AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery vs Carbonite Server comparison

"The initial setup is pretty straightforward, it's not complex."

"We have never had any issues with scalability."

"Customer service is quite helpful."

"CloudEndure Disaster Recovery is a fairly stable solution."

"The setup is pretty straightforward."

"It's on the cheaper side and not too expensive for users."

"The most valuable aspect of CloudEndure Disaster Recovery is its instant block replication feature. This allows us to perform live block verification and eliminates the need to concern ourselves with recovery point objectives. This capability is particularly advantageous for critical workloads."

"Since it is a managed service, I reduce my time to manage infrastructure and applications."

"It seems reliable and easy to use."

"The solution is very stable."

"Easy verification of things is the most valuable feature."

"It does not slow down your computer or use a lot of resources as it works."

"The Granular Restore of SQL feature has been a lifesaver more times than I can count. One of the main reasons for looking at Carbonite was their support for platforms like AIX and AS/400 Series."

"I find the BMR/image and the recovery pieces are valuable."

"Technical support handled all our issues quickly and effectively."

"The solution is a free engine to help work with the container."

"I set up a test, deleted the source, and went to fail it back, and it didn't work."

"Since I have to view everything on the console, the previous application solutions like IBM and Sanavi showed the RPO and RTO status directly. In AWS Disaster Recovery Service, these details are not available, making it difficult to check my replication status."

"I would like to see better support for creating and working with archives."

"The failback could be improved. It should be more intuitive."

"The user interface, customer support, and the recovery time for the current customer query could use improvement."

"The only thing I would like to see is, they don't have a formal ticketing system. There is no way I can go back and see what questions we had six months back, what issues we had, and how they were resolved."

"The product could be improved by incorporating more AI-driven automation for deployment and additional security features. These enhancements would make the solution even more user-friendly and secure."

"Definitely there should be better logging. From a customer perspective I would like to see more logs on what is happening. If there is an issue, I would like to know what the problem is. Right now, we have to depend on the support of the vendor to check and let us know, because we don't have access to a lot of logging information."

"It could be a little bit easier or faster to be able to access data files without having to download anything."

"The stability has room for improvement."

"In the next release I would like to see an improvement in the auto failover option."

"They do not yet have USB recovery but they are adding it in coming releases."

"The support for object storage isn't quite there yet. Its public cloud support can be improved. I would love to see the public cloud support for object storage, and it would be great, but what I always hear from the folks at Carbonite is that in a lot of cases, it directly competes with their cloud offering. So, I don't know when or where that will go or if that will go anywhere, but we are hopeful to see something. The dashboard is a little outdated. If they gave it a facelift and put some better design around their dashboard, that would be tremendous. I generally care less about the visual aesthetics of an application as long as it does what it needed to do, which is true in the case of this solution. We also have the Microsoft 365 platform. Because they're two separate platforms, I have to log in to my Microsoft platform to manage it, and I have to log into my Carbonite server backup platform to manage it. Having these two coexist together in one management console is really what we're looking for, but we went for it knowing this. We also knew that there would be some integration coming down the road. So, we're again hoping to see some of that coming in 2021."

"The Hyper-V backup has room for improvement."

"The only thing that I would like to see improved is related to marketing. Currently, it is very difficult to find the right paper and stuff for me. Their marketing department should provide better information because currently, it is very difficult to find information on the internet. It was bought over by OpenText, and you won't be able to find a lot of information about this solution on their site. They should also provide training facilities for commercial purposes. Some of my colleagues recently went for pilot training, and they were technical. If I want to get trained, the training has to be more commercial. Currently, there is no such training for users like me."

"The pricing is better now that they had come out with the Tier 2 which replicates a little less often. In comparison to what I would have been spending with any other type of solution, the pricing is fair."

"We were happy with the pricing that they gave us."

"CloudEndure Disaster Recovery is charging clients $20 to do the DR backups. It is an expensive solution."

"I feel the product's pricing is a good value. Licensing is pretty straightforward."

"Where the price adds up, there are CloudEndure licenses, then there is the AWS environment, and finally, there is the AWS storage, so cumulatively, it adds up."

"It has saved us money from having to buy hardware for disaster recovery."

"I rate the price of CloudEndure Disaster Recovery a six out of ten."

"They license us on a per machine basis. We have a set number of machines, which we have licensed.​"

"The pricing is between $120 and $150 per year."

"Its price is reasonable."

"We pay 9,000 dollars per year for our license."

"The solution is open source."