We performed a comparison between IBM Spectrum Protect and NetApp SnapCenter 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."For initial setup, we started with the blueprints, which were great. The blueprints allowed us to be able to decide if we needed to use small, medium,k or large. Because we are a large environment, we used a large blueprint. Once we followed everything in the blueprint, it was a smooth transition from there."
"It helps our customers protect their data, especially with stuff like ransomware, compliance, and regulatory requirements."
"It is good in terms of functionality. My clients are very satisfied with this solution."
"The most valuable feature for data recovery in IBM Spectrum Protect is its database protection capabilities."
"Nothing beats this solution for file backup."
"One way they have improved our organization is through the stability of the solution and the availability of the product."
"Because of the flexible parameters, everything can be fine-tuned to the customers’ needs in their environment."
"The feature that I have found the most valuable is that IBM Spectrum Protect is highly integrated with IBM ESS. In addition, it allows us to back up our virtual servers directly to take VM snapshots. It runs on Linux as well."
"Most banks and financial institutions use the solution."
"I like the instant backups and recovery feature that SnapCenter provides within NetApp storage systems."
"It has very fast backup and can handle a huge amount of data. It also enables really fast recovery."
"It's a centralized, easy-to-use solution empowering RBAC management, monitoring, notifications, extensive logging, and backup schedules for standalone as well as groups of the same types of environments. The cloning capabilities accelerate development."
"The main advantage is its fast backup and restore."
"The simplicity of backup and restore directly with VMware is an advantage and the time to backup and restore is reduced."
"The backup features are the most valuable because they allow the DBAs to replace SnapManager for Oracle (SMO), which is going away, and to do cloning as well. We can also clone to different servers and have the actual backup clone mounted on different servers. And we can split easily too."
"We have been very satisfied with the technical support's help. Their knowledge level is great. For a noncritical question, they will get back to us within a day."
"It's difficult in terms of the configuration at set up. In our case, it required another admin, one person dedicated to the backup."
"The software is complex; setup is complex."
"It seems like they are a little behind on the integration to Azure Cloud as well as Amazon."
"It lacks reporting and an efficient alert mechanism. The GUI could also be improved."
"The version that we had when I first started made it look really bad. We are talking about commands that should have run in two seconds, but instead took four to eight hours. Other components were sluggish."
"I would like to see monitoring within the platform: monitoring for storage pools and monitoring for the server's health (e.g., CPU and memory)."
"The solution's initial setup process wasn't easy...The solution is overly complicated in terms of architecture, especially compared to other tools in the market."
"Probably educating the virtual group who are not as used to the product. Most of our expertise is with AIX servers and virtual server backups."
"We tend to have a lot of Hyper-V... so now we have two management consoles and we would ideally like to leverage SnapCenter to include Hyper-V."
"The DBAs are comparing it to SMO but it doesn't have a lot of the functionalities that SMO has."
"The product lags in terms of availability."
"We have hundreds of servers and systems and hundreds of customers and they're separated in a multi-tenancy way in NetApp SVM. Right now, the problem is that it always scan all SVMs. If I backup Customer A, it scans all SVMs, or tries to scan all SVMs, if there is a backup relationship on the storage. But it doesn't have the permissions, so we run into timeouts or the backup just takes too long. They're fixing that in the upcoming release..."
"The compatibility with other manufacturers, like Oracle and Hyper-V, could be improved. I would like to see it be more compatible with other software."
"Reporting of the jobs could be better."
"I feel a little bit that during the whole process of putting this software into production we were like a beta program. It was full of bugs... For example, we had a problem with truncating our Exchange log files... It has improved over time."
"The documentation could be a little bit better so that we could handle more of the troubleshooting ourselves, rather than having to go through support."
IBM Spectrum Protect is ranked 17th in Backup and Recovery with 146 reviews while NetApp SnapCenter is ranked 42nd in Backup and Recovery with 24 reviews. IBM Spectrum Protect is rated 8.0, while NetApp SnapCenter is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of IBM Spectrum Protect writes "Performance and recoveries are better, and customers are happier with performance". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NetApp SnapCenter writes "A stable solution that is mostly used by banks and financial institutions". IBM Spectrum Protect is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, IBM Spectrum Protect Plus, Commvault Cloud, Dell PowerProtect DD (Data Domain) and Cohesity DataProtect, whereas NetApp SnapCenter is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Cohesity DataProtect, Commvault Cloud, NetApp Cloud Backup and Delphix. See our IBM Spectrum Protect vs. NetApp SnapCenter 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.
