Azure Backup Reviews

We generally use the solution for VM backups. 

With a couple of buttons, we can configure a VM for a backup and use the wall service, the storage wall service, pretty seamlessly. 

From a day-to-day operation perspective, the installation and configuration of the Azure Backup and the backup timing are great. It offers a non-intrusive backup - like a snapshot type of backup. This way, we don't see any impact when running the backup and the job runs without any problem unless the VM host itself is having some problems. 

From the stability aspect of it, the execution aspect, I don't see any issues.

I didn't see any kind of major flaws or anything. The only thing I would say that could be improved is the reporting. It can be a little more customized or something like that. Maybe they need a little bit more on the dashboard view. The reporting and governance can be a little more fine-tuned.

I've used the solution for 18 months or so.

The solution is stable. The performance is great There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable. 

We haven't really used technical support in the past. We went with them due to the fact that it's not a complicated use case for us, so we haven't really seen any issue. We haven't really dealt with Azure Backup-related troubleshooting or anything.

I work for a client who pays for the solution. My understanding is the costs vary year to year. I don't really have any visibility, however. 

If you're hosting a majority of your platform in Azure, this solution should be okay. Azure Backup is probably the easiest solution to with, rather than bringing another third party into the mix. As a consolidated solution, the Azure Backup will work well - if your native cloud platform is Azure.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

Currently, I have Many Azure VMs for clients, and We are  doing the backup, disaster recovery, and tactical replication for all of them.

We install the backup stack for our clients. We explain the situation and have our technical team complete the installation for the clients.

With set up managed retention using the backup policy. We do retention, and we do security. 

The level of security is high on it.

Most of our clients used to have Mac storage in all of their offices, such as NAS (network-attached storage) by 20, or 30 terabytes. We have informed our clients, rather than keep their storage on-premises and risking it getting damaged with no disaster recovery, it would be better to synchronize it and move it to the cloud. Some of the clients will keep it on the cloud while some others have to keep it on-premises and on the cloud at the same time for direct synchronization.

The backup is configured as replication or synchronized between both of them.

When we install for the client, they have a full solution. All of their computers are connected to a single sign-on with Office 365. They all have a domain on the Microsoft cloud. Included with this we add Azure, all of their HR software, ERP, and accounting on the cloud. The add-on backup to the environment will be with Microsoft.

One of the most valuable features is security and connectivity to the data.

The hardware is nice. We configure the hardware and can choose anywhere from two cores to 56 cores. 

We configure the machines the way we want.

We are using two different types of technology. Side to side and tier to side. Recently, we sent an email regarding this issue. Maybe they could improve the fees. The cost is a bit high.

If we had 100 users, and we are using the backup on servers, it would be helpful if the user could know the level of synchronization that he has done. It can only be done by administrative forces. As an example, if I am the administrator and I have users getting data online, I can see what is happening. However, for the user, if they are experiencing some kind of failure with their data, they do not receive any notification and do not know. It will work, but it will need a lot of customization.

We would like to see some kind of notification given to the user that a file was not synchronized properly or what may have happened. What we are doing now is through a third party system where they will notify us if a file is not synchronized properly inside of his computer.

We have been using this solution since 2016, so it's been almost four years.

We are now using the latest version.

The solution is stable.

With our clients, there is a 95% success rate, for the remaining 5%, sometimes it's a problem with the network or a problem with the files.

If we give them a server and storage they need to choose a security method if they want to protect their data. They need to add more to be available inside their servers. If a client hasn't chosen protection for his data and his data has malware or any virus, it is not under our umbrella, they must choose their security methods. For most of our clients, we provide security for them.

This solution is scalable and it's easy. It's like you are using your computer folder. We will be mapping. We would map the file to the server. It's like a new folder, a C, D, E, or F. New storage inside the servers will be created.

One of the clients that we have now has 50 terabytes of storage. We have created another server on a cloud backup for these 50 terabytes. They have 100 users that are using this backup through file sharing.

We always get direct support. I am supported well.

We use to have SAN storage , attached to our physical server 

But after being shifted to azure , we felt the performance and security more 

You need someone with experience to complete the initial setup. If you bring in an engineer or a computer science person who doesn't have experience in Microsoft then he cannot do it. They might be able to install the Windows Operating Systems and Active Directory but they won't be able to connect to the VM online on the cloud. They need some experience. If someone trains them, they can get it in one day or maybe two.

In my experience, each installation with us can take 18 days if the client requests an on-premises deployment. If they need just a server to create a backup, we will create a virtual machine online, which will take one or two days.

It will take time for an on-premises installation because we will install the server locally. This includes the operating system, the links, and connecting them to the server and then to the cloud. It will work online or offline. This will take 15 to 18 days.

