Microsoft DPM Reviews

We're a local government entity and also a very Microsoft-centric shop. We use it for backing up the following workload types (All servers running Windows Server 20xx): 
- Physical Windows Servers
- Hyper-V Servers (at the host level)
- Hyper-V Servers ( at the guest level)
- Sharepoint
- Exchange 
- Network File Shares, implemented as CAFS (Continuously Available File Shares)

DPM has improved our RPO over the previous solution, which was dated and had been in place for years.

The solution really does great recovery. When the typical use case of someone says, "Oh gosh, I've accidentally deleted my file", we have that item-level recovery. It's saved us on many occasions. However, I do believe any backup solution would give a user that kind of performance.

The solution came with System Center so we didn't have to pay for it that way. If you're already a System Center customer, I believe it's a free product, or, at least, it comes with that bundle. That benefit there is you're already in the system set or ecosystem.

In that sense, the price is good since we're on System Center. 

The solution backs up Microsoft workloads just fine, when synchronization doesn't fail.

There is a very poor online user community in terms of people blogging about their experiences with DPM. 

I'm on Google all the time, resolving issues. All I ever find is the official Microsoft documentation. While that can be helpful, and that is in many cases, authoritative, it's not the same as having an independent user community who's writing about it. I have to wonder about the product when I don't see a vital external user community in existence.

Every day I have to log in and look at agent alerts and failures that I have to resolve. There are so many different types of agent failures that I have to diagnose pretty much every day due to the fact that the replicas are out of sync with the current state of a file or the VM or something. I'm constantly involved in a lot of hands-on maintenance. They need to change that and potentially make some sort of automated solution to this problem so the workload isn't so heavy for those maintaining the solution.

It's not a set it and forget it kind of solution. Not that anything is. However, it's a lot of labor involved in just keeping the replicas in sync.

One of the things I think would like to be able to use is their cloud storage at the block level so that it's cheaper for a government entity. We want to have replicas in the cloud, however, it's very expensive. They're using the most expensive tier of Azure storage. We would rather just be able to specify that our cloud backups go to Blob based storage for budgetary purposes. I don't believe that's available, but then again, I can't really find that out online due to a lack of a user community.

I would like to maybe have Office 365 backups. I know other vendors offer that however, I don't believe that's available within this solution.

I've been using the solution for about three years now.

The stability is average at best. I'm daily resolving anywhere from 20-80 synchronization failure, which occur for a variety of reasons.

The stability of the underlying system is questionable. There are many layers including the VSF service and the Windows server backup. There are agents. Then there's the DPM service as well. There are enough layers that having small problems from time to time means just constantly resolving replication issues. Stability, in terms of how well it keeps replicas in sync, is average.

I have not actually scaled this solution "out".  One server is backing up a population of 80 servers, most of them virtual, as well as Continuously Available File shares.

A secondary server is backing up our primary server, but that's secondary protection, not scaling per se.

I can say that you need to keep your total number of Data Sources to under 300 per server.  I did find this out only through a paid session with Microsoft Support.  This is a scalability metric, which would indicate you need to scale out.

I fixed the problem by reducing my data sources.  I did so by changing SQL Server protection to SQL backup jobs instead of using DPM Sql Server application protection.  SQL Server protection can explode your data source count, if you have a lot of databases to protect.

Technical support is lacking. You can't call Microsoft and enter a help ticket and have someone call you back. You also can't find a user community online.

Both of those avenues are things that almost anyone does with a new product of any complexity. Users are going to want vendor support or a user community supporting and I haven't found either to be available.

We used an older version of VEEAM.  Our director was behind the adoption of DPM. We did so at his request.

The initial setup wasn't straightforward. There definitely was a learning curve. I would say it was complex.

Due to the steep learning curve, deployment probably took a few months. Once you understand things, you need to look into protection groups and items of that nature. 

I'm still learning new answers to the product. It's an ongoing learning process.

I implemented this in-house.

Other than the SQL Server license, the cost factor is appealing.  There is a learning curve, like any other solution. 

My director was the one who advocated this choice. There was no competitor analysis, probably because the price of DPM was bundled into SCCM, for which we were already licensed.

We're a government agency, so we don't have a business partnership with Microsoft.

I would suggest that Microsoft try to figure out how to foster an online user community outside of their official channels. This has been a source of frustration for me. New users should know, before implementing the solution, that this community doesn't exist right now, so there's no way to third-party verify Microsoft claims.

I would rate the solution five out of ten.

