Dell NetWorker Reviews

Dell NetWorker is primarily used on customers' off-site premises to take backups from core servers. Although we are a solution provider and not the direct user, Dell NetWorker is effective in taking backups and is used in customer environments. It helps our clients by providing reliable backup solutions.

NetWorker is easy to install on clients and servers, and making backups from server to storage and backup devices is straightforward.

The challenge with Dell NetWorker lies in its deployment over virtualized environments. Ports are not visible to the network, which requires a dedicated physical server. Improving this feature could greatly enhance usability.

We have been using Dell NetWorker since 2022 or 2021, for the last three years.

NetWorker is stable and provides a means for seamless backups from various devices.

Initial setup can be completed in approximately three working days, depending on the server and backup devices involved.

We have a dedicated team for the implementation which is well-versed in virtualization, servers, and storage connectivity. The team includes more than sixty engineers in various specialized domains.

They should improve the visibility of network ports when Dell NetWorker is deployed over virtualized environments.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

The main benefits of Dell NetWorker include its efficient incremental backup windows and the comprehensive training available for protecting various environments using NetWorker and Data Domain.

It offers seamless integration and can handle many VMs without adding workload or requiring additional backup time.

It provides a more convenient solution because it can integrate with multiple applications.

To integrate with the library and Oracle, we must make multiple changes to the OS and the database. However, with another solution, we only need to install the backup software, configure it, and run the backup without any changes to the OS. 

I encountered an issue with Insight, but by using the VR backup, I rebuilt the indexes and successfully brought the server up on the VR side.

It is stable.

It is scalable. 2000 servers are using this solution.

I've handled around 2,200 backups, and the high compression rates are impressive, achieving up to 99% deduplication and compression. This greatly increases capacity, reduces costs, and improves efficiency. From my experience, using the Avakapindi tool is the best approach. However, when it comes to Dell NetWorker, some challenges exist, particularly with integrating applications like SaaS and EVR. While integration with more straightforward databases like MySQL is manageable, advanced databases and applications like MongoDB, SAP, DB2, and Postgres are challenging to install and understand, especially from a DBA perspective.

Another issue is that with NetWorker, everything must be managed directly on the server. You can't install the agent or manage backups and restores from the front end; you must log in to the server. This is inconvenient for cloud providers, where accessing the server directly isn't always an option. Ideally, all backup and restore activities should be possible without server access, but with NetWorker, server-side limitations require logging in for updates, agent installation, and other tasks.

Most of the customers who are using NetWorker have a data domain.

Ultimate verification software is very useful for installing the networker in our environment. Deploying this solution takes two to three hours and three people.

It was easy to bring up and monitor the server, making it feasible in our environment. For example, it can be done despite encountering a couple of issues.

Pricing is considerable. We often need to purchase Data Domain to obtain the necessary licenses for NetWorker. Typically, they purchase Data Domain and then get the licenses for NetWorker and Avamar as part of the package.

Data Domain is a powerful solution, especially when integrated with Zenfone. It delivers the best backup performance and superior data aggregation and compression ratios unmatched by other backup solutions. One more thing to add is that achieving high performance during the backup window and optimizing deduplication and compression can greatly enhance the overall process. However, this can also impact the speed and efficiency of data restores.

I recommend the solution.

Overall, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

The software is quite complicated and useful for large corporations using different information systems, like different databases and applications. NetWorker is good for many agents from different software applications. Dell has decided to launch a new software called PowerProtect, so they might close NetWorker in the future.

NetWorker, you can realize any architecture with NetWorker because it's a comprehensive solution. They have many agents for other applications.

NetWorker's major problem is its legacy software. Legato was the company that invented NetWorker in the early '90s, and in keeping the product line all these years, Dell has many legacy features that they cannot drop because their customers still use them.

These legacy features are a problem when it comes to integration. In supporting these features, it's difficult for Dell to implement new features because Many of them use kernels that are not optimal. This could be why they decided to launch a new product line.

I've used Dell NetWorker for about eight years.

Dell NetWorker is quite stable.

Dell NetWorker's scalability is good. My company has several thousands of users.

Dell's tech support was great.

We previously used Veeam, which was good for virtual infrastructure.

The ease of initial setup depends on your experience. The concept of NetWorker is slightly different from NetBackup, for example. If you have enough education about the product and understand the administration and installation procedures, it's quite easy. The time taken to set up the product depends on how complex the infrastructure is.

We use a license without a time term. We just need to buy additional support when needed.

In Russia, we have some problems with the presence of Western vendors here, so we have no support from US companies. I doubt anybody will increase the number of licenses or expand the installation because that involves support from the vendor.

I rate Dell NetWorker an eight out of ten. I recommend the solution.

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.

We mostly use this solution for file-based backups. 

We are a global company. We use NetWorker and other backup products throughout the world. We have a very close and long-term relationship with the EMC Networker and we are not going anywhere. We have roughly 30 to 40 TB of data stored with them.

We use this solution daily.

We have scheduled backups, daily, weekly, and monthly and we use the dashboard as a monitoring tool; if there is a failure, we can reconnect all the operational activity.

I don't directly do the backups, my backup administrator coordinates with EMC regarding all configurations, upgrades, and operational needs.

Storage-wise, EMC is user-friendly.

The configuration is too complex. As a backup solution, it's not user-friendly.

I have been using EMC NetWorker since 2014.

Dell EMC NetWorker is stable. We don't have any issues scalability-wise, but configuring and upgrading are complex.

Scaling out is very easy. We have a capacity-based license so we have no issues with the scalability.

I personally don't deal with customer support but due to multiple unsuccessful attempts to upgrade, my administrator is not satisfied.

