Dell NetWorker Reviews

We provide this solution to our customers and we are partners with Dell. I'm an information consultant. 

The valuable features are scalability, virtual environment protection, and the migration to OneCloud feature. All the features are excellent. 

This is an expensive solution, in addition to which, the interface is not user-friendly. We're sometimes looking for a feature on one interface and it's on another. It would be helpful if they would centralize everything on one interface.

I've been using this solution for two years. 

The solution is stable. 

The solution is scalable.

Dell support is the best in the world. 

The initial setup is very complex but once that's done, the rest is easy. We've deployed this solution to 10 customers. 

NetWorker is a very expensive solution. 

I usually compare NetWorker with NetBackup which comes with IBM Spectrum Connect. I think NetBackup is a better solution. In our country, it's only the communication operators who use this solution because they have more data to manage every day.

This solution is suitable for enterprise-size organizations. I usually only provide NetWorker as an option if the customer asks for it. If it were my choice, I would recommend Veeam or IBM Spectrum Protect.

I rate the product six out of 10. 

Usually, you can use this product to do the backups for almost everything. For first-party products, like SAP, it works well. It's good for security and protection and offers a repository for backups. 

The possibility of recovering up-to-the-moment data is very useful. You can have any backup registry onsite. There's a special database, which will contain all index orders. The only thing you have to do is set up the backup medium with the proper backup. It's very easy to use.

There is really broad coverage as to what can be protected. That's the thing from the point of view of the usage and from the point of view of the technology itself. It's very important how it can operate easily and how it can be integrated with Data Domain.

Once it's set up properly, it works very smoothly. It's a pretty straightforward setup.

The solution is stable. 

It has lots of great features, and we don't find anything lacking. 

It is very scalable. 

The interface could have a different appearance. It could be green or blue instead, for example. 

Users need to have specific knowledge of the product before they jump in and use it. 

I've used the solution for 21 years. 

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

It's scalable. You can scale on one single computer up to hundreds of them on computers, or thousands of virtual machines with the same Networker products.

Typically, issues are escalated to me, and I deal with problems on my own. However, I have been in touch with support. They are helpful and responsive. 

Positive

I've also worked with Avamar. 

For the DevOps environment, I would prefer to go with Avamar. However, if I needed to set up something at the enterprise level, I'd prefer Networker.

The initial setup is very straightforward and simple. It's not difficult to set up at all. 

Backup systems are one of the most tricky to maintain as there are so many factors that can influence the backup process. Not only the backup - also the computers themselves, the operating systems, can play a role. It takes a moderate level of maintenance.

I can't speak to the actual pricing of the product. 

I'm working with the latest version of the product.

I'd advise new users to know the product before you start to implement it. Very often, people start to deploy the system without product knowledge. Sometimes the product implementation is really bad. If the implementation is bad, so it won't work for you smoothly. So know the product implementation and features, and you should know which ones will be the design architecture of the system.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten. 

We are service providers and provide NetWorker for our end-users, our customers.

For POC purposes, we use it on our premises. Also, to have an overview of each and every kind of NetWorker.

We have a number of projects that we supply Networker for and we are completely satisfied with it. We use NetWorker to serve both workload types; a physical workload, and a virtual workload.

Dell EMC NetWorker is a very solid Backup software. It is the oldest backup software from EMC. It comes from Dell EMC's legacy.

The most valuable feature of NetWorker is the wide spectrum of available plugins for each and every software you can back up. For example, SAP, SAP S/4HANA, Oracle, and AIX.

Networker is very good backup software. It always provides you with incremental backups.

When you reach out to your maximum license availability, or you exceed your license limit, NetWorker never stops doing your backups.

With one terabyte of a license, you can back up a hundred terabytes of data back up. They never stop doing that. We always need to follow a fixed software but some customers have an overcapacity license, and they are happy about this feature.

It has a rich set of features.

It is not easy to understand. 

It's not easy to deploy.

It's complex in nature.

When it's deployed, the customers always need to have training from us. In order to make it user-friendly, there is an agent that can be used to back up every product.

Networker users many agents, and just like Powerprotect Data Manager, you can install its VM to import the VM into vCenter, and from Center, you can start your backups.

With NetWorker, you always need to have one server, and from that server, you need to initiate all backups.

You will need to know the interface and NetWorker CLI.

It's not user-friendly.

If NetWorker could be deployed on a virtual machine, similar to Avamar, that would be a great feature.

The features that are required in NetWorker are available in PowerProtect and Avamar. There is no need to enhance Networker, they just need to rename it to PPDM or Avamar. That would be better.

I have been using Dell EMC NetWorker for six years, since 2014.