I would say it's not an industry leader. It might work for some people and it might be the most cost-effective option for some people, however, I don't know if everyone needs cloud backups. If a company needs a turn-key system or something close to turn-key system, it's not that.

On-premises

Microsoft Azure

I found Microsoft DPM pretty useful. It satisfied most of my requirements. We have a local tape drive as well, so we do an online backup of the exchange onto hard discs which later gets transferred to the tape drive. It seems to be fulfilling all the requirements, except I would say it's not very user-friendly.

One of its most valuable features is its capability to give a BMR for all the workstations that I want to connect to or to the servers, as well as the fact that it could do an online backup off the exchange.

I would say the user-friendliness could be improved because I have found that my colleagues are not finding it very easy to use. I have used it quite well. I was able to do a lot of features within it, but for a frustrated user, it becomes a little user-unfriendly. Also, one issue was if I wanted to restore mail - it's not feasible here.

I have been familiar with this solution for about six years.

I had no problem with the stability - I could easily schedule it for the times I wanted the backups to take place.

I didn't have any issues with the scalability.

I only contacted customer support once. It's a brilliant product. 

The initial setup was straightforward. It took about an hour. I did it myself.

We bought the system center and we bought the DPM, as well, so I didn't need to upgrade the product at a later stage. I bought the SA for one year so it didn't cost much. I can't remember what I paid for the total licensing cost of that. Then, after one or two years we bought it on a three-year fee scenario and since then I have not had the need to buy any more SA solutions.

I would rate Microsoft DPM an eight on a scale from1-10.

On-premises

This solution is part of our main disaster recovery as well as long term recovery solution policy. It will work on physical and virtual machines.

Moving to this solution has improved our backup capability. Zerto is only able to replicate virtual machines whereas DPM is capable of backing up everything.

The most valuable feature is that DPM has an index so individual files can be searched. This is our primary tool for recovering deleted files or folders. Once we implement a System Center Operations Manager, all of our DPM servers can then be seen on one dashboard.

Additional Hyper-V knowledge would be great. There are some articles online detailing the interaction with hypervisors. Using the built-in tools would speed up some of the normal routine procedures.

I have been using Microsoft DPM for over three years.

It is a stable product.

DPM is easily scalable. There is a database stored on a SQL server in which the size needs to be monitored.

Prior to using DPM, we used Zerto.

Zerto has a fast recovery of entire machines whereas DPM has an index so individual files can be searched. DPM is capable of backing up both physical and virtual machines.

There were some quirks in the initial setup. I needed to make certain the SQL versions and reporting was completely patched but not necessarily updated. DPM is only happy with certain versions so do not upgrade SQL to the latest and greatest. Follow guidelines laid out on the Microsoft-DPM web sites.

On-premises

We primarily use the solution as a backup. We have some standalone and beta on it, however, we haven't got the whole stack on it now.

It has improved the organisation by taking care of disaster recovery.

The solution works well as a backup.

The initial setup is quite straightforward.

You can scale the solution easily.

The stability is very good.

The user interface can be improved quite a bit.

Overall, I wouldn't describe the solution as user-friendly. It's not very intuitive.

The issue is that for users who are not interacting with the product regularly, it becomes difficult to trace the various functionality available. The product version that we have does not have

I've been using the solution for almost a decade at this point. It's been about nine years. It's been a while.

The solution is stable and reliable. It doesn't crash or break down. There aren't bugs or glitches. It works well.

The solution can scale if you need it to. That's not a problem at all.

We have about 200 users on the solution right now.

I'm unsure as to if we will increase usage in the future. That's not due to the nature of its scalability. Rather, we find it's not user-friendly enough.

We've been satisfied with technical support so far. They are knowledgable and responsive. I have no complaints about their level of service.

I wouldn't describe the initial setup as complex. It's pretty straightforward.

The deployment doesn't take too long. It takes about an hour in total to do everything you need to do.

I handled the implementation myself. I didn't need the assistance of a consultant or integrator. It was handled in-house.

I bought the license for the solution from Microsoft as part of System Center. I'm not sure of the exact cost of the solution.

We did test a couple of other different solutions before we ultimately chose DPM.

We're just Microsoft customers. We don't have a business relationship with the company.

I believe that I am using the latest version of the solution. We got into later versions as we didn't use the beta version.

I wouldn't recommend this solution to others right now. It's not user-friendly enough. That level of annoyance with the product can really kill it.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. They used to give away this product and they stopped doing that. It would be nice if they returned to having it as a free solution. It would also be nice if they took some time to reconsider its design in order to make it more user-friendly in the future.