Again, to backup online, for the server and Active Directory, it will be one day to complete.

We are using a file-shared backup; one for on-premise and one on the private cloud.

Our clients are seeing that it is cost-effective.

The fees are a bit expensive. When clients see improvements and see a product out of the box, clients will not look at the price, but the price could be lower. 

Support payment works by the level of partnership and the number of shares.

As a gold partner, we have more than 50 hours of support per year and this is more than enough. With the 50 hours, I get a one hour call. If I have a problem and I call, they have one hour to call me, and I have unlimited calls if I need them to call me after 24 hours or the next day. 

As gold partners, we generate the licenses for our clients and we pay monthly. Our clients pay annually or make two payments per year.

Sure , like any solution we just make evaluation and testing 

That’s what we have done before starting with azure backup 

Before doing a backup or getting any cloud solutions, you must first check the environment and the systems. Most companies will have computers in a workgroup. Each must have its own domain and Active Directory. 

You will have to do the know-how technologies inside the company for the basic configuration. Then they can choose and start. You know longer have to use storage that will stay inside the office because anyone can unplug it and take it with them.

With a cloud solution, you can specify which MAC address, user, environment, or region can get the data from the server.

I have been using Microsoft for 16 years. I am very familiar with all of the Microsoft technology.

Now they have the cloud, Microsoft Office 365 and Microsoft Azure, so we transfer and we have been awarded the digital technology transformation three times.

We are a cybersecurity company that cares about security for our clients.

As a gold partner and CSP partner, we have our portal. If a client needs 100 Azure servers then I can create them directly for him, without having to contact Microsoft or anyone. I can create them and the charges will come to me monthly. Also, I can choose the mode of payment, be it monthly or annually. There is also the rebate and the cashback that will come with yearly or monthly billing.

I don't see any problems with Azure. It gives our clients peace of mind. Data is important.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.

The main use case is to back up my on-premises machines, essentially resembling the traditional backup software that has been included with Windows operating systems for the past three decades. In this specific case, it's a cloud-based solution. This cloud-based backup service also offers regional redundancy. For instance, if you're using the South UK region as your primary location for backups, you have the option to mirror your backups to another designated region. In the past, this secondary region used to be highly customizable, but now specific regions are designated as partners. For instance, Western North Europe may be a partner region. This means you are constrained to using specific partner regions for redundancy. If the primary region encounters issues, the secondary region will seamlessly take over the backup load.

It is a functional backup solution. One of its standout features is similar to the "Recycle Bin" on your Windows Explorer desktop but for your backups. You have the flexibility to encrypt your backups and choose the storage capacity you're comfortable paying for. It empowers you to create virtual machines that scan your network and assume the administrative tasks related to backup. This means you can easily configure backups between different machines, similar to what you can do with vSphere in VMware, where automation takes care of administering your machines. These capabilities extend beyond just Hyper-V and also cover Mobile Device Management (MDM).

When attempting to back up encrypted files and later restore them to another location, it's essential to configure your service principal names. Many Windows administrators are familiar with this and handle it manually. It would be beneficial to receive alert messages if something isn't configured correctly, for instance, if service principal names are missing, a message could prompt you to set them up. This is a common challenge shared by various backup programs and administrators who are unaware of these requirements tend to overlook them, rendering encrypted file restores impossible. It is essential to test the restore functionality to ensure it works as expected. Also, having configuration assistance with quality of service features would be valuable for administrators. This would allow administrators to allocate resources effectively, deciding how much bandwidth to assign to different backup tasks. An upcoming feature, that appears promising, is the platform connectivity feature. This feature will apply to various types of networks, including video networks and other backup networks. It would be great to see a similar capability integrated into Azure Backup in the future.

I have been working with it for five years.

The customer support is truly exceptional. I've had the opportunity to experience support from Cisco, which is renowned for its top-tier service. In comparison, Microsoft's support is right up there, coming in as a close second. I would rate it ten out of ten.

Positive

I have some experience, but I am not actively utilizing Veeam anymore. I've found Azure Backup to be quite satisfactory for my needs. Some of my clients still prefer Veeam. It's worth noting that the terminology and concepts in these backup solutions are very similar. Veeam is often considered more user-friendly, but it comes at a higher cost. With Azure Backup, you primarily pay for storage. It may seem like a marketing strategy by Microsoft, but it's important to understand that the cost of the backup service itself is bundled into the storage pricing.

The initial setup is relatively straightforward. You just need to follow the instructions provided, which are usually quite clear. Whether you're selecting Hyper-V or a barebone machine, the instructions are generally easy to understand. The only potential challenge I've encountered is with download links when you need to install an agent. When it comes to the backup processes themselves, I haven't faced any significant issues. All of my students have been able to follow the instructions, which speaks to the product's usability and reliability.

