OpenText Data Protector Reviews

I provide Data Protector as a solution to my customers, but I have fewer clients using the product these days. 

Data Protector's GUI is the most useful feature.

The GUI could be updated. The GUI hasn't changed since version 6. It's on version 10 now. The reporting could also be better. Also, while Data Protector is excellent for backing up physical hardware, it needs more features for backing up VM images because many environments use hypervisor. 

It's not as good as some of its competitors. One image backup job should be able to restore the file or database level, but Data Protector has to create three separate jobs.

I have been using Micro Focus Data Protector for more than five years.

Data Protector is stable.

Data Protector can scale up, but I have never used that feature.

I rate Micro Focus support six out of 10. In the past, I contacted Micro Focus support frequently, but most of my customers stopped using Data Protector. I had a good experience with their team five years ago, but their technical support has gone downhill since then.

Neutral

Setting up Data Protector is straightforward. I rate it 10 out of 10 for ease of setup. 

I rate Data Protector six out of 10 for affordability. I don't know the exact cost, but the Micro Focus license is expensive compared to other products like VM. You can back up VMs for free.

I rate Micro Focus Data Protector six out of 10 overall. I would recommend something besides Data Protector. It isn't competitive with other products and doesn't support replication features. So it's less competitive with other products in the market. So I wouldn't advise.

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.

The primary reason clients purchase this solution is for backup.

I don't like this solution so much because it's very technical and compared to Commvault and Veeam, it's not so user-friendly. The interface needs improvement. 

It was sold to another company, I haven't seen a lot of improvement that they have done. 

I have been using it for six years. 

It is not a stable product because I found that it's only dedicated to HP products. 

Scalability is not good because for us if we buy 10GB and want to upgrade there's no provision to upgrade easily. You must consult with the HP support team. As opposed to Veeam where you just buy their license then they upgrade it or with Commvault you just buy their license and then the user can upgrade.

The support nowadays isn't so good because in order to get support you have to have a support contract. 

Commvault is an enterprise backup solution that does both virtualization, on-premise, and cloud and also does outside replication.

The initial setup is straightforward if you understand Data Protector. The deployment takes around two days. You need a consultant for the deployment. 

The pricing is around $3,000 to $5,000. The charge additionally for support and to scale.

Considering the data report and also the possibility of maintenance and support, I would advise going for Veeam or Commvault because of the free trial security and backup possibility data protection, which is on-premise, cloud, and replication. This cannot be done by Data Protector. 

I would rate it a six out of ten. It only has the option for on-premise while the other solutions can do on-premise, cloud, and replication use the same interface. They should improve it to have a replication feature and do backups within the cloud. It can be a good device to use.

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.

Typically, our clients utilize OpenText Data Protector for Oracle firewall backup NDMPs and, more recently, for HANA. I have undergone training where OpenText explicitly stated their support for SAP HANA. Thus, we have a client base for whom we provide data protection using the Data Protector tool.

Every feature is important in data protection. Every feature plays a vital role. There's nothing particularly about it. 

It is easy to understand and implement. It is also easy to upgrade. These are the main challenges that we face, but OpenText Data Protector makes it quite simple.

In SAP restoration, we faced issues with changing the SIDs and changing the path for every backup object. It is quite a lengthy process to do that. We have to change that individually on every object. We have also provided an enhancement request to the OpenText team.

The backup process for SAP Oracle could be improved. When restoring, the need to alter SIDs arises, particularly in scenarios involving server changes or out-of-place restores. This leads to a requirement for modifying remote checkpoint settings and initiating the restoration process. The situation becomes more complex and time-intensive when dealing with a large number of files.

So, improvements are needed for the backup of SAP Oracle, especially for situations involving CPR codes

Another area of improvement is support. There's room for improvement in terms of the support we receive from the OEM or the technical support team.

The reason for seeking improved support is mainly due to extended response times. Mostly, I've encountered situations where an engineer has to wait until the end of their shift before passing the issue to the next level of support. This process takes too much time to resolve any issue. Unfortunately, we frequently do not receive dedicated support from the Micro Focus team.

Another area of improvement is stability of the application on Windows.

I have worked with this solution for more than two years. We currently use the latest version.

The stability is poor, especially the application which we run on Windows. It is not that stable, so we do some issues with the application. 

I would rate the stability a four out of ten. 

Our clients are normally enterprise-level businesses. So, we have approximately 30 clients using this solution.

There have been instances where Micro Focus helped us resolve cases, but most of the times, we handle the issues ourselves due to the prolonged response time from their team, sometimes taking several days.

Neutral

I would rate my experience with the initial setup a nine out of ten, where one being difficult and ten being easy. 

It is very easy. 

The deployment process typically takes around one or two hours.

To deploy the solution, you initiate the process by right-clicking in the admin interface. The deployment can be done manually or set up for automatic deployment. Information confirmation is a key step, and the solution is then automatically deployed. 

The pricing falls somewhere around seven out of ten, where one being cheap and ten being expensive. It's neither too expensive nor very cheap.

Usually, I work with the standard license rather than a capacity-based one.

I recommend it because it's simple to use, easy to understand, simple to operate, and simple to implement. The backup stability is commendable, even when dealing with NDMP and SAP Oracle backups. Based on my experience, I would suggest Micro Focus Data Protector to our enterprise clients.

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight 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 have two different systems. We use Microsoft Azure Backup for VM machines and Micro Focus for our file server, database, and cloud backups, like Exchange Online and so forth.  

The online backups of Office 365 have room for improvement. This is now available for the Exchange Online part of Office 365, but we're still waiting for SharePoint Online, Teams, etc. We know that it's coming, but it takes time.

We have been using Data Protector for more than 20 years. We started using it when it was an HP solution, but then Micro Focus acquired it. It was always the same product.

Data Protector is highly stable.

Data Protector is scalable. 

I've never heard any complaints about Micro Focus support, so I think it's okay.

Data Protector is quite simple and easy to deploy. The deployment is always the same. It's on a server, and the agents are deployed to the machines in a straightforward way. We have two engineers who deploy and manage all our backup solutions. 

We switched from device licensing to volume-based licensing for Data Protector.

I rate Micro Focus Data Protector eight out of 10. We chose Data Protector years ago because it supported all the systems and databases we needed. Other software packages covered a special range of products but didn't offer broad support. This was a long time ago, so I don't know the situation in the market today.

file backup and VM backup 

Nops, MFDP Solution is outdated in termes of current backup and protection requirements and we are forced to move to another solution 

The world has changed, growth is happening towards cloud capabilities, and this product is not that developed. If you were to ask me what I like about Micro Focus Data Protector previously, I would say that this product is a single platform manager. At that time there was not any competition. You got the backup guaranteed even if it took some time, but in the they recovered the file. It was a really strong backup solution which contained a single license for tender services. But now the world has changed. There is instant recovery available but they're still an application based backup model. They didn't evolve.

Micro Focus Data Protector must improve its overall evolution record. They need to focus on hardware-based instant recovery, client recovery, and cloud abilities. Now there is no cloud ability.

Another thing they need to work on is that they still lack bare-metal VM and bare-metal recovery models.

The third issue they need to improve, and at the top of the list, is that with the RTO and RPO, we cannot come to a customer as an industry best. Because what happens when you sell is that recovery takes the longest time. This is the pain point in the solution, that