myself.

At this point, we don't have plans to increase usage.

I have never used technical support personally just yet. The previous administrator had to for a couple of different issues and they mentioned that support was good. 

I'm not sure if a different solution was ever used. I've been at this company for 12 years and we have only used it. They used it even before I arrived. I'm not sure if anything came before it.

The initial implementation was actually fairly easy. It was pretty straightforward. I actually just rebuilt it and put it onto a newer server. It is actually very easy.

I had deployed within a day due to the fact that I was familiar with it. If somebody wasn't familiar with it, might take them up to a couple of days to do it. I was very familiar with it and therefore could do it pretty fast. It took me just a few hours or probably a day's worth of work to get everything in there, the way I wanted it.

We do not require any additional staff for deployment and maintenance.

We handled the implementation in-house. We didn't require a consultant or reseller to assist us.

Any time any of these products can back up your systems so that you can quickly restore them or restore files is most definitely beneficial to your company.

The solution is not the cheapest option. It's pretty pricey.

Although I know that we pay for it yearly, in March, I'm not sure of the exact costs.

The pricing goes by different types of databases that you're backing up. It's more expensive, for example, if you have an SQL database depending on what you're backing up.

I don't recall paying anything beyond a standard licensing fee for the product.

We're currently considering looking for a new solution. We want to see what is out there. This product is also quite expensive.

Having a reliable backup is essential to your company. For example, we were using this product to back up one of our servers that got the CryptoLocker virus. We were able to go back and restore it to just a few hours previous to the attack and we were able to get everybody right back up and running within a day, in less than a day's time. It absolutely could have just spread right through the whole environment had we not caught it. This solution gave us the ability to be able to get back up with minimal data loss.

Overall, I would rate the solution at an eight out of ten. If they were able to take out some of the bugs we have found I'd rate it higher.

Our primary use is that we are using it for backup mostly with Hyper-V service.  

It allowed us to step up to a better backup routine from the previous product we were using.  

The most valuable features for me are the ease of restoring the data and the backup window.  

I think that the one place the product could improve the most is in user-friendliness. If you compare it with Veritas' NetBackup, for example, that difference is pretty clear. They could take a lesson from their own products.  

Capability-wise the Backup Exec product is very good, but the lack of user-friendliness means people struggle to find and use some of the interesting features that would otherwise benefit from. They will miss utilizing those capabilities.  

Reporting capabilities are not up to the standard of other products. If you compare the reports which we get from NetBackup, those contain a lot of information that we need and do not get with Backup Exec. By comparison, the Backup Exec reports are pretty simple.  

Better reporting capability and a more user-friendly design would greatly improve usability.  

We have been using Veritas for backup for close to five years now.  

We have not seen any glitches in the product's function. It has always been stable and reliable.  

It is easy to scale the solution. There is a limitation to the size or complexity of the environment that it will be optimal for, but it is scalable.  

The technical support is pretty good. We have reached out for Backup Exec and we have gotten the support that we needed.  

We were using Data Protection Manager prior to Backup Exec. We switched to Veritas because we saw by comparison that it was a better product for our situation with more capabilities.  

The setup was simple. I do not really remember exactly how much time it took to set up because it has been quite some time now, but I know that we did not have issues getting it up and running.  

The setup was done by a small team from within our company without the help of a vendor or integrator. The team was mostly made up of engineers within the company. The product has remained in place for about five years.  

It requires maintenance from our side. Usually, it is mostly the admins managing it, so that is about four people in our case.  

The cost of Veritas is really mid-range for this class of product, I would say. Everything is included in one license and there are no additional, hidden costs.  

My advice to anyone considering this product would be to know how many servers have to be covered and the complexity of the environment as well as the capabilities of Backup Exec. Veritas cannot handle a complex environment very well. It is really only designed for a simple environment.  

On a scale from one to ten where one is the worst and ten is the best, I can rate Veritas Backup Exec as somewhere around eight. It has some very good capabilities but limitations with system complexity, user-friendliness, and depth of reporting.  

We use the product for data backup purposes.

The product's most valuable feature is scalability.

Veritas Backup Exec's support services could be faster.

We have been using Veritas Backup Exec for eight to nine months.

It is a stable platform.

The product is scalable.

The initial setup is complicated and takes 45 minutes to complete. However, the prerequisites, including environment monitoring, make operating easy.

The product's price is reasonable. However, it could be reduced. We purchase its yearly license.

I rate Veritas Backup Exec a six out of ten.

I am using Veritas Backup Exec for backups of Oracle, VMs, and Nutanix.