This product is stable. Our customers have never experienced any issues.

Dell EMC NetWorker is scalable.

We have many different companies that we deal with, some are banks, using Networker. One of the largest companies in Pakistan has been using this solution since 2015. Another client with a big data center has been using it since 2016. We have many other vendors who are happy with this solution.

The NetWorker price point is excellent. When you purchase the Data Protection Suite, NetWorker is free with that suite. If you purchase Avamar, NetWorker is free with Avamar, for one terabyte license capacity.

NetWorker is very competitive.

NetWorker is a good product.

There is no challenge in having NetWorker in your environment.

Powerprotect Data manager is the next generation backup software. I would recommend using the latest backup software suite.

NetWorker is also a very good backup software, for physical or virtual workloads. People know the features that NetWorker is providing.

If I had to choose one, I would go with Powerprotect. It provides simplicity and ease of use. It is not complex. Second I would recommend Avamar, then it would be Networker.

I would rate Dell EMC NetWorker a seven out of ten.

The backup software has been much faster since we've deployed the solution.

The system needs better integration with other toolsets.

Support could be improved. EMC also needs to offer more information for users online.

The solution needs more automation and more reporting, so we don't need to check everything manually.

We use the solution every day, for all of our backups. We don't plan to increase usage, but we do use it extensively right now.

I haven't had a good experience with technical support. It takes them a very long time to resolve issues.

We used to use HP DataProtector. It took too much effort to manage it, which is why we switched.

The initial setup was very straightforward.

We did the implementation ourselves.

It's approximate, but I believe we pay around $20-30,000 a month in licensing.

We did not evaluate other option before choosing this solution.

We use the private cloud deployment model of the solution.

Networker is a fine solution, but there are other more modern automated solutions on the market. We are considering changing to one of those. They take up fewer resources, which is why we are considering switching. I believe this solution is better than Data Protector, but there's another one, Rubrik, that saves a lot of time and effort.

We should have involved EMC with the implementation because it was difficult. I would recommend others consider this lesson that we learned from our attempt.

I would rate the solution seven out of ten.

The management of Dell Networker is quite cumbersome because we have to operate on a separate interface for reporting backup jobs. In addition, we have different interfaces, so we recommend it be consolidated into a single interface for all its operations. For example, my team and I have to hop on other interfaces and different applications to manage Dell Networker. Hence, it becomes pretty cumbersome for operations.

We have been using the solution for six years.

The solution is scalable, and approximately 1,000 users utilize the solution in our organization.

We have had a good experience with customer service and support. I rate them an eight out of ten.

Positive

A partner did the initial setup, and we shared the venue. The setup was not difficult because we outsourced it to a consultant. So that consultant came in and deployed the solution for us.

The pricing could be more economical for organizations, so organizations like ours can adopt and utilize it to its full potential. However, at the moment, we have challenges with the pricing as it is quite costly.

I rate the solution an eight out of ten. The solution is good, but it can be improved by consolidating multiple interfaces into one.

We have everything - we have Oracle databases, SQL databases, Windows platforms, Linux platforms, Exchange Servers. We have many servers along with several different storages. This is a very big group with a variety of systems.

Although Dell EMC NetWorker is a little bit more complex to combine with other products, it is really a very strong product. It became stronger when we started doing backups to disks instead of to data simulators when we import the Data Domain. The solution became stronger because the backup to disks is faster and the duplication ratios and compression are very high so it will save lots of space at this storage size. The granularity of the Exchange Servers is very good.

In terms of what can be improved, they need to be compatible with the cloud because EMC NetWorker cannot compete with other products at the moment. The other products like Veeam and Commvault are more flexible and are more compatible with other cloud vendors. EMC cannot do the same thing. EMC focuses only on their own cloud and do not take into consideration other cloud vendors.

I started using Dell EMC NetWorker in 2012.

It's stable. It is very, very stable software.

There are no problems in terms of stability. But as I said, the configuration, the deployment, etc... are more complex when you compare to the other products. That's the only thing. But from a stability point of view, it is very stable.

In terms of scalability, unfortunately, we were unable to upgrade the EMC NetWorker. We're still on version 8.1. So I have no idea of the capabilities of the latest release in terms of scalability. But for sure, when you compare to other products, EMC NetWorker will not be able to compete because other products are more agile and more compatible with many cloud vendors. They need to put more effort into that.

Despite it being more complex, it is a very powerful solution but still requires effort so that users can have good access to it. I cannot see people choosing EMC Networker. At the moment everybody chooses to go for Veeam and Commvault. At the moment everybody is waiting for BIM to go to Commvault. I've been in a deep study of the previous one and backup solutions, and I met many people and everybody prefers to go with Commvault or Veeam. I didn't see anybody preferring to go with EMC NetWorker.