On-premises

It is almost perfect for Microsoft products. It is not a very powerful tool, but it is okay for small sites and small businesses with Microsoft products.

It is easy to use for backup and restore. It is good for backing up Microsoft servers such as Exchange and SharePoint servers.

It needs portability for other vendors. It is good for backing up Microsoft servers, but it doesn't support third-party solutions such as Oracle Database. 

It depends on Microsoft Volume Shadow Copy, especially for Hyper-V, which has a lot of problems. They should enhance the Volume Shadow Copy functionality. 

Its reporting should also be better. Reporting is too weak in DPM.

I have been using this solution for six years.

It is stable.

It is scalable.

Their technical support is moderate. I am an expert in DPM, so I don't need support many times.

Its installation is straightforward. It takes one hour at the most.

I installed it myself.

I would recommend this solution for small businesses and small sites. I plan to keep using this solution.

I would rate Microsoft DPM a seven out of ten.

On-premises

We are using this product for backing up our entire environment, which includes our ERP and all of the other systems that we have.

The whole idea for doing a backup is to be able to fully recover and restore, and some of the options are quite good for us. We have been happy with the recovery tasks that we've carried out.

The automated procedure is quite good for us, as it is able to capture all of the information that we require.

The compatibility is very good. We have an IBM AS/400 machine in our office that we're using, and we're able to back it up fine. This is the same for other systems, as well. I think that overall, it is really adaptable, compatible, and scalable.

Management reporting could be improved.

I have been using Microsoft DPM for the past four years.

I think that Microsoft DPM is very stable. We are a local authority and we are running multiple health information systems, engineering, and financial systems.

We have a vast number of systems and we're scaling up to more than 4,000 users. As of now, we have been able to scale up to our requirements.

We have been in contact with Microsoft technical support here and there. We have a local supplier that we work with, and it is important to keep in mind that DPM isn't the only product that we are using. We also use a configuration manager, an operations manager, and a service manager which is the service desk. The entire set is the Management Suite.

In terms of response time, they are okay. However, we've had an issue with not being about to get the kind of reports that we want in terms of managing our environment.

The initial setup was really straightforward and we didn't have any challenges. It took us between two and three weeks to deploy.

We completed the implementation and deployment in-house and without any issues.

Our IT department is divided into four groups which are security, infrastructure networks, MIS, and solutions. We have three engineers who are responsible for DPM.

We are currently working with an on-premises deployment but we want to use the hybrid option now. We are looking forward to seeing how it performs.

To this point, from what we have been using, we have found this product to be okay and we haven't had any major issues. We are happy with the features that we have.

Overall, we are happy with this product. At the same time, I cannot give it a perfect rating until I see how well it scales in the cloud.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

On-premises

My work is on the customer side. I analyze a company's situation and figure out what's best for them from a cost perspective and an installation perspective. I'm a customer of Microsoft and managing director of the company. 

I would definitely recommend data protection DPM. It has an application backup, a file backup, a system backup and a hypervisor. It works flawlessly, never a problem.

They could improve the compatibility and integration with other products and the ability to do file-to file backups of other products. I also find the hard disk aligning quite complicated and that should be simplified. 

I've been using this solution for nine years. 

The scalability of the solution is fine for Microsoft products, but there are issues when it comes to backing up other databases because I cannot take the file-to-file backup which creates some problems. 

From the time you purchase the support they're there to help you. The price is good and that helps. There isn't a price match for DPM right now in the market.

Deployment time depends on the user case; how many servers you have, etc. However, the basic installation can probably be done in two or three hours. Configuration depends on the products you're backing up, how many there are and the number of servers. I have my own team for deployment and I'm also Microsoft certified.

I recommend Microsoft DPM as it is a cost-effective solution that works. It's worth checking the limitations of DPM before deployment, which can be done by reading the documentation. Make sure it's suitable for your needs and that it's going to work for you.

I would rate this solution a seven out of 10. 

Hybrid Cloud

Ease of D2D and D2T backups.

Fast restores

In the areas of disaster recovery.

2.5 years.

Recent minor upgrade required a reboot of all of my protected 2008 servers. This I considered unacceptable as I had to reschedule an outage window to reboot 100+ servers. 

Yes, occasionally protection will stop working say for a simple system state backup.  

Microsoft support for this product is very good. Open a web ticket and they will call you and still maintain the ticket as a web ticket

Organization used BUExec but migrated to DPM because of Microsoft licensing and cost to maintain BUExec.

Straightforward.

In-house implementation.

Not given opportunity by management to evaluate additional products.

Very good for Microsoft workloads.