Iron Mountain Connect vs NetApp Cloud Backup comparison

Iron Mountain and NetApp are both solutions in the Backup and Recovery category. Iron Mountain is ranked #69, while NetApp is ranked #29 with an average rating of 9.0. Iron Mountain holds a 0.3% mindshare in BRS, compared to NetApp’s 0.2% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Iron Mountain users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of NetApp users who would recommend it.

Iron Mountain Connect

Read 2 Iron Mountain Connect reviews

408 Views
305 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

NetApp Cloud Backup

Read 4 NetApp Cloud Backup reviews

576 Views
473 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Iron Mountain Connect

NetApp Cloud Backup

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 11, 2024

Iron Mountain Connect and NetApp Cloud Backup are compared based on features, improvement areas, ease of deployment, and pricing/ROI. NetApp Cloud Backup seems to have the upper hand with advanced features making it worth the price according to user feedback.

Features: Iron Mountain Connect is noted for strong data management capabilities, robust compliance features, and a straightforward user interface. NetApp Cloud Backup integrates well with cloud services, offers automated backup processes, and includes more advanced features as per user feedback.

Room for Improvement: Iron Mountain Connect needs improvements in speed and user interface configuration. NetApp Cloud Backup needs enhancement in the initial setup process and better customer support response times. NetApp Cloud Backup's setup complexity and support issues are more frequently noted.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Iron Mountain Connect offers a straightforward deployment process and responsive customer service. NetApp Cloud Backup deployment can be complex but efficient once configured. Customer support for NetApp Cloud Backup is a noted area of improvement. Iron Mountain Connect is seen as easier to deploy with better customer service.

Pricing and ROI: Iron Mountain Connect offers competitive pricing and good ROI. NetApp Cloud Backup, despite higher setup costs, is valued for advanced features contributing to a strong ROI. Users find Iron Mountain Connect more budget-friendly, while NetApp’s superior features justify its higher cost.

To learn more, read our detailed Iron Mountain Connect vs. NetApp Cloud Backup Report (Updated: April 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Iron Mountain Connect vs. NetApp Cloud Backup

April 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 847,772 peers since 2012

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Categories and Ranking

Iron Mountain Connect

Ranking in Backup and Recovery

69th

Average Rating

8.6

Reviews Sentiment

8.3

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

NetApp Cloud Backup

Ranking in Backup and Recovery

29th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.2

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Deduplication Software (10th), Disk Based Backup Systems (4th), Cloud Backup (23rd), Cloud Storage Gateways (5th)

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Backup and Recovery category, the mindshare of Iron Mountain Connect is 0.3%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of NetApp Cloud Backup is 0.2%, down from 0.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Backup and Recovery

Featured Reviews

Raj Bhaduri

Enterprise architect at Centrica

Good policies related to data

I primarily use it for various policies related to data, such as data retention, data deletion, and archiving policies. All policies can be set using this system The most valuable feature for me is the policy management capabilities. I would like to see more integration with different platforms,…

Read full review

Abbasi Poonawala

Chief Enterprise Architect at Bank in KSA/JPMORGAN

Simplifies our backups with an agentless backup manager, but needs better integration with in-house applications

