Dell NetWorker Reviews

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.

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.

I use the solution in my company as it is a product that has been sold to many customers, especially to those who need a foolproof, solid, and stable backup and restoration solution.

The use case for Dell NetWorker has been for customers with at least 60 to 75 machines for which they need a backup tool, and after that, it can go up to a couple of thousand machines. The product is useful for those who require a working solution without much technical fixing needed to make it work. The tool's restoration part is the most important, which allows users to check if the restore part is working properly with Dell NetWorker's help. The aforementioned reasons prompted me to continue selling the product to our company's customers.

The most valuable feature of the solution is a function in Dell NetWorker that works if the data that you are supposed to restore is resilient. If the data you want to restore is incomplete, then it has some functionality that will restore everything that is okay and skip the part that is not okay, so you get almost everything back.

Based on my experience, it was tricky to get support when I started working with the tool. The support is an area with concerns where improvements are required. Once the product starts working, users get good support.

I have been using Dell NetWorker since 1997.

It is an extremely stable product.

The scalability part of the product is very positive since you can scale it up or down as much as you like without any limitations.

In Sweden, where I used the tool, there were around a hundred users.

It was tricky to get the support to start working on your problem, but once you get to contact them, they offer professional help quickly.

I had technicians and engineers in my company to take care of the setup part of the product. The setup process of the product was straightforward. 

The product's setup phase can be completed in a day. My company hands over the product to the customer once they learn how it works.

The product can be deployed on an on-premises model. It can be deployed in the cloud or on-premises.

Earlier, users had to make yearly payments towards the licensing costs of the product. The licenses were expensive, but users used to get the best device to use.

My company did evaluate other products like Backup Exec, NetBackup, and IBM Tivoli Storage Manager against Dell NetWorker. My company chose to work with Dell NetWorker because of the backup and restoration speed that it offered, along with stability.

During my experience with the product, it did not have the deduplication feature in it unless you bought Dell EMC Data Domain and hardware appliance.

It is a really stable product and is one of the best solutions in the market. Based on my experience, the product has no limitations.

Dell NetWorker released a new version many years ago to cover a new operating system's latest version, but it didn't work. My company had to face a lot of problems with our customers until Dell acknowledged the problem and the fact that there was a need to do a little bit more work. The aforementioned area consists of the details of when I faced some issues with the product.

The benefit of having Dell NetWorker in infrastructure was to ensure that there was a backup and restore environment that was stable, worked well, and could deliver when needed.

I rate the overall tool a nine 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 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.

The primary use cases are file system backup, endpoint backup, and virtualization backups.

We are using it with Quantum and Dell Data Domain.

The GUI is user-friendly.

The performance is improving. It used to be that NetWorker's performance was not very good but after integration with Data Domain, and after they switched to a quality-based network solution, the performance increased.

Over the past five to six years, the speed that NetWorker connects between networks and servers has improved. It used to take a long time.

We are using DD Boost and it is helpful.

The integration of the web API should be improved. There has been new functionality added to the API but it should be easier to understand.

The Backup module should be improved, especially the functionality for SharePoint and SQL Server. We are having issues when we are trying to backup up Microsoft applications, and it happens when the data is very large. For example, our database is 19 terabytes and this is very large for NetWorker, so it runs slowly. We are not able to tune it and segment it. If it were a file system, then we could split it into smaller pieces. In cases like this, it is very fast. However, because we are not able to divide it, the backup is slow. This is one area that can be improved because often, people don't need to take a full backup. Sometimes, then just want a snapshot of some data.

The capability of incremental backups should be included. As it is now, when DD Boost tries to compare the current backup with the previous one, it has trouble with the large versions and it can take three to four days. They cannot perform an incremental backup using VSS technology for SharePoint or MS SQL Server. Definitely, backup for Microsoft applications needs to be improved.

They should improve the support for backing up containers.

The process of upgrading versions should be improved because as it is now, you have to completely uninstall the old version first, and then install the new version. If we compare this to another product, like Veritas NetBackup, it also has good features but when you upgrade to the latest version, everything is automatic.

I would like to see better cloud integration, such as with AWS or Azure.

I have been using Dell EMC NetWorker since 2007.

I am not in the operations team right now, but my impression is that it's stable.

It is easy to scale and I have not found any issue in doing so. However, there can be issues when a proper sizing tool hasn't been used. We have had trouble with giving requirements based on what the sizing tool reports.

We have approximately 100 people user NetWorker and supporting the customers.

The technical support from Dell is very good and very fast. We have a very good collaboration with Dell, and we are one of the valued partners.

I have been dealing with issues related to one of the solutions that we have provided. One of the ones in the past two months is that the SharePoint Backup was supposed to be done using the Microsoft SQL Server writer. They do not support the third-party's product, which is fine, but it's an accountability issue. Ultimately, I don't think that they do all of the investigations properly.

We are currently using EMC Avamar in addition to NetWorker.

I have also worked with Commvault and Veeam, and the integration with virtualization is better with these products. They also support backup using VPN, which is something that NetWorker lacks.

I cannot name a feature that NetWorker has that you don't find in other products. There are, however, features lacking in NetWorker that do exist in other products. They need to keep pace with the ongoing requirements that are in the market.

I have been working with this product for a long time, so I find the installation very easy. This is also an area that has improved over time, as it has because easier than it used to be.

The length of time required for deployment varies between environments. Recently, I deployed it and it took approximately 20 minutes end-to-end, with configuration.

We deploy with our in-house team. Our operations team is responsible for maintenance.

The pricing for NetWorker is in the mid-range. It is not very expensive and not very cheap. There are some extra features that required an additional license. For example, we save a separate data protection suite (DPS) license.

I have been evaluating EMC PowerProtect to compare the performance of it with EMC NetWorker.

For a file system backup or one that is on disk or in a tape library, or for virtualization, I recommend using NetWorker. I say this because of ease of deployment, ease of use, and the user-friendly GUI. 

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.