The initial setup is complex. It requires a long brainstorming because you need to consider servers, storages, storage nodes, client servers, and the main backup server. It's quite complex. Brainstorming and designing will take time. You need the full verification and sometimes more than that if you have many servers where you need to install the client.

In order to implement, a consultant is needed. Without that, you cannot do it yourself. You can do it but there is a risk. So it's better to have another person.

In terms of pricing, yes, of course, EMC is cheaper. Commvault is more expensive. Maybe with the latest release, EMC Networker became more expensive, but I have no idea about the latest prices from EMC. Whatever we spent on EMC NetWorker was far cheaper.

What I've seen is renewal prices. Maybe the price of the implementation would be more expensive. But, at least from what I've seen, Commvault is more expensive than EMC NetWorker.

There are some main differences between Commvault and NetWorker and a lot of people prefer Commvault. First of all, worldwide ranking. If you look at the ranking starting from 2017 until today, you will find Commvault is always ranked first of second. EMC is not at those levels. Whenever you want to buy a backup solution, you need to look at the worldwide ranking. You need to conduct customer feedback. This is the first main difference between EMC NetWorker and Commvault. The second thing is their architecture, which is easier with Commvault. Commvault is easier to deploy.

On a scale of one to ten, I would give Dell EMC NetWorker a seven.

They need to allow EMC NetWorker to be more agile and flexible with other cloud vendors. It has to come into the cloud arena because now everybody's talking cloud. They shouldn't be only restricted to on-premise. Everybody now is talking cloud, so it has to talk the latest language in IT. You need to make it more compatible with cloud vendors. When you talk about Commvault, it is very compatible with many cloud vendors like AWS. But you do not see the same thing with EMC NetWorker. They need to work on this point.

I would not hesitate to go to Commvault. Undoubtedly, Commvault is better. It is the best. If somebody would ask me which one to choose between EMC or Commvault, I would not hesitate to say go for Commvault rather than for EMC NetWorker.

We are using Dell EMC NetWorker for backup and restore purposes.

The support for legacy products is very good.

The components for container support such as Docker and Kubernetes need improvement. They are lacking.

Stability needs improvement. Also, scalability could be better.

I would like to see better support for the container systems, and we would like to see more support for image backups instead of pure file backups. Image backups are faster.

I have been using this solution for more than 15 years.

We are not using the latest version, we are one major version behind.

We have had some issues with stability, but we can't say for certain that it is an issue with the client's environment, or if it's an issue with the server.

It's a scalable solution.

We have approximately 5,000 clients per backup server, and we have six servers.

We have not contacted technical support. We have only had a few issues that we were able to resolve.

For newer software, EMC has expressed that they will not be supporting NetWorker for much longer. It is my understanding that they will continue for the next two years only. 

We are looking for new technology, and we are in the middle of an RFI.

I would not recommend Dell EMC NetWorker, as the product will end in a few years.

I would rate Dell EMC NetWorker a seven out of ten.

We have a Hyper-V installation, with a mixed Linux environment.

We have an on-premises deployment.

Configuration for Hyper-V needs to be improved. Our original configuration did not work because of an issue that differed between versions.

We are able to do direct backups, but analyzing the logs is not straightforward. There are a lot of things that have to be done from the client-side in order to locate and identify errors. This should be made easier.

This solution should support part-loaded data.

I would like to see support for the enactment of errors, where the error should be very clear-mannered, on board, with NMC control only. When some backups fail, we investigate all of the possibilities and sometimes have to enter the admin from the client-side. We then have to render the log and investigate that. If it is a Microsoft issue, for example, then we will contact Microsoft. This entire process needs to be enhanced.

As long as all of the requirements are met, this is a very stable solution. It is used for our daily operations.

Scalability of this solution is very good. We have approximately four hundred employees using this solution.

Technical support for this solution is very good. They are nice people and whenever we need support, they turn up and investigate. Within an hour they will start an investigation.

The initial setup is a little bit complex, but it is very good. In terms of configuration, you have a basic administrator account. If you are going to be configuring Hyper-V or another technology then you have to have an admin account for those, as well. Without a proper administrator account, you will not be able to perform backup and restore functions.

There are also other things to consider, such as the network port and user compatibility. Hyper-V has issues to consider with respect to configuring the backup.

My advice to anybody who is researching this solution is to first check to make sure that your environment is stable, and compatible with this product. Even before doing a POC, the environment needs to be considered. Once any incompatibilities have been ruled out then a POC should be done, where everything needs to be tested.

This product can be complex and difficult to understand, but once you have some experience it is very good.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.