We are using Microsoft BPM in parallel; it's not an enterprise backup solution, but it is an alternate solution. EMC is a one-vendor solution — that's why we chose it, but it is not a good backup solution, it's a complex solution.

The initial setup is complex. Currently, my team is doing an upgrade and they are having a lot of trouble. They have attempted it multiple times but are still unable to complete the upgrade.

We are located in Pakistan, we have a vendor that supports and guides us. The configuration and upgrades are not simple compared to storage and other uses; it's much more complex.

We have our own team that takes care of all maintenance-related issues.

We're using a capacity-based license. My administrator can take backups as per we have the license. Our license includes support and maintenance. 

In my opinion, Networker is not a very good product. It's very complex compared to Veeam and other products. In short, we needed a single bundle solution, that's why we chose Networker. Overall, I think Veeam is better.

I don't recommend it because of its complexity and the updates, etc. We don't recommend that anyone uses Networker. We recommend looking into Veeam or another solution.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give Networker a rating of five.

I primarily use NetWorker to back up over 1,200 virtual machines and over fifty databases. 

NetWorker's most valuable feature is recovery, including the policy-based backups that can be configured.

Currently, the NetWorker server only supports the Windows server bare-metal recovery, so an improvement would be built-in support for Linux and UNIX BMR. In the next release, NetWorker should include support for container backups and Kubernetes.

I've been using NetWorker for over ten years.

NetWorker's stability and reliability are very good, but it still needs monitoring by external software solutions to be maintained properly. NetWorker requires monitoring by the backup administrator to check for failed backups, and it also sometimes has issues pop up that require patching.

NetWorker isn't scalable - you can't add more nodes to it, although you can add some data zones. If you want to add environments to NetWorker, you have to deploy more standalone solutions. 

I'm very satisfied with Dell's technical support. It's very easy to open an SR and get support from them, and whenever we open a request, we get a response, and they ensure our issue is resolved.

The initial setup is a little complex as you have to deploy a virtual machine or  NetWorker on a physical server, depending on your architecture and environment. However, once that operating system is deployed, the NetWorker installation is quite simple. The deployment takes about half an hour, but the integration with the virtual machines and the environment takes two to three weeks.

We used a partner team.

I'd advise anybody thinking of implementing NetWorker to look at their environment, virtualization solutions, and infrastructure requirements and then decide how their environment should be designed. They should also consult with the EMC architect who will be designing the data zones and will be responsible for migrating their environments. I would give NetWorker a rating of seven out of ten.

I was hired as a solution architect and implementation specialist for this solution. We are maintaining this solution for a customer in Hamburg, Germany.

I am working with an SAP on Oracle solution at the moment.

Our customers use this solution for backup and disaster recovery.

The usual deployment model for this solution is on-premise.

The most valuable features for us at the moment are NFS, file system backup, and IP backup.

The main problem that we are having had to do with stability. We are looking forward to better stability in future versions.

Our customers often ask for better integration with Microsoft Exchange.

Stability is something that needs to be improved.

This is a highly scalable solution, but on a larger scale, it is not very stable.

I was contracted to migrate our client's disaster recovery environment from Tivoli Storage Manager to EMC NetWorker.

The solution itself was easy to set up, but configuring a global disaster recovery environment was quite complex.

I am a consultant who implements these solutions for our clients.

When it comes to choosing this solution, it depends on the environment and the scenarios that you're focused on. There are many advantages with EMC NetWorker compared to other disaster recovery solutions, but the software is lacking in some areas that other vendors focus on. It really depends on what you want to get from the solution.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

Primary use is a mixed and match backups, which include my file server, the Linux server as well as a the SQLs. As of now, we won't have that much of a challenge. But, sometimes it was required to make some manual intervention for any additional things. With Networker, we are having DD 25 MB as a back up solution. In addition, we are keeping the backup. So, currently it is working.

Earlier, we used the Veritas backup solution. Before, we had a lot of manual steps. Now, with Networker, we do not have those steps.

Currently, the best feature is the DR replication for us. So, whatever data we are taking in the backup, it will get replicated end of day to our DR site.

In Rubrik, we were getting less time for backup the things because snapshot feature is there. So we asked that our EMC account manager help us. He suggested some block based backup, but we have seen that it won't stand as compared to the rubric snapshot back up. Rubrik and Veeam has the directly cloud interface. So, you have to just  configure the credentials for the cloud access and you can start taking the backup from Rubrik, which means the local backup is after schedule. So currently we don't think there is anything  like this with the Networker. We would like Networker to have a cloud side approach, which it does not currently have.

In addition, we have been facing some problems what with the initial configuration. I heard that Networker has released some beta versions. 

The stability is not so good, in the middle range.  Within the last 3 months, we were having some issues while just storing the backup. But it has been resolved within a one to two weeks. In regards to another case, it took a bit longer.

This solution is bundled with this DD 2500. But, there is some limitation for scalability of the DD 2500 shells. I can add only one more single shell, and that is a limitation.

We have used them, but we need to renew the service.

I have used Rubrik and Veeam in the past.

The implementation was difficult and, due to some reason, it was not done properly and we had to suffer a lot. The problems were only rectified only a month ago, after multiple follow- up with EMC teams.

When considering a vendor, I think it is key to find a solution that has:

• Minimal manual intervention
• Low cost

Any person who is going to be installing this product should have full knowledge, and they should deploy whatever most valuable features are there. They have to explain it to the end-user and get it utilized for them.

The low cost is important.

Dell EMC Networker is really the best in the market! After evaluating the solutions, we automatically decided to use this solution.