Dell NetWorker Reviews

We are using Dell NetWorker in our ITC Limited to restore and manage data effectively. We have restored ten years of data with it.

Dell NetWorker has been effective and provides a good way to handle large-scale recovery tasks.

The most valuable features of Dell NetWorker are its reliability, performance, application data security, and encryption process. The compression ratio is very flexible for designing all the required policies for backup.

Dell NetWorker's support requires some experienced personnel to handle issues. In some cases, solutions are not found in one method of call and it escalates to many levels until an experienced person can join to resolve the issue.

I have been working with Dell NetWorker for the last five years.

I have no complaints regarding the stability of Dell NetWorker, and I find it to be an eight out of ten for stability.

I rate the scalability of Dell NetWorker an eight out of ten.

I haven't found solutions in the first call in some cases, indicating that the support team needs more experience and expertise. However, I have had mostly positive experiences with support.

Positive

I have previously worked with Veeam. I found the data compression ratio is very high in Veeam.

The initial setup is easy, and I rate it a nine out of ten for ease of setup.

I can do the deployment myself without anyone's help.

I am not sure about the exact pricing, but it seems to be nominal and reasonable.

I evaluated Veeam before switching to Dell NetWorker.

I recommend using Dell NetWorker due to its reliability, scalability, security, and convenience.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

We have used the solution largely for backups, including all our databases and UX machines.

The solution offers very good backups and has all of the basic features any other solution would have on offer. 

There's tight integration between Data Domain and NetWorker as well. Data Domain is an EMC product. They have very good integration between the two.

The initial setup is simple. 

Its stability is very good. 

The solution can scale. 

The web console could be a lot better. All the customers are dependent on a separate console server. If they want to access NetWorker, they need to have a separate console server to access the management window. I know they've come up with a browser-based management site in order to monitor day-to-day backups and to perform the administration or the setup within the web console. Yet, for the web-based console, they still need to do some improvements.

The documentation could be better. I find the solution is not properly documented. If you want to set up a SharePoint, there are certain steps to be followed, which I have to discover myself, I have to find out myself, which was not found in those installation setup guides. That's something I would suggest. We have already passed this suggestion to Dell EMC, letting them know that there are a few steps missing. The documentation was not properly maintained or properly updated. Previously, the older documentation was good. However, it seems that now, when they update and move forward it's not properly documented.

I've been using the solution for ten years. 

It's stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable and the performance is good.

The solution can scale. We only need to get an additional license if we want to do a scaling of our infrastructure. We just need to buy the capacity we need. We can just upgrade the RAM in case it needs additional resources also. We can even deploy another NetWorker server. 

Scaling is purely based on capacity. You don't have to buy it per server either as most of the servers are virtualized. As you have the socket license and the capacity license, then you can actually deploy a new server.

We have more than 1,000 users on the solution right now. 

We've used EMC, Veeam, and Rubrik.

We do have Rubrik and I set up Rubrik a few months back, and it's working fine. 

EMC, in terms of cost, is more expansive. I would definitely go for NetWorker instead as, when you compare it with the Veritas NetBackup, NetWorker is cheaper. Rubrik is cheaper than NetWorker, however, with  Rubrik, we're only using it to back up our VMs. For the other kinds of workloads, such as Exchange or SharePoint, we are still using NetWorker.

The initial setup is not complex. It's straightforward. Once you have all your prerequisites ready, then you are good to go.

As integrators, we are able to handle the initial setup. We handled the setup ourselves mostly in-house. 

I don't have any information on the ROI.

We'll have the solution for about five years. I can't say how much it will cost in total. 

We are users and integrators as well. 

My advice would be to have, once you have started to use it, something more on the Windows-based tools. If you see the commands, all those commands are as if you're running a query. The underlying structure of NetWorker is a skill database, so it's actually running on a skill database. Mostly you'll be running some queries, or querying commands to get the reports using the command prompt. For someone who is familiar with Windows, they'll find it very easy to use.

I'd rate the solution a nine out of ten. 

We have a centralized data domain system with a 100% virtualized environment. The product helps us with VM Backup, NAS system backup, and file system backup.

The product is a good backup solution and has helped our organization in most data storage scenarios.

Dell NetWorker's valuable feature is its ability to configure the network for immutability, specifically for backups. It is the most essential feature nowadays. We can take immediate backups. It has a good compression ratio as well.

The NDMP backups, especially NAS, could be optimal. We receive complaints from various vendors related to its slow performance. Additionally, it required full backups and configuration every week or two. There could be a possibility of constructing full backups from incremental data intelligently, similar to TSM. Further, they could adopt a progressive backup methodology.

We have been using Dell NetWorker for six years.

I rate the product's stability a seven out of ten.

I rate the platform's stability a seven out of ten.

The technical support services are good, especially when we have connected with the right individuals or specialists.

