Azure Backup Reviews

We primarily use the solution for disaster recovery.

The solution is cost-effective.

The backup features are very useful.

The solution overall is very reliable.

The interface needs improvement and it doesn't offer as many features as other third-party backup solutions.

The solution is still in its infancy; it's not a mature product yet.

The stability of the solution is good. 

The scalability of the solution is good.

As Microsoft partners, we get support when we need it. We've been satisfied with them so far.

Previously we were using Windows Network Backup as well as Veeam. Right now, we are testing Azure.

The initial setup is pretty easy. You literally load an agent from the servers to whatever machines you want to backup. It's pretty intuitive when you go into Azure to set it up. Deployment times depend on the bandwidth, and in South Africa, that can vary. It might take up to a day or so. Once you do your full backup, you're only doing incremental backups going forward, so it's just the initial setup and backup that might take a while.

I handled the implementation myself.

We're Microsoft partners.

We had issues before where there were no Azure Data Centers in South Africa. From a compliance point of view, backing up to outside the country was a bit of an issue. Now Microsoft has two data centers in South Africa, so it is no longer a problem.

I'd recommend the solution to others, but only if they have decent and reliable bandwidth. They should also make sure their alerts and monitoring are all set up to notify if the backups fail or succeed.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

We have been this as our default backup solution since we migrated to Azure. We have both Windows and Linux systems in our environment.

This solution allows us to take complete Windows backups on a schedule that we choose. This can be hourly, daily, or weekly.

The MARS agent makes it easy to use.

There is no MARS agent for Linux, which is a problem for us because we have systems that use Linux Red Hat and Ubuntu.

There are other things missing in Azure that require us to use third-party tools. We would prefer to use Azure alone because it would be easier, as well as more secure.

The time required to restore files should be a little faster. It takes quite a long time to restore files at the moment.

We began using Azure Backup about six months ago.

Technical support is very supportive and they are giving me the best that they can do.

We began using Azure Backup as soon as we migrated to Azure from on-premises, AWS, and Oracle workloads.

We have no complaints about the deployment process, and everything installed fine.

We are currently evaluating options to back up our Linux filesystems.

While Azure Backup works well for our Windows systems, because it is not working with Linux, it is only doing half of the job that we need. If we had a MARS agent that worked for Linux then I would rate this solution a least an eight out of ten. It would allow us to use Azure as the only backup tool, without having to use products by third-parties.

I would rate this solution a five out of ten.

I use Azure Backup in my client's company.

We are happy with this product and have not found any issues while using it.

We have been working with Azure Backup for less than one year.

This is a stable solution.

This is a scalable product. My clients are small and medium-sized companies.

The support is good.

The initial setup is easy.

The price is somewhat high and could be lower.

I am currently evaluating Acronis Backup. If there is something better then we will switch to using it.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We use this solution to back up our private environment and virtual machines.

The monitoring and tagging features could be improved. 

I would like to see more functionality in regards to the mapping.

I have been using this solution for roughly one year.

Azure Backup is both very scalable and stable.

We've had both good and bad experiences with technical support. Sometimes they take a long time to respond to our requests.

The initial setup was very easy. I deployed it myself and I believe we had it up and running in one day.

I would recommend this solution to other companies because it's an enterprise product that suits all requirements.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give this solution a rating of eight.

The primary use case is to have in Azure or backup with a machine on-prem.

Its only feature is backup. That's literally all it does is back up and restore, that's it.

I have been using Azure Backup for five years. 

I have no issues with the stability at all. So I don't necessarily care about the stability of the product. I look more at whether or not can I recover. And I haven't had a failed recovery yet. I have not had any failed recoveries of all my years. 

Scalability is fine.

Technical support is good enough.

Azure Backup is the only solution I've really worked with. You wouldn't know about the other tools. The only other backup tool I've done before was one called OmniBack, which you wouldn't know about because it's not sold anymore.

The initial setup complexity depends on the environment. On-prem can be complex to set up but the cloud is simple.

The time it takes to deploy depends. It can take anywhere from half a day or a few days, depending on the complexity.

The price is pretty good, maybe $30 for a machine, I can't complain.

Pricing is based on consumption base. 

I would rate it a ten out of ten and I would definitely recommend it.

We provide solutions with Microsoft. The principal use is as a backup solution for the the Azure environment because we use 365 solutions.

This solution is deployed on cloud.

The most valuable features will depend on the environment and if you're using the cloud platform, or if you want to keep your backup on-premise.

I would like to see more automation, integration, and security. The price could be better.

I have been using this solution since 2004.

It's stable.

I haven't had any issues with technical support.

Installation is straightforward.

The price should be cheaper, but it's affordable if you use the yearly subscription.

I would rate this solution 5 out of 10.