One area that can be improved is around how we define the different KPIs. In particular, the business KPIs. I have my own in-house application for the business KPIs, so for example, with our policies around retention, which is a period of seven years, I have to read these parameters from other applications and I need them to integrate well. NetApp Cloud Backup Manager should help to get this integrated seamlessly with other applications, meaning that it will populate the data around the different parameters. These parameters could be things like the retention period, the backup schedule, or anything. It might be an ITSM ticket, where it's a workflow that is triggered somewhere, and the ITSM ticket has been created for a particular environment like my development environment, an INT environment, or a UAT environment. This kind of process needs to integrate well with my own application, and there are some challenges. For example, if it allows for consuming of RESTful APIs, that's how we will usually integrate, but there are certain challenges when it comes to integrating with our own application around KPIs, whether it's business KPIs or technical KPIs. What I want is to populate that data from my own applications. So we have have the headroom in the KPI, and we have the throughput, the volumes, the transactions per second, etc., which are all defined. And these are the global parameters. They affect all the lines of business. It's a central application that is consumed by most of the lines of business and it's all around the KPIs. Earlier, it used to be based on Quest Foglight, which is an application that was taken up and customized. It was made in-house as a core service, and used as a core building block. But our use of Quest Foglight has become a bit outdated. There is no more support available, and it's been there as a kind of legacy application for more than ten years now in the organization. And now it get down to the question: Is this an investment or will we need to divest ourselves of it? So there has to be an option to remediate it out. In that case, one possibility is to integrate the existing application and it gets completely decommissioned. Here it would help if there were some better ways of defining or handling the KPIs in the Cloud Manager, so that most of the parameters are not defined directly by me. Those will be the global parameters that are defined across all the lines of business. There are some integration challenges when it comes to this, and I've spoken to the support team who say they have the REST APIs, but the integration still isn't going as smooth as it could be. Most of the time, when things aren't working out, we need dedicated engineers to be put in for the entire integration. And then it becomes more of a challenge on top of everything. So if the Cloud Manager isn't being fed all the kinds of parameters from the backup strategy around the ITSM and incident tickets, or backup schedules, or anything related to the backup policies, then it takes a while. Ideally, I would want it to be read directly from our in-house applications. And this is more to do with our kind of product processes; that is, it's not our own choice to decide. The risk management team has mandated this as part of the compliance, that we have to strictly enforce the KPIs, the headroom, and the rest of the global parameters which are defined for the different lines of business. So if my retention period changes from seven years to, let's say, 10 years or 15 years, then those rules have to be strictly enforced. Ultimately, we would like better support for ITSM. The ITSM tools like ServiceNow or BMC Remedy are already adding multiple new features, so they have to be upgraded over a period of time, and that means NetApp has to provision for that and factor it in. Some of the AI-based capabilities are there now, and those things have to be incorporated somehow. One last thing is that NetApp could provide better flash storage. Since they're already on block storage and are doing well in that segment, it makes sense that they will have to step up when it comes to flash array storage and so on. I have been evaluating NetApp's flash array storage solutions versus some others like Toshiba's flash array and Fujitsu's storage array, which are quite cost-effective.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros

"The most valuable feature for me is the policy management capabilities"

"Scalability is very good."

"NetApp Cloud Backup performance is good and they have beneficial technology."

"I rate the scalability a ten out of ten...It has a great impact on our business because we have the infrastructure deployed globally on four continents around the world."

"One feature that works well for us is that the Cloud Manager is a completely agentless solution. There's a similar dashboard on both the versions for on-premises and the cloud, and with reference to the Cloud Manager, it's a little faster because there's nothing to be installed as such. Being agentless, it doesn't require any agent to be deployed on the targets where the backups are triggered."

Cons

"I would like to see more integration with different platforms."

"NetApp has a nasty way of dealing with the license for the product's on-premises virtual NetApp appliance that you need in your whole architecture, and it is not directly linked to NetApp Cloud Backup."

"One area that can be improved is around how we define the different KPIs. In particular, the business KPIs. I have my own in-house application for the business KPIs, so for example, with our policies around retention, which is a period of seven years, I have to read these parameters from other applications and I need them to integrate well."

"Integration and reporting could be improved."

"NetApp Cloud Backup could improve by being easier to use. Veeam solution is easier to use."

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available

"If one is not cost-effective and ten is a highly cost-effective product, I rate the tool as a three. The tool is not so cheap."

"NetApp Cloud Backup has a subscription-based model and it is paid annually."

"Our usage depends on the number of licenses we have. On the cloud, it's a pay-to-use kind of model which suits our needs well. Once we have the Cloud Manager installed, the licensing process is okay, regardless of whether we're running backups in the cloud or on-premises. Sometimes, we have to restrict the number of users as per the contractual agreement and in this case we simply cut down on the licensing."

"Cost could be lower."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Backup and Recovery solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

847,772 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

No data available

Manufacturing Company

18%

Computer Software Company

15%

Government

Energy/Utilities Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

Questions from the Community

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

What's the 3-2-1 data protection that NetApp Cloud Backup offers?

Hi, the 3-2-1 data protection from this product is related to a backup strategy with the same name. I'm assuming you don't know about it so I'll tell you in a few words. In its essence, this backup...

See all answers

Is NetApp Cloud Backup secure for backup?

I've just started using NetApp Cloud Backup but my initial reason behind choosing it in the first place is that they advertise their high-security approach. So basically, they give you ransomware p...

