OpenText Data Protector Reviews

We use Data Protector for backup and recovery.

The most valuable feature of Data Protector is its integration with VMware. A lot of software these days integrates with VMware, and you can run some of these things on virtual machines. You can even have your backup manager running on a virtual machine and use physical managers to move data around. Their VMware integration isn't too bad, but Commvault has that feature, and many other backup products do.

We're not satisfied with the robustness and stability of the software since Micro Focus took it in-house. The GUI is one thing they could improve. It's still a bit archaic. Data Protector needs a more functional, user-friendly GUI.

I started at this company in 2018, so I have been using Data Protector at this company since then or maybe a little before. They were using the solution before HPE sold it off to Micro Focus. The company was initially using it with MSL Tape Libraries. When I joined, StoreOnce had just been installed.

Data Protector isn't stable.

Data Protector is sufficiently scalable for our purposes, but our site isn't that big.

I rate Micro Focus Data Protector six out of 10. We were unsatisfied with the support, and that contributed to the decision to migrate to Commvault. The quality dropped when they outsourced support. It's not the only company. HPE also took its service and support to Bangalore in India.

You should only outsource if your service level won't drop, but it always drops. When you mention that to management, they say, "Okay, we know, but everybody is doing it." Accenture does it and Cognizant, too. All the big services companies are all down there.

Neutral

The company is considering a switch to Commvault. It's a global company, so the transition will be worldwide, and we don't have a say. I still don't have any hands-on experience, but I know HPE has tightened its ties with Commvault, and they're producing technical best practices for the product. They are even promoting Commvault as their backup solution of choice when providing backup solutions to customers.

Data Protector used to be their product, so they did have the chance. Once Micro Focus acquired them, even HPE was not satisfied with the level of support and gradually started looking to Commvault. At the same time, if somebody asked me which backup solution I would suggest, I couldn't recommend Commvault because I don't have the experience yet.

I rate Micro Focus Data Protector six out of 10.

I am a manager at a mid-size non-profit and we use this to backup HPE UNIX servers.

I like that it supports HPE UNIX servers since many backup solutions do not - this is the main reason why we chose this solution.

I do not think that this solution is relevant in the current IT market. They have not upgraded their features and functionalities which makes it difficult for them to remain competitive. 

I have been using this solution for about fifteen years.

It is a stable solution, we have not experienced any bugs over the past fifteen or so years.

I would say that it is scalable.

Support could be better. Right now, for us, their preferred communication method is via email which takes quite a bit of time to resolve even small issues.

The initial setup in general was simple. However, if you want encryption, you need to install something else, and there are other models for reporting. This can get a little complex since it is not a single solution that gives everything out-of-the-box.

We have four or five guys from our backup admin team who work in here regularly.

The solution was implemented by a partner of Micro Focus and it took about one to two days to setup for our mid-size company.

There is a perpetual license involved in addition to support which needs to be renewed annually.

I would rate this solution a six out of ten.

The primary use case is integration with the HP storage unit. There is an HP product line called HP High-End Storage. We are primarily using Micro Focus Data Protector for SAP RT application, which is an earlier version. 

Integration with HP storage is a very strong point for Micro Focus Data Protector. 

It is the best solution for general operations like backup and restore. Zero downtime backup (ZDB) is one very important feature, which is basically the integration with the storage array. It is a very strong feature. We're using storage with snapshots with this integration. 

In general, you can say that Micro Focus Data Protector is behind in capabilities when compared with other backup solutions, such as Commvault, Symantec, NetBackup, but it is very strong for certain use cases such as array integration. We are using it in production even now.

There should be some kind of cloud integration and archiving solutions. I think this is the area they need to focus on.

We have been using Micro Focus Data Protector for six to seven years. 

We have been using HP solutions, comprising HP servers, storage, and even the HP operating system unit, for five to seven years. Micro Focus Data Protector was configured and installed during the last tech research around six to seven years ago, and it is still in production. Currently, we have replaced the solution with some other solution, but for the older tech research, Micro Focus Data Protector is still working.

We're relying on this backup for our very critical core application. It's really good all the time for backup and restore operations. We never faced any issue. You can say it is a very smooth and stable experience.

