IBM Spectrum Protect Reviews

The D2D2T archive of my PACS data improved after I put Spectrum Protect 8.1.4 into production.

Disk-based implementation of a data protection solution for multiple sites, which is a better fit for my complex data protection needs.

They need to reduce the complexity and make the learning curve easier.

So far, version 8.1.4 is stable.

The scalability is better than my legacy TSM 7.2.

I would rate tech support at seven out of 10.

I don't see moving from TSM to Spectrum Protect as a solution swap, I see it as just re-branding.

The initial setup is better than TSM, buts still has room to improve.

If you do not have deep pockets, don't come to IBM.

EMC Avamar and Cohesity were also in the PoC.

Be careful what you wish for, and make sure the new solution will fit into your current IT environment.

We sell and implement it for customers. It performs very well, though every product has room for improvement.

Our customer's on-premise infrastructure is comprised of flash storage, spinning disks, tape, virtual tape, virtual servers, and snapshots. For storage, we see SAN, iSCSI, NAS, flash, slower disk, SATA, and Near Line (NL) SAS. Some customers use virtual libraries.

• It helps our customers protect their data, especially with stuff like ransomware, compliance, and regulatory requirements. 
• It helps them protect their data, keep it long-term, and feel pretty secure about it, basically sleeping well at night.

It is a proven product. It has a lot of features and capabilities. That is its pro and its con. It makes it a very capable product, but somewhat difficult to use.

Our customers would like to see metadata replication, tearing to tape, and more cloud capabilities.

Stability is great.

Scalability is excellent. It is a solution which needs to be designed. For example, when you design something, you usually have a more scalable solution, because you are building it into the initial plan. Therefore, it is very scalable, but the downside is that it costs money.

The product can scale. I have seen 20 to 40 percent growth per year for my customers for the next three to five years.

My customers do use the technical support, and it's getting less effective, because it is not coming from North America anymore as it used to. Now, it comes from Egypt. The English is not as good, and the support is definitely getting worse.

We live and breathe the initial setup, so the process is good.

Vendors who tend to appear on customers shortlists are Veeam, NetBackup, and Commvault.

I would definitely recommend this product, unless it is pure VMware virtualization backup.

Most important criteria when selecting a vendor:

• Reputation
• Reliability
• Cost.

However, cost is probably the biggest factor for most customers.

It builds confidence to recover from a variety of disasters. It really keeps our data safe and lets us manage what is important to us and our customers.

Flexibility and Scalability. Sturdy software for potentially large environments. Because of the flexible parameters, everything can be fine-tuned to the customers’ needs in their environment.

If customers have problems or requests and they file a PMR/ESF (Problem Management Record/Electronic Service Request) to IBM, they can present a weblist of when this problem/feature will be solved/released depending on the amount of other customers having the same request. (People can vote on how useful/problematic new features/items listed by other customers are and thus create a higher priority.)

A recent failure with the Spectrum Protect v8.1 client on windows 2016:
2017-05-25 23:28:30 ANS6718E: The path contains too many nested subdirectories. The maximum number of nested directories is 1400.
(This was never a problem on other windows versions and seems to be introduced in the client version on Win2k16) Will be fixed in the next client version v8.1.2.) (Will be released in a few weeks.)
http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=swg1IT18901

There were stability issues only in the brand new features which were recently released.

There were scalability issues only in the brand new features which were recently released.

I would rate technical support as follows based on these categories:

• Help in own language (Dutch): 7/10.
• Speed: 8/10
• Customer friendliness: 9/10
• Ability to solve problems: 9/10
• In-depth knowledge (Level-1 and Level-2): 10/10

Arcserve and Microsoft Backup.

The installation was straightforward, although having specific knowledge about the product can be helpful.

That depends on the environment per customer. Since there are different licensing models, it's helpful to check which best fits the customers' needs.

We evaluated Arcserve and CommVault.

Follow a basic course before you start using the product. As it is so flexible, it's helpful to cover the basics and know what needs to be done to get the most out of this environment.

The diversity and flexibility of the application. No matter what the problem is, I can solve the problem any number of ways based on the customers’ requirements.

It scales.

In terms of room for improvement, I would like to see better interfaces.

I'm not allowed to talk about features I want to see in the future. I have an NDA with them. The things that I've asked for are already on record.

It's one of the most stable backup applications I've ever used.

They continue to make enhancements that allow it to scale even larger and higher. They also added additional capabilities to the software that allow it to grow within the industry.

We have used technical support and they are excellent.

We used NetWorker.

I was involved in the installation. I've set it up hundreds of times. It is a complex setup. You have to do your planning for your environment. Once you have the plan, the setup is easy. But the planning is the hardest piece.

We looked at NetBackup, Backup Exec, and there were a couple of other ones that we looked at.

My advice is to hire me and I’ll install it for you. We knew it was time to invest in a new solution because backups are crucial for our environment.

When looking for a vendor, we look for service, scalability, and stability.

Spectrum Protect's best feature is that I can use it practically anywhere, on any platform, and for any servers or clients.

I've been using Spectrum Protect for twenty years.

Spectrum Protect's stability is good. We have experience with big companies that have a huge number of objects, and it works fine with sixty to seventy terabytes per day.

Spectrum Protect is scalable, you just have to be careful when migrating data and so on.

IBM's support hasn't been so good in the last few years.

The initial setup is complex,and requires planning.

Spectrum Protect is not a cheap option.

I advise anybody considering implementing Spectrum Protect to make very good plans before starting, know your backup requirements, and test the restore. You need to plan a backup solution for a good and fast restore. I would give Spectrum Protect a rating of eight out of ten.