In terms of ROI, it has proven to be quite successful for my specific needs, and it is incredibly cost-effective. I am quite satisfied with it.

It is incredibly cost-effective and offers fixed pricing, with no additional fees for the licensing.

As with any backup software, it's crucial to thoroughly test the recovery process to ensure it functions as intended. Sometimes, the issue might simply be forgetting to configure your service principal names (SPNs). SPNs can be somewhat similar to DNS names. When you enter "Google.com," you expect to receive an IP address. Similarly, when dealing with service principal names, you specify the HTTP or another service on a particular machine and expect to validate it with a certificate. It is an essential step that should not be overlooked. If these configurations are forgotten, it could result in backups that cannot be restored, which is far from ideal. Therefore, rigorous testing is essential to validate the effectiveness of your backup strategy. Overall, I would rate it nine out of ten.

We use Commvault for on premises clients and the Azure Backup for cloud-based clients.

This solution is easy to configure and restore. It is a Microsoft product so is easily compatible with other solutions.

The restoration of permissions is a functionality that could be improved. If I want to restore permissions, I should be able to do this. 

Secondly, there is a limitation of 99 files restores per day which means that we can't complete a huge file restore. We would like Azure to increase the number of the possible file restorations.

I have been using this solution for five years.

This is a stable solution. 

This is a scalable solution besides the limitations on file restorations.

It takes a long time to resolve support tickets with the Microsoft support team. They could offer faster resolution of tickets. I would rate them a two out of five. 

Neutral

We use Azure Backup alongside Commvault Hyperscale X. The latter offers a compression ratio that is much higher compared to Azure Backup. There are no limitations on file restorations using Commvault. 

Azure Backup is free and we are only charged for storage. Commvault is definitely costly compared to Azure Backup.

The initial setup of this solution is straightforward, 

Azure offers competitive pricing and charges us only for the storage space that we use. 

We use this solution for across-the-board data protection. That includes VMs, and storage pools for basically any level of recoverability whether for files, storage pools or transactional data. I'm an enterprise architect. 

Backup helps quite a bit in terms of immediate recovery and immediate restoration. It's very helpful when it comes to data corruption, file damage, or inadvertent deletions. The other component is the relatively broad data protection we get across the entire Azure landing zone. It backs up efficiently and reports better than a lot of traditional tools. 

I think the extensibility onto hybrid environments needs a bit of tweaking. It's great in the cloud but when you're on-prem it requires quite a bit of infrastructure in terms of Azure ARC and bringing it back. 

I've been using this solution for around four years. 

The solution is quite stable and reliable. We've had a few little nominal outages, but nothing terrible. It's much more reliable than any of the traditional on-premise kind of private cloud environments. 

The solution is very scalable for us but scalability depends on your location.There are no problems accessing Azure in Europe or North America but if you're looking at the newer regions, they're slower in adding the same capability. I used Azure in Dublin because there was no Azure in Africa. When they turned on Azure in South Africa we had to switch to that but we only got 50% of the functionality. South Africa should have been brought to the same level before we had to make the move from Dublin. It's taken us backward. 

The initial setup is fairly standard and not too complex. Deployment generally takes a few days depending on the size. Anything to do with data retention takes more time as we have to define the backup schedules and retention and those kinds of things. Validating the backups is quick and efficient but determining which data we need to keep and for how long, takes time. Those are all issues related to the customer.

Deployment steps are basically about carrying out an inventory of the workloads. You want to guard the types of protection you're applying specifically to databases versus different systems and services, and then how that ties into full recoverability. That would take a week maximum in the worst case and we do that internally. 

We usually have two systems engineers involved in maintenance. Different projects require different capacities.

ROI is very good as long as you modernize your solutions and then it brings quite a saving. If you don't upgrade to cloud, and you just do a lift and shift, it'll kill you with the cost.

Licensing costs are consumption-based so the more storage we eat, the more data we protect, the greater the cost.

It's important to ensure that the capabilities you require are available in your region. Feature availability per region is the most important thing. You can't do a design for Azure in North America and then think that it's going to work everywhere. Azure is not consistent so you may be forced to buy third-party products that you didn't budget for.

I rate this solution nine out of 10. 

My primary use case for Azure Backup involves dealing with infrastructure services. As a solution architect, I am familiar with all the services, particularly running AI solutions to aid our processes. Azure Backup has been part of my setup for managing large-scale data.

The most valuable feature of Azure Backup is its simplicity. When using a Microsoft operating system, whether server or Windows, Azure Backup proves to be an excellent product. It integrates well with Microsoft OS, which is still used by many organizations in the market. 

Another valuable feature is its retention policies, which offer both archive and standard options. This allows cost-effective management of older data by moving it from a standard vault to an archive vault.