The decision to move from TSM to Dell NetWorker was primarily driven by Dell/EMC infrastructure use. We wanted to maintain a unified vendor approach across the entire converged infrastructure.

The initial setup is straightforward. However, PPDM is a lot easier to deploy than NetWorker.

We never encountered any challenges for data backup and restore. It is a big advantage considering the return on investment.

It is inexpensive compared to new products like Rubrik or Cohesity. They offer discounts to government organizations.

We have to keep Dell NetWorker updated as many security fixes need to be done. With everything shifting to the cloud, the organization beginning with the transition should consider hybrid solutions. This approach will help them back up both the cloud and on-premise versions in a hybrid environment.

I rate it a seven out of ten.

We just use it for one purpose only, and that is to take our core banking database, Oracle, and take the RMAN backup. It is not used for any other purpose, only for taking the core banking software's Oracle database backup using RMAN.

Automation has been beneficial as we set criteria like old backups and retention periods, allowing NetWorker to function well with minimal interruption or maintenance required.

It is a little bit faster, and the storage time is better. Taking backups is faster.

Management of the software is a little bit hazy and not easy. We have to find where the administration features are located.

We may continue to use it in the future because it comes with PowerStore as backup software.

It's automated well, however, we faced occasional issues like partial upgrades causing disruptions.

We faced some issues with support. The engineers took too long to provide support, causing problems like backup stops and the need for manual backups.

Neutral

We also use Commvault in parallel; its features are better than NetWorker. Commvault is easier to manage, and restoration is simpler and faster. However, Commvault has a problem as it's hosted only on Windows Server, which is a security risk for us since we prefer Linux or Unix platforms.

We purchased our product in a bundle, so I can't specify the exact price. Dell bundled it with XtremIO, or previously we used Clarion CX4, and then XtremIO came. Now it comes with PowerStore. Therefore, I cannot precisely state NetWorker's exact price.

We use Commvault alongside NetWorker. Commvault is more manageable, with a faster restoration time and smarter features.

Due to support issues, I would not recommend NetWorker. Commvault's features are preferable. Although Commvault has a limitation of being hosted only in Windows Server, which poses a security risk, it is still more efficient.

I'd rate the solution six out of ten.

We use Dell NetWorker to back up data from several databases and virtual machines.

The software’s best feature is data backup for any system. Using it, we can back up virtual machines, servers, different applications, and modules.

While upgrading to a new version, we encounter challenges related to specific algorithms or code regulations. It causes problems if the new version is incompatible with the old authentication method or existing modules. Thus, we have to conduct non-integration tests.

It requires a specific server or a specific NRA and GNLP download to configure the application. This setup is time-consuming, especially when compared to modern web-based tools. It could be better.

Additionally, its support services need improvement. When we log a case, it takes a long time to resolve it. There could be more experienced engineers in their team.

We have been using Dell NetWorker for ten years.

The product could be more stable. Sometimes, we need to restart the server every week. That is the reason we are looking for other tools.

We have less than ten users for Dell NetWorker.

Dell NetWorkers’ technical support services need improvement.

The initial setup process is easy. The time taken for deployment depends on the kind of tool we want to integrate. Some configurations, including integration with data domain, on-premise, and on-cloud, are complicated. It took us a few weeks to complete the process. The software is simple to set up and has an OVA system allowing employees to configure IP addresses. Although, it is challenging to backup the device or library.

It is a relatively inexpensive product compared to NetBackup.

It is a good product. It has interconnection with different vendors. I recommend it to others. It offers a lot of documentation for a better understanding of configurations and modules.

I rate it a seven out of ten. There are many areas of improvement, including functionality and support.

Dell NetWorker is mostly used for backup solutions, and it was quite good and easy to work with.

Dell NetWorker's user interface is quite simple and very interactive. The solution's user interface is easy to manipulate or maneuver around.

The solution could be graphically better.

I have been using Dell NetWorker for five years.

I rate Dell NetWorker ten out of ten for stability.

Our clients for Dell NetWorker are mostly enterprise businesses.

I rate the solution ten out of ten for scalability.

It took a while the last time I tried to get support, but once I got connected to the support, it was quite easy. I had a few challenges in the beginning, but it didn't take long once the communication was established.

Positive

On a scale from one to ten, where one is difficult and ten is easy, I rate the solution's initial setup an eight out of ten.

It takes a couple of minutes to install the server and the agents, but the solution's deployment doesn't take long.

On a scale from one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive, I rate the solution's pricing an eight out of ten.

Dell NetWorker has supported our client's daily backup operations in a good manner. It's quite easy to use Dell NetWorker for disaster recovery processes. It is straightforward and requires a couple of steps, unlike other solutions where you'd have to go through too many options. Dell NetWorker allows me to examine the endpoints for data protection needs.

Dell NetWorker's deduplication functionality is way better than what we get on Veeam. The implementation of Dell NetWorker has positively affected our overall IT infrastructure performance. I would recommend the solution to other users.