The most valuable features of Veritas Backup Exec are the graphical interface, ease of management, and overall ease of use.

Veritas Backup Exec should improve by having a user portal that customers can use.

I have been using Veritas Backup Exec for approximately two months.

Veritas Backup Exec is stable.

We have approximately sixty people using the solution.

The solution is scalable.

The solution could improve the support they provide.

I have used other backup solutions prior to Veritas Backup Exec. Veritas Backup Exec has an easier graphical interface to use.

The initial setup of Veritas Backup Exec is simple.

Our customers used their own integrators for the implementation.

The solution is difficult to maintain. We have difficulty when searching. 

I recommend this solution to others.

I rate Veritas Backup Exec a nine out of ten.

We use this solution to backup MS SQL databases, backup NAS servers, backup virtual machines, and directly backup clients ( on windows servers).

All data sources are covered by a backup process which is very stable and fast.

A big advantage is that it can backup direct to tape.

It has good stability. Its interface is very good, responsive, and easily restores data. I use it for backup, encryption, and restore operations, and it works.

The possibility to back up and restore directly to/from tape is valuable.

I am using many agents from VM to LMDP. I also use an agent for SQL Server, which has advanced options because it is the Enterprise version.

It is currently missing the dynamic backup feature for virtual machines, which is available in NetWorker. I can create politics in NetWorker to add virtual machines with specific tags, but I cannot do this in Backup Exec, which is a minus for me. Currently, a user has to send a request to the Backup Administrator to add a machine to the backup, but I should be able to create rules to automatically add a new machine to the backup. This kind of functionality is very important in current times, especially when we are using cloud solutions.

I should be able to create more than one stream in a policy and specify how many streams I want to run in parallel in one policy. Currently, I have to manually create more policies to back up more than one virtual machine at the same time.

Their support can also be improved in terms of response time.

I have been using this solution for forty years.

It is a stable product. There are no issues with its stability, but I am facing an issue with QNAP storage. 

I use two types of storage for backup: Data Domain and QNAP. With QNAP, the backup server connects through iSCSI, and sometimes, I had problems with the stability of storage on QNAP through the iSCSI interface. I didn't have any such issue with Data Domain. I am trying to find a solution to this. I have tested the storage from Quantum, which is a good solution. Very soon, I will change from QNAP to duplication storage from Quantum.

They are helpful, but they are not very fast. They respond, but it takes them 24 hours to send the first response, which is not good. I am using their standard support. They might have another better support.

Positive

Its initial setup was complex because I had an old version of Backup Exec, and I could not upgrade directly to version 20. I had to do a new installation and migrate the data. It was nice but complex.

We used an in-house team to implement the solution.

We save six hours.

It has a good price-value ratio. Its price-value ratio is better than Veeam.

It has good replication, and it is better than other products. It is good for backing up not only VMs but also clients. It is also good for SQL Server and NDMP data servers.

I would rate Veritas Backup Exec an eight out of ten.

We have two use case types. We do onsite and offsite. Onsite, we need some conversion and backups. Offsite, for example, similar to Symantec, it is based on the volume, and we sell this solution to clients. 

We've used the solution for ten years, and everything has worked very well.

There are many settings, and after working on it for so long, we have a good understanding of the configurations that make sense. 

It's easy for us. It's like a legacy of predictability. We've used it for a long time.

The initial setup is easy.

It's stable.

The scalability is good. 

We need to have duplication and better compression. We don't really get that with Veritas. There's customer demand for it. 

We'd like to see some better synchronization between the office and other sites. There's room for improvement in off-site syncs. 

I've used the solution for ten to 11 years. 

The solution is stable. I haven't noted any issues. It doesn't have bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable. 

It is a scalable product.

Maybe in the early years, we used to seek support, however, now, since we are quite versatile with it, we deal with any issues ourselves. We normally don't seek any support now. When we used them, maybe ten years ago, they were quite helpful.

We find the solution to be straightforward to set up. It's not overly complex or difficult. I'd rate it a ten out of ten in terms of ease of implementation. 

We always keep three people (engineers) on the solution. During the implementation, we have three people there, and they can handle maintenance once it is up. If, for a backup, somebody's not available for a particular reason, we'll be covered as we don't rely on one person.

We are resellers.

We use the latest versions to ensure we get support as older versions often lose support.

I'd advise potential new users to read the manual well and don't just go next, next, finish, et cetera. Read everything well to understand the options they are providing. I've seen many people fail to understand what options are offered or what the customer needs. If you don't do the right configuration, it becomes faulty. It slows down the process if it's not configured right. 

I'd rate the solution ten out of ten.