Arcserve UDP Reviews

We use Arcserve UDP for the backup replication.

We are satisfied with Arcserve UDP. The most important feature that we use and why we choose this product is the RHA feature.

I have been using Arcserve UDP for approximately two years.

Arcserve UDP is stable.

I have found Arcserve UDP to be scalable.

Our customers are mostly midsize companies using this solution.

We have plans to increase the usage of the solution in the future.

There is a problem now with the support. Formerly, they had a head office in the country we were working in Turkey. However, they close the offices, and we have to receive support from abroad. It takes a bit of time to receive support.

We evaluated Veeam, but you chose Arcserve UDP.

Arcserve UDP is in the middle range of complexity. The interface can be developed a little bit more to be user-friendly.

The solution is priced well compared to other solutions.

I rate Arcserve UDP a nine out of ten.

We primarily use StorageCraft ShadowProtect for small and medium-sized businesses, backup servers, desktops, and public servers.

The ability to switch between different hardware platforms and utilization tools are some of this solution's most valuable features.

Physical and virtual servers are treated the same, and an image can be copied from one machine to another, whether physical to virtual, virtual to virtual, virtual to physical, or physical to physical. As a result, you can transition from HP to Dell, or from VMware to Hyper-V to physical.

A lot of their new technologies are not very good. 

The older products were fantastic. They invested in ShadowXafe, OneBox, and other companies, where they purchased hardware and attempted to reinvent product offerings that I do not use because they were difficult.

I have been working with StorageCraft ShadowProtect for ten years.

StorageCraft ShadowProtect has good stability, but ShadowXafe does not.

ShadowProtect does not scale as well as ShadowXafe.

ShadowXafe is an entire space where you can backup all of your virtual machines at once.

It's easier in large environments.

The technical support was horrible. That's why we switched. We've been drifting away from StorageCraft for a long time now, largely because of their support.

They are the worst support organization in existence.

They are assessed using metrics such as closing calls. They are difficult to connect with and even more difficult to reconnect with when you do. They are only interested in resolving cases as quickly as possible. They provide incorrect information.

There are only a few people that know certain products, and getting in touch with them is almost impossible. In general, it is extremely difficult to connect with anyone.

It was completely useless.

A few are good but most are not.

It was more a case of being difficult to reach them. They send you three emails in a row, and if you do not respond, the case is closed, which is frustrating. They don't seem to care about resolving the issue; instead, it appears that they are more concerned with closing the case in order to meet the quota.

In the previous version, the initial setup required the installation of several tools in order to get things working properly. Many of those tools have been combined in the new versions.

The new version is supposedly easier to use, but there is still a lot of fine-tuning to be done, which they may have corrected by now.

Pricing is most likely comparable. Some are more costly than others. They are somewhere in the middle, in my opinion.

ShadowXafe is the new software they have developed, that they have been focusing on it for the past couple of years. ShadowProtect is the older software.

I worked at StorageCraft for seven years. I was responsible for their technical sales. I am familiar with their products, as well as their competition. 

I was on my own for almost five years, using their product and others to do backup recovery as a service for businesses. I use StorageCraft as well as some other vendors to fill in the gaps where they're weak. Because my job at the end of the day is to do a restore for companies.

I resell items, but mostly just implement, and manage their service. In most cases, I pay a monthly fee for whatever software we use.

We still have customers and use StorageCraft. We started using ShadowXafe, but it nearly destroyed my business. For older customers with older products, I reverted to the older version, and Beam for a few others.

If I had to rate ShadowXafe, I would say a two out of ten.

I would rate StorageCraft ShadowProtect an eight out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for backup purposes.

It's more the convenience of the solution than an overall improvement to our organization. I can restore online and check that it is working alright as well.

The backup is the most valuable feature. It also makes storage very easy.

The only problem with the solution is that when I change the drive capacity, it has to do a full backup. It's a problem when I have five servers to backup. When I only want to change the size of the drive, I have to do a full backup that can take one week.

The stability is very good.

The solution offers good scalability. I don't have plans to increase the usage at this time. Only I am using it.

I've never had to call technical support, so I can't speak to the service level.

Previously, we used NetVault. It didn't have all of the solutions we needed for the VM, so we switched.

The initial setup is easy; it wasn't complex. Deployment took about three hours. You just need one person for deployment and maintenance.

I did have help with the implementation.

The licensing we have is a yearly contract. I don't think there are costs beyond the standard licensing fee.

I am using the on-premises version of the solution.

I like the solution; it's working well for us.

I would rate it eight out of ten.

We use it to back up pretty much everything that we've got in our system. We've got a 13-terabyte license. We back up HyperV servers, files, and SQL. You name it, and we pretty much back it up.

The standard backup and restore feature is most used.

Its interface can be improved. I find it unintuitive.

It could have some integrations. It doesn't have some of the integration and some of the monitoring features that I would normally utilize. Some of the solutions have got integrations with different storage and things like that.

We've had ArcServe for as long as I can remember.

It is overall rock-solid. It does what it says it is going to do, and it does it well.

We're pretty small. We've been able to scale it out for what we needed to do with it. We could do multiple sites when we needed to.

We have only one backup guy who uses this solution. I pop in once in a while if he is not available and restore something, but overall, it is a one-man show.

