We performed a comparison between Bacula Enterprise and Dell Avamar based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Backup and Recovery solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable features are the special plugins such as SAP HANA databases, Microsoft SQL, and various types of virtualization."
"It is easy to scale Bacula Enterprise even if your system is growing tremendously in data and servers."
"It works great and it provides you with several standard tools to restore your backup, even after a big failure."
"The solution has extensive documentation and a very active community."
"It can be used in virtually any environment we have onsite."
"Bacula is pretty stable."
"It brought many advantages - such as the learning curve being very light."
"What I found valuable in Dell Avamar is the deduplication feature. I also like that the solution can be integrated with Data Domain."
"The deduplication feature is the best aspect of the solution."
"Dell Avamar has helped our organization by allowing us to do backups."
"The setup is very easy."
"The stability of Dell EMC Avamar is very good."
"Duplication and the speed of backup are great."
"So far, Avamar covers everything we want. We are replicating to other sites for disaster recovery, so it's working well for us."
"Centralization is Avamar's biggest advantage. It moves data to a central location from various geographical locations."
"We are looking for a unique interface that can rule both enterprise and open source editions. Such a thing does not yet exist."
"We would like to see an improvement in the functionality of the GUI."
"It could improve its interface or offer a specific screen for the manager of the company."
"A more user-friendly interface (GUI) can be developed."
"Easier setup and configuration, perhaps including a GUI, would be an improvement."
"The initial setup could be a bit easier."
"Bacula needs a graphical user interface because, for administrators, the command-line interface is okay, but for the average user it is not very easy."
"The recovery is a bit slow."
"Some integrations are not in place, such as the email alerts, which are not compatible with Office 365 SMTP gateway."
"It lacks support for certain plugins, like SAP HANA, for example."
"Dell Avamar could improve by adding more backup features."
"It's not the best solution for big databases."
"Desktop-laptop backups and backup over the WAN needs lot of improvisation. For DTLT there must be a provision to push agents from the management console."
"Some customers need to back up to tape, but Avamar lacks support, so it costs a lot."
"It would be better if we could integrate easily with other platforms."
Bacula Enterprise is ranked 31st in Backup and Recovery with 9 reviews while Dell Avamar is ranked 11th in Backup and Recovery with 81 reviews. Bacula Enterprise is rated 8.6, while Dell Avamar is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Bacula Enterprise writes "Very cost-effective and well organized with good compression". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Dell Avamar writes "Stable, integrates well with other solutions, and has a good price, but its UI needs a refresh". Bacula Enterprise is most compared with Bareos, Veeam Backup & Replication, UrBackup, Veritas NetBackup and Dell PowerProtect DD (Data Domain), whereas Dell Avamar is most compared with Dell PowerProtect Data Manager, Veeam Backup & Replication, Dell NetWorker, Dell PowerProtect DP (IDPA) and Dell PowerProtect DD (Data Domain). See our Bacula Enterprise vs. Dell Avamar report.
See our list of best Backup and Recovery vendors.
We monitor all Backup and Recovery reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.