Overall, I rate Dell NetWorker ten out of ten.

Dell NetWorker is used as a backup and recovery solution.

Feature-wise, the most valuable ones stem from the fact that it is the most flexible and easiest backup for your virtual machines, along with being the backup of a wide range of databases using modules.

The API side of the solution has certain shortcomings. However, I don't think much improvement because we already have APIs in place, but I think there is a scope to improve the API side.

I have been using Dell NetWorker for seven to eight years. Also, I am using the solution's latest version.

In my experience, I haven't seen many issues with the network, though there are some incidents that come up here and there. I don't see any regular issues until you have good resources. I mean, resources like CPU, RAM, and all.

It is scalable software. All you need to increase is its RAM and CPU. It's pretty easy. Apart from that, if it's the backend, where the data is stored on the data domain, it is again a scalable product.

Most large enterprises use the solution. With the storage and with the databases, Dell NetWorker has a wide range of modules to cover these databases and backups.

I contacted technical support. It's always there in any product. Usually, for backup failures, we contact support. The support you get depends on the support level that the customer takes. You have dedicated support and normal line support. Customers can always ask to escalate.

The initial setup is easy. As you go on to configure the databases, multiple teams are involved, like the database team, the Unix team, and the backup team. Even then, it's pretty easy and straightforward unless you run into some infrastructure issues.

The solution is deployed on the cloud and on-premises.

The time for deployment depends on the size of the environment. If it's a small environment, and everything is in place and works, it takes just two or three hours. If the customer has a larger enterprise, then, obviously, it will increase because you need to install extra storage nodes.

The issues are not straightforward. For example, with the issues in the documentation, there are other products where if you get an error, it's completely code-based, or error codes, so it's pretty easy. Going through the document of Dell NetWorker, I see it's a bit different. You need to dig into the issues.

I rate the overall solution a nine point seven or nine point eight out of ten.

I've been using this solution for backups and restoration.

Backup reliability for this solution is fine. It's good.

Dell EMC NetWorker is still not mature, compared to its competitors. For example: the TSM (Tivoli Storage Manager) of IBM is very accurate in error logs, and it is very rare to get failure alerts when using the TSM. It's fast and reliable which I didn't see from Dell EMC NetWorker. Another example is the Veritas which I also have experience with. Though Veritas is lower in level compared to the TSM, Veritas is more user-friendly than the TSM.

All features for Dell EMC NetWorker are good, but they are not something to be happy about.

Sometimes this solution shows some errors, e.g. related to open files. It is based on Java, which is very bad. There's so many issues not reflecting what's really happening in the background.

Reporting is very bad in Dell EMC NetWorker. It's also very difficult to get whatever you need based on the backup time duration.

Dell EMC NetWorker has so many versions in a short span of time, which contain a lot of bugs that need to be fixed because each upgrade has its own issues. For every new update of this solution, bugs get fixed, but something new, e.g. a new bug comes up in each version which needs to be fixed. 

I've been using Dell EMC NetWorker for four years.

This solution is 95% stable.

This solution is scalable. It's easy to scale. The only thing that matters in terms of scalability is the storage for the data domain, e.g. adding the disk and another unit, and that's it.

Support, especially from the Middle East region, is very bad. Sometimes support is good, but it's usually bad.

Setting up Dell EMC NetWorker is not complex. The setup was straightforward.

We implemented this solution internally, with guidance from the Dell team.

The price for this solution is cheaper than other products. The price is the only reason we are renewing, otherwise we'll be moving to Veeam.

I evaluated IBM TSM (Tivoli Storage Manager) and Veritas.

We deployed Dell EMC NetWorker to 300 machines. It took us six to seven months to stabilize all issues during the upgrade and complete the deployment.

We only did maintenance for the upgrade and for versions such as the kernel, or the code slash code upgrade, or the version of the software. No major maintenance was needed for this solution.

There are two users in our company working with Dell EMC NetWorker. The backup is a daily process, while administration is not done on a daily basis. For checking and reviewing errors and failures, this solution is used daily.

Usage will depend on the company: how much activity they have and the types of activity they have, e.g. registration or development through IT.

The main reasons we're thinking of switching from Dell EMC NetWorker to another product include the reporting, support, and the bugs. There are so many issues we find annoying which require additional resources.

My advice to people looking into implementing this solution is that for big environments, it's so complicated. For example, for a clustered environment, you have a clustered environment for Oracle RAC, where you have so many firewalls in between, but Dell EMC NetWorker is not mature enough to handle that kind of environment and setup. Oracle RAC works well in big environments, but not this solution. Dell EMC NetWorker would be good for smaller environments where it won't be heavily used. We are an airline company with 300 machines, but we're not comparable to a big company like Google.

My rating for Dell EMC NetWorker is a seven out of ten.