It covers all our bases in the entire organization, and we aren't planning on expanding any further.

I have not dealt with them, but I know that the person handling the backups has not been super happy with the technical support on that side.

I don't recall using anything else prior to it.

It was pretty straightforward. We've had it for a long time. It was set up a long time ago, and it has been migrated over the years. The person handling the backups has spent quite a few months fine-tuning it.

The person handling the backups did it pretty much on his own. He also takes care of its maintenance. 

Its price seems reasonable. Its price is average as compared to the other products I've looked at. 

We have a three-year license right now. There are no other costs beyond the standard licensing fee.

I would advise making sure that you have your strategy planned. 

I would rate it a seven out of 10. It is a good, solid product, but it doesn't do anything special. It just does what it is told.

We were using the hybrid model of this solution but now we're using the on-prem model. We switched to on-prem mainly because of the costs and that it's reachable when something happens. We use this solution to backup the virtual server. 

The data protection functionality is the most valuable feature of this solution.

It should be easier to switch between backup locations. We have multiple data storage locations and sometimes one of those storages need to be replaced. It would be nice if they made it easier to reconfigure the backup configuration. 

I would like to see an integrated solution from Arcseve to replicate it to the Azure environment of Arcserve itself, an environment set up by Arcserve ready to connect to the UDP software. It should be a plug and play to replicate the data to an Azure of Arcserve itself. 

It is pretty stable. In the past, we had some issues with a different version in which we had to eventually shut down the servers in the production environment. Now, we don't have any issues with it.

Scalability depends on the configuration. Only I use this solution in my company because I'm the only one in my company who is responsible for the backup and restore functionality. I am also the only one who maintains it. 

Their technical support is excellent. They always understand what the problem is.

The initial setup was straightforward. It took around two or three hours. 

I deployed it myself. 

We only have the maintenance of three standard UDP licenses. Each license is 50 Euro. There are some additional costs for the storage and software but it has nothing to do with the UDP.

I would rate it an eight out of ten.

Think better of the configuration before shutting off the whole backup environment because when it's running for a couple of months or years it's difficult to change the data storage location and configuration. It would be nice to have more of a whitepaper from Arcserve with respect to setting up certain environments. 

My primary use case for this solution is for backup and restoring. We use it for our VMware solutions and also our physical machines. It's good software that is helping us with our restoring.

The most valuable features of this solution are that I can by just one click, copy and paste anything that I would want. I do not have to restore the whole virtual machine. I can just right-click, open it in Arcserve view, and copy anything I want to add to the production. This is very easy and simple. And, the restore function is very fast. This is a huge benefit. The backup is also very short.

Every time I change the disc, I have to do a full backup. But, we were serviced for this, and it appears to not be doing this anymore.

It is very stable. It has not crashed for us. And, every time that we needed to restore something, we had it. We could restore very fast.

I like the scalability of the solution. It seems OK.

We use technical support by a local provider that is very good.

I was not involved with the initial setup of the solution, my manager was in charge of that for our organization.

I do not work with the pricing or licensing issue of the solution for our organization.

Before choosing a solution, I always consider the stability and whether it is doing the work and restoring that it is supposed to do. 

Our primary use case with Arcserve is as a backup solution.

We used Arcserve as a backup solution, but it wasn't very flexible. The UDP at Arcserve had multiple issues, and we could not go into granular details of retrieving backup information. For example, what backups existed during what time. We were not able to retrieve to satisfy our requirements. I'm not really satisfied with Arcserve. As a whole, the solution was not very promising.

The product could be improved. For example, on Veritas, you can see a particular file, when it was backed up, on what particular archive it exists, et cetera. We were unable to retrieve that specific information from Arcserve for our requirements.

There could be additional features added based on the practical concerns we had. If I have backed up a certain amount of data, I want to know, if I give the path of the data, how much of data has been backed up, and the sizing information with regards to data. That information could be included in the features.

I've been working with Arcserve UDP for about three years.

The stability of the solution is okay. We used it for some time, but it was not meeting our requirements properly.

We didn't scale the solution, so I'm unable to comment on the scalability of it.

We received support from the vendor who was technically assisting us, and it was okay, but we could not implement the requirements that we had. We weren't contacting Arcserve, but I'm sure the vendor consulted support.

The pricing is moderate.

I would rate the solution a four out of ten.

I would not recommend the solution based on our experience. It depends on the situation. If you just want VMware or backup, it's okay, but in an extensive manner, if you want to use backup technology and tools, then it does not have the flexibility. So I would recommend it if there is a general case. If not, I would say look for something else.

I am a partner for StorageCraft and work with my customers who are small businesses and use the solution to backup their servers. I am able to backup to a local disk and replicate it in my data center where I have a small network for software applications and customer backups.

This product is extremely user-friendly and it is capable of performing large-scale archive/backup (five+ years worth). It is easy to store, maintain, and check backups.

I think that the price could still be a bit cheaper and I do not like that they have been purchased by Arcserve.

This solution is stable.

This solution is scalable.

Technical support is very fast for the most part.

The initial setup was straightforward.

I was able to complete the setup myself.

As an MSP partner, I believe that the prices are fair.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.