We have customers and retailers who have been using IBM Spectrum Protect for many, many years, so all our sales over the last five years have been renewable sales. I'm a reseller and partner, so I provide this solution. This solution is deployed on-premises. 

In the past, one of the most valuable features, and the biggest advantage, was the incremental forever feature. Not many other backup vendors provided that. In the pre-virtualization environment, it was very robust and simple technology, especially writing to tape. 

IBM Spectrum Protect could be improved by making the installation easier. Once it's implemented, it's okay. 

IBM started lagging behind when things started moving to storage and cloud-based solutions. Even though they've recently released updates that give cloud-based protection, personally, I still believe they are not up to par with the likes of Rubrik. 

The entire product is a little bit clumsy because they have co-joined two different products, so it's complex. Even from a sales/explaining to people what it does point of view, it's complex. Whereas, if you take more current products, it's a single box solution. You reel it in, you fire it up, you do a couple of points and clicks, and off you go, whereas the IBM system is seriously complex. There's a lot of training involved and it's a massively difficult product to sell at this point in time. 

I have been working with IBM Spectrum Protect for over 20 years. 

This solution is stable. 

This solution is scalable. 

IBM support has always been reasonably good. They've got a worldwide network and they've been doing it for many, many years, so I can't fault them from a support point of view. Whenever there had been a problem, we had various people working on resolving it. 

IBM Spectrum Protect is very complex to install—it's not a simple installation at all, which is why there's always professional services attached to a Spectrum Protect sale. 

The amount of technical people you will need depends on the size of the environment, but in an environment with about 800 VMs and a couple of Unix machines, you need at least two administrators. 

We implement this solution for customers. 

Customers need to pay for licensing in order to use IBM Spectrum Protect. The customers that have been using it for a long time are okay and happy with it. From a cost point of view, it's better for them to renew their licenses than to go through the difficult process of changing a backup product in their environment, and migrate from one product to another. 

Currently, we have moved away from Spectrum Protect, and towards Rubrik. Rubrik has been my product of choice over the last two years, at least. Even with the recently released updates that give cloud-based protection, I still don't believe IBM Spectrum Protect is up to par with the likes of Rubrik. Of the customers who still use IBM Spectrum Protect, we only have three left—there used to be a lot more. 

I currently rate IBM Spectrum Protect a six out of ten. 

The advice I would give to anyone considering starting to use IBM Spectrum Protect is to use Rubrik instead. I've always been a very big proponent of Spectrum Protect—years back, I used to be a trainer for IBM as well, so I really like the product—but at the moment, I just think there are other solutions that work better. 

It is a very good and mature enterprise product. Once it is set up and everything is put in, you don't have to manage it. It actually runs automatically by itself.

In terms of features, they've got it all covered. The features they have are quite good. The only downside to it is that it is for an enterprise or big organization. In my opinion, it is not for a small business. 

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

If you want to get the maximum benefit out of it, you should be a big organization. In my opinion, it is not for a small organization. 

It depends on the experience that you have. Instead of Windows, we've mostly implemented it on a UNIX-based platform, such as AIX, or Linux. So, you need someone who has the skills to manage these platforms. Apart from that, Spectrum Protect itself is a great product.

I would rate it an eight out of 10. 

IBM Spectrum Protect offers stable software and products. It has much third party integration, such as that involving databases, email and virtual machines. 

The solution is quite outdated compared with others and I feel IBM to be lagging a step or two behind other vendors. 

We have received user complaints about the user interface. There is a need to manage a monitor and it can sometimes be exceedingly difficult to manage the internal TSM Spectrum Protect database. 

As a general rule, things should be updated. I do not manage too many customers who still utilize IBM, perhaps only one or two. 

While the installation is, overall, pretty straightforward, we must make certain that the requirements are met before we begin the process. 

In respect of stability, while IBM is very good because of the maturity of its products, which function well for the current environment, there are certain features I find lacking. It is stable, but old. 

When it comes to technical support, we must occasionally collect the log and we find the process to be layered. This makes it problematic to get the support we need from level two, since level one support basically consists of a call center, something which is more useful for end users than integrators and which is time consuming, as well. 

The solution tends to be hard to monitor and control and the user interface should be addressed. So too, the environment and the queries are not user-friendly. 

The most important feature which I wish to be added involves the GUI, the user interface. The solution should have more features and a more powerful GUI, equal to the command-line, as we occasionally are unable to configure it through the GUI and must resort to command-line prompting. 

The solution is not geared toward one who lacks a dedicated manager of his backup infrastructure, usually involving the command-line interface. This can make it quite challenging. We occasionally have to configure our minutes or make a mass configuration using the command-line, as opposed to the GUI. 

IBM is pretty challenging when it comes to scalability, since the bigger the environment, the greater the TSM database, especially in respect of long term retention. Sometimes our customers require permanent backup retention and this increasingly enlarges the size of the solution's database, making things hard to manage. 

I have been working with IBM Spectrum Protect for eight or nine years. 

Though there are certain features missing when it comes to IBM, I consider it to be good, as we are talking about a mature product with good functioning in the current environment. The solution is stable, just outdated. 

IBM poses a challenge to the scalability, since a bigger environment requires an increased TSM database, primarily when it comes to long term retention. Our customers occasionally require permanent backup retention and this places an increasing burden on the size of the solution's database, which makes things challenging to manage. 

Technical support can be problematic, as we must occasionally collect logs and are required to first go through level one support before proceeding to level two. This process is time consuming and geared more towards the end user than the integrator. 

While the installation is mostly straightforward, there is an initial need to ensure that the requirements are fulfilled before proceeding with it. 

I rate IBM Spectrum Protect as a six out of ten.