Veritas InfoScale Availability vs Windows Server Failover Clustering comparison

Veritas and Microsoft are both solutions in the High Availability Clustering category. Veritas is ranked #3, while Microsoft is ranked #1 with an average rating of 8.0. Veritas holds a 25.6% mindshare in HAC, compared to Microsoft’s 29.0% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Veritas users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Microsoft users who would recommend it.

Veritas InfoScale Availability

Read 2 Veritas InfoScale Availability reviews

594 Views
356 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Windows Server Failover Clu...

Read 8 Windows Server Failover Clustering reviews

1,321 Views
504 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Veritas InfoScale Availability

Windows Server Failover Clu...

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Veritas InfoScale Availability and Windows Server Failover Clustering based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out in this report how the two High Availability Clustering solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.

To learn more, read our detailed Veritas InfoScale Availability vs. Windows Server Failover Clustering Report (Updated: December 2024).

Buyer's Guide

Veritas InfoScale Availability vs. Windows Server Failover Clustering

December 2024

Download the complete report

Helped 824,053 peers since 2012

Categories and Ranking

Veritas InfoScale Availability

Ranking in High Availability Clustering

3rd

Average Rating

8.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Windows Server Failover Clu...

Ranking in High Availability Clustering

1st

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

5.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of December 2024, in the High Availability Clustering category, the mindshare of Veritas InfoScale Availability is 25.6%, up from 22.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Windows Server Failover Clustering is 29.0%, down from 35.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

High Availability Clustering

Featured Reviews

it_user281973

Storage and VMware Expert at a comms service provider with 1,001-5,000 employees

It provides a stable SAP environment, but deployment does require someone with experience.

It offers High Availability for many applications, including Oracle and SAP environment In my last job, it provided a great SAP environment that was stable and running on Veritas Cluster. I've used it for six years. It's not so easy in some cases, and you will need some experience. There were…

Read full review

Barry Liou

Project Manager at IDPoints Ltd.

An affordable solution for warehousing but lacks scalability

We use the solution for warehouse purposes. We built an SQL server on the solution The solution has a hot-swap feature. If one of the servers fails, we’ll still have a running system. It takes a few seconds to swap to the other server. The system has no interruption and is highly available. The…

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

"It integrates well with other solutions."

"The product is stable."

"The most valuable feature is the ability to easily create clusters supporting geo-redundancy."

"The solution switches over to another server in case the server goes down."

"The most valuable features of Windows Server Failover Clustering are the ISS, failover cluster, and DC."

"Some of the advantages, are it can give you the ability to choose."

"The reliability is pretty good."

Cons

"It could be more stable and more secure."

"There are times when we do the system security updates and have to restart the server which is difficult because we need to wait until the end of the day or when working hours are finished. There are service updates that have a requirement to restart the system and it is not convenient."

"The product should be less dependent on network configuration."

"The stability is good, except for when something crashes or shuts down unexpectedly, then it can be a bit difficult to reestablish the service in a stable state."

"The tool's pricing is high."

"They could drop the price or improve the cost of the hyper-converged component of it all. Right now, licensing is expensive and complex."

"The standard, non-enterprise technical support could be improved."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Our clients pay for licensing on a yearly basis."

"We are on an annual license to use this solution."

"I would rate the solution's pricing an eight out of ten."

"So if you acquire the Windows server license, you will also get all of the Windows services licenses."

"The functionality is included in Windows Server licences."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which High Availability Clustering solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

824,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

23%

Computer Software Company

14%

Insurance Company

10%

Retailer

Computer Software Company

18%

Financial Services Firm

17%

Government

Manufacturing 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 do you like most about Windows Server Failover Clustering?

The product is stable.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Windows Server Failover Clustering?

There is no extra charge except a service fee for some professional work. I rate the product’s pricing a five out of ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Windows Server Failover Clustering?

The solution uses external storage, while third-party solutions don't use external storage. They're using a mirror to create a partition on each server and synchronize the data in the background. I...

See all answers

Comparisons

IBM PowerHA System Mirror vs Veritas InfoScale Availability

Compared 19% of the time

HPE Serviceguard vs Veritas InfoScale Availability

Compared 18% of the time

DRBD vs Veritas InfoScale Availability

Compared 15% of the time

More Veritas InfoScale Availability Competitors

DRBD vs Windows Server Failover Clustering

Compared 22% of the time

HPE Serviceguard vs Windows Server Failover Clustering

Compared 16% of the time

IBM PowerHA System Mirror vs Windows Server Failover Clustering

Compared 14% of the time

More Windows Server Failover Clustering Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

High Availability Clustering

November 2024

Download Veritas InfoScale Availability product report

Buyer's Guide

Windows Server Failover Clustering

November 2024

Windows Server Failover Clustering report

Download Windows Server Failover Clustering product report

Also Known As

InfoScale Availability, Veritas Cluster Server, Veritas InfoScale, Veritas VCS, InfoScale

No data available

Learn More

Veritas

Microsoft

Overview

Veritas InfoScale is a workload-centric storage virtualization solution that abstracts applications from their underlying infrastructure, enabling enterprise-grade functionality around business continuity, performance optimization, orchestration and agility.

Windows Server Failover Clustering provides infrastructure features that support the high-availability and disaster recovery scenarios of hosted server applications such as Microsoft SQL Server and Microsoft Exchange. If a cluster node or service fails, the services that were hosted on that node can be automatically or manually transferred to another available node in a process known as failover.

Sample Customers

Wayne State University, Zenith Mart

Karl-Franzens-Universit_t Graz, NAV CANADA, Magnachip, ólectricit_ de France, Cambridgeshire Constabulary, Bank Alfalah Ltd., Local Government Association of Queensland

Buyer's Guide

Veritas InfoScale Availability vs. Windows Server Failover Clustering

December 2024

Free Report: Veritas InfoScale Availability vs. Windows Server Failover Clustering

Find out what your peers are saying about Veritas InfoScale Availability vs. Windows Server Failover Clustering and other solutions. Updated: December 2024.

DOWNLOAD NOW

824,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Veritas InfoScale Availability vs. Windows Server Failover Clustering report.

See our list of best High Availability Clustering vendors.

We monitor all High Availability Clustering 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.