See all answers

Is NetApp Cloud Backup expensive in your opinion?

It depends on how much exactly you count as expensive. For me, NetApp Cloud Backup isn't too expensive. I say that based on the services it provides and on the way it provides them. I think it's im...

See all answers

Comparisons

IBM Spectrum Protect vs Iron Mountain Connect

Compared 36% of the time

Rubrik vs Iron Mountain Connect

Compared 33% of the time

Veeam Data Platform vs Iron Mountain Connect

Compared 31% of the time

More Iron Mountain Connect Competitors

Dell PowerProtect Data Manager vs NetApp Cloud Backup

Compared 49% of the time

NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP vs NetApp Cloud Backup

Compared 27% of the time

Rubrik vs NetApp Cloud Backup

Compared 24% of the time

More NetApp Cloud Backup Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Backup and Recovery

March 2025

Download Iron Mountain Connect product report

Buyer's Guide

Cloud Backup

April 2025

Download NetApp Cloud Backup product report

Overview

Connected Accounting&ERP is a mid-range accounting program with single user and network editions for Macintosh and Windows operating systems. Connected can be shared concurrently by both Mac OS and Windows users on a single data file. Connected "Core Accounting" consists of the General Ledger, Accounts Receivable and Accounts Payable modules. Connected "Enterprise" builds on the Core Accounting aspects by adding powerful inventory, job costing, and currency additions. Pricing starts at $399.00.

Iron Mountain

NetApp Cloud Backup is a fully integrated service for cloud backup and restoration. It was created to comply fully with NetApp's native data management software ONTAP, used for hybrid cloud experience. NetApp Cloud Backup is used to create backup and restoration for the protection and archiving of data, databases, and virtual machines related to the Cloud and On-Premises data in ONTAP. The way NetApp Cloud Backup works is by automatically creating block-level incremental backups. This ensures that the created backups are very fast and easy to restore. It is suitable for data protection regarding on-premises software as well as in the public cloud. NetApp Cloud Backup provides users with the ability to protect their cloud data at affordable prices and with a user-friendly interface so they don't need a lot of technical knowledge to be able to secure their cloud storage.

The copies created by NetApp Cloud Backup can be stored in the user's personal object storage in the cloud as well as on premises with StorageGRID - NetApp's storage platform. The backup copies can be restored to the original source or to a different source in Cloud Volumes ONTAP. NetApp Cloud Backup provides backups to AWS, Azure, and Google Cloud.

NetApp Cloud Backup Features

The features NetApp Cloud Backup provides include:

Data recovery: NetApp Cloud Backup provides restoration of individual files as well as full volume recovery, based on the user's needs. The data can be retrieved from a specific point in time, giving clients even more assurance that their cloud-stored data can and will be saved.
Indexed catalog: Another feature that NetApp Cloud Backup offers is a search catalog, providing multiple search criteria and the ability to locate a file across all backups.
Various archival tiers: This feature provides the ability for multi-cloud support, including top services like Google Cloud Storage Archive, Glacier Deep Archive, Amazon S3 Glacier, and Azure Archive Storage.
Encryption: End-to-end encryption allows users to feel more secure about their data.
Cloud technology features: Additional features regarding cloud technology include the options for movement from CAPEX to OPEX and mixing BYOL and PAYGO.

NetApp Cloud Backup Benefits

In addition to enhanced security and protection from malicious attacks, the advantages of using NetApp Cloud Backup include:

Aligns with the 3-2-1 backup strategy
Various levels of protection of data, including encryption and full customer control
Protection against ransomware, using different security methods
A wide variety of supported workloads, including databases, VMs, applications, NAS, and K8s

Reviews from Real Users

Abbasi P., a User at a financial services firm, likes that NetApp Cloud Backup is a completely agentless solution.

A Service Manager at a tech services company values its stability, scalability, and good technical support.

NetApp

Sample Customers

University of La Verne

Information Not Available

Buyer's Guide

Iron Mountain Connect vs. NetApp Cloud Backup

April 2025

Free Report: Iron Mountain Connect vs. NetApp Cloud Backup

Find out what your peers are saying about Iron Mountain Connect vs. NetApp Cloud Backup and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

847,772 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Iron Mountain Connect vs. NetApp Cloud Backup 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.