The reporting functionality of Azure Backup needs improvement. I currently use logic apps and manually configure scripts to enhance the reporting processes.

I have been familiar with Azure Backup for two to three years.

Azure Backup is stable for Microsoft environments, however, integration with VMware is less straightforward.

Azure Backup works well for scaling in environments using Microsoft OS due to its significant market presence.

Microsoft's technical support for Azure products could be improved. 

Positive

The initial setup of Azure Backup requires some changes, and I do require a lot of effort. However, over time, adjustments have been made to improve the setup process.

I generally recommend Azure Backup to others. However, for those actively using VMware platforms, I suggest considering alternative solutions or using a specific AVS solution provided by Microsoft for better integration. 

The overall product is rated ten out of ten.

We can implement Azure Backup for any customer who wants to back up their servers, whether on-premises, AWS, or any other cloud. We can implement the solution in such scenarios if the customer doesn't have an existing backup in place.

Azure Backup is easy to manage from a single dashboard.

The solution should involve more redundancy types in the backup storage and support open-source OS.

I rate the solution’s stability an eight out of ten.

Azure Backup is a highly scalable solution that can support a large amount of volume but lacks horizontal scaling. Ideally, we need to either push the MARS agent via SCCM or use some kind of tool to deploy the MARS agent in all the VMs. Although the solution's vertical scaling is pretty good, its horizontal scaling could be improved. Around 80% to 90% of our customers use Azure Backup in some way or another.

The solution's technical support is okay, but even the support team cannot do anything if the feature lacks something.

We have customers using other backup tools like Veritas Backup or Commvault Backup. Azure Backup is easy to manage from a single dashboard. If it is on-premises, customers can still take a backup of the on-premises environment if they don't want to increase the on-premises storage. Ultimately, it's an upfront cost for them. In that way, they won't use Azure Backup but will use Azure Storage to save one more copy on the cloud.

The solution’s initial setup is straightforward.

The solution's deployment time depends on the size of the environment. If there are fewer VMs, it will take less time to deploy. If we consider only one VM where we need to deploy a backup, then it will hardly take an hour or so to deploy it along with the recovery point. The deployment time also depends on the data.

If it is an Azure environment, the solution can be deployed in just a few clicks, and it will start taking a backup. If it is any third-party environment, users need to spend some more time on the deployment.

The solution's return on investment depends on the size of the environment.

Customers choose their backup tool based on its flexibility and cost-effectiveness. Customers prefer Azure Backup because it has a pay-as-you-go model, and they won't have to pay an upfront amount at the initial level. The solution's pricing and licensing depend on the environment.

We use the solution to protect specific data types or environments, such as an SQL database, a normal VM, or a file share. I suggest Azure Backup for a small or medium environment with 30 to 40 VMs. For a big environment, I suggest third-party backup tools, which are more flexible and manageable because they come with single dashboards.

Overall, I rate Azure Backup an eight out of ten.

Our primary use case of Azure Backup is for data on our application servers. We host our ERP systems with SQL for backend software. 

We've been in partnership with Microsoft for more than 15 years. I'm the CEO and the CIO. 

Before we started using Azure we spent a lot of money at our various sites, setting one up as the main physical site and a second for disaster recovery. We had to invest a lot of money to buy hardware that needed replacing every two or three years. Switching to Azure has saved us thousands. The hardware is always updated and we're now able to invest more in our staff which is highly beneficial because it translates to satisfied clients.  

As a security setting, Azure is very detailed. We can add features on retentions and retain the backup for several days. The retention policies are very good. I like the notifications and multiple layers of security that the solution offers. It enables us and our clients to feel secure and you can install and connect your systems wherever you are. 

We're hoping the price of the solution won't increase in the coming months when Azure is due to review all its products. I think that what the product lacks now is an AI system; if we had that, we'd be able to more easily upgrade the hardware system.  

We've been using this solution for about seven years. 

We haven't had any stability issues. If the initial setup is done properly there won't be any issues with stability. 

The scalability is good. We have around 12 users in the department. Some of them provide techno support and others do testing on the system to check its abilities because sometimes it has too much load. 

Customer support is very good. 

The initial setup was straightforward. Deployment time depends on the size of the data.

We pay over $8 million per year in licensing fees for 365 and Azure usage. There is no additional cost for hardware but we train our employees and that is an added cost for us. 

We had a look at Amazon before going with Azure but we decided to go the whole way with Microsoft. These days, I'm not sure there's much difference between the two.   

It's important to know what you'll be getting from whoever provides you with the solution because it's important that support is included. This product has really helped me in scaling up my company. We love this solution and think everyone should have it. 

As a provider and a user, I rate this solution 10 out of 10.