Scalability of Micro Focus Data Protector is good. There may be tens of thousands of users currently in our company.

The technical support is really good. They're always very cooperative and really very good. The support experience is actually very good.

I was not there at that time. It shouldn't actually take much time, maybe a few weeks or one month.

It was deployed by HP. Their deployment team installed and configured everything.

It is a very good product if you want to go for the ZDB backup or the array integration with HP products. In general, when comparing Micro Focus Data Protector with other backup solutions, such as Commvault, NetBackup, or any other vendor, they are much more comprehensive and have much more capabilities.

I would rate Micro Focus Data Protector a seven out of ten.

ZDB, and instant recovery. Also, it will do both physical and virtual backups with Hyper-V and ESXi.

Using the backup storage snapshot functionality we are able to back up 2T databases and 2T file storage fast.

Hyper-V backups need improvement so they can do GRE.

I've used it for five years.

We have a very complex and unusual environment so it took a while to get things working.

Since we started using v5, stability has improved quite a bit.

This has also improved since earlier versions.

We have very good customer service.

We pay for premier support and it is great, but it's not so good if you just have regular support.

We used Tivoli and it did not work well in our environment. Data Protector was cheaper and would do what we needed to do.

It was complex. We had a consultant in for several weeks to get us working. We needed to get the ZDB type, and virtual backups working. The file system backups were no problem.

We had a vendor team, and the main person is still the most knowledgeable one I know for what we needed.

You get what you pay for so don’t skimp.

We had it included in a large purchase we were making at the time.

If you are just doing straight file system backups, this product is straightforward, but if you use any of the many features I would suggest getting help. The interface could be improved and it doesn’t have some things that other products do, but it would depend on what you need from your backups/restores and what your window is.

We use the OpenText Data Protectoras an enterprise backup solution. It performs backups for various company setups, including servers and storage systems.

The tool's most valuable aspect is its ease of management. It was not complex. In terms of features, I can mention a couple of things. For example, if you need to restore a VM, you can do it with multiple streams in OpenText Data Protector, which is an advantage over Commvault, from what I've noticed, having worked with multiple tools. Another thing is the Oracle backups; configuring Oracle backups is much easier in OpenText Data Protector.

Automated backups run on their own schedules, which happens automatically as planned.

The challenge is that we can't restore a single file from the VM in the data process when we do VM backups. But with Commvault, you can restore a single file even if you have a VM snapshot package. That's one drawback of this tool. When we do VM backups, it should help us browse the VMs to restore a single file instead of doing the complete VM restore.

I've been working with the product for a couple of years. Throughout this period, I haven't been focused on just one tool; I've worked with multiple solutions.

The solution is stable. 

The product is a scalable enterprise solution. 

The tool's support is good but not the best. 

Neutral

The tool's deployment is simple. To implement the OpenText Data Protector solution, we first assess the size of the data and the number of servers that need backup. Based on this, we estimate the requirements for setting up the tool framework, including the media servers.

We allocate the necessary space and RAM for these servers. Once this is done, we proceed with the basic installation of the server, add the licenses, and configure the backup services.The initial setup may take around two hours, but the full deployment duration depends on the number of servers that need to be integrated and set up for backup.

The process doesn't require many people or resources. One person can easily handle the setup. If it's a large enterprise, a few extra hands might be needed, but the initial setup can be managed by one person.

The cost-effectiveness of the data protector solution depends on what the customer needs. If it matches their requirements, it's cost-effective. However, if they need more features, they might have to buy extra solutions, affecting cost-effectiveness.

The product is cheaper than Commvault. 

The tool  is easy to manage and offers centralized management, a major advantage. You can use one console to manage multiple locations. We don't currently use AI in our strategies, but we may explore it in the future. Integrating AI with OpenText Data Protector could help ensure that our backups are clean and free from cybersecurity threats or corruption. This would enable us to perform clean restores whenever necessary.

I rate the overall product an eight out of ten. 

Due to some management issues, we're moving to Data Domain.

The solution is easy to use. The management of the product is also easy.

We faced some certification issues after we upgraded to version 10.2.

I have been using the solution for around 16 years.

The tool is stable. I rate the stability an eight out of ten.

I rate the tool’s scalability a seven out of ten. Our clients are medium-sized businesses.

The initial setup is easy. I rate the ease of setup a nine out of ten. The deployment takes around half an hour.

The licensing cost is too high. It costs us a lot when we migrate with the appliance.

We have migrated the solution with an appliance. We are in a transition phase to use Data Domain. I recommend the solution for its ease of use. Overall, I rate the product a nine out of ten.

We use the solution mainly for backup and recovery of all our infrastructures. Also, we are using Veeam for this purpose.

Regarding features, the solution is highly stable when it comes to taking backups of our enterprise infrastructure, such as Linux, Oracle, and SAP.

If I compare products from HP to Micro Focus, I do not see a lot of development in Micro Focus like before. The product can be developed by including functionalities like DR, CDP, and SureBackup, which are currently unavailable in the solution. However, one also needs to consider that Micro Focus is used by enterprise-sized businesses that don't care about many features. The solution's data protection features and scalability could be improved.

I have been using Micro Focus Data Protector since March 2020. We are using Micro Focus Data Protector 10.03 and 11.03. My company is a consultant who provides the solution to its customers

It is a stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

Micro Focus is not as scalable as Veeam. Also, I have many customers working on Micro Focus Data Protector.

I remember that many of the cases of our customers that were highlighted to the customer support team remained unresolved for a week. Actually, Micro Focus needs to invest more resources because the product is sold from company to company.

The initial setup process for the solution is easy. 

The time taken for the deployment depends upon the infrastructure. If you have a lot of servers and storage, a lot of effort is needed to take care of the integration part of the solution. Veeam's deployment process is easier since it has a better user-friendly GUI. But, again, it depends on what the customer exactly needs.

Our company only needs staff members while carrying out any upgradation or migration processes.

The license for the solution is very expensive compared to the other products in the market. There are two types of licenses. Now, they are forcing all the companies to go for their capacity license, which is very costly. If a company is growing, it will require more of the solution, and the company will have to pay more.

I would recommend Veeam over Micro Focus Data Protector. Overall, I rate the solution somewhere between six to seven out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for our server backup and some Linux system backups as well as a backup for our SQL.

The main reason for usage is to protect our information. However, we've searching for new tools for increasing the volume of information and increasing platform protection. Unfortunately, Data Protector is not exactly the tool for that task.

The stability of the product seems to be quite good.

The solution isn't ideal for big data or large CRMs.

We have been lacking proper training on the solution. This seems to be a weak point of the product. They should offer better training for their users.

Other tools seem to be easier to use.

The solution should offer support for the backup of cloud platforms. The same system needs to work with replication and mirror sites, for example.

I've been dealing with the solution for five years or so.

The stability of the solution is quite good. There aren't bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze at all. It's reliable.

As this is an appliance, the scalability is limited to the sizing. There's only so much capacity that is possible.

It's difficult to get technical support and proper assistance for this tool.

I've only worked with this particular company for eight months and they've had the solution for a number of years previous to my start. I did not play a role in the implementation and therefore can't speak to how easy or difficult the setup or deployment was for them.

I'm not sure how many people the company used for deployment or how many are needed for maintenance.

I don't have any insights into the licensing or costs. It's not an aspect of the solution that I handle directly.

We're currently planning on changing out backup tools. At the moment we're looking at Veeam and Barracuda. We have some systems deployed by Spanish users and they already use Barracuda, which is why we are considering it. We're taking licensing costs into account, however, we're finding that the most visible difference is the user interface as well as the style of use - for example, how to backup and recover data.

We're just a customer and an end-user. We don't have a special relationship with this company.

I'm not sure of the exact version we're using. It may be some iteration of version six.

I'd advise new users to implement the solution using a support person and good documentation and to make sure they are putting the correct data policies in place.

In the past, it was quite a good tool, however, now, due to a lack of training, or due to having a lack of staff that is trained in it, it is likely much easier to have something like Veeam, which isn't as complicated of a solution.

On a scale from one to ten, I would rate this product at a five. In comparison, I'd rate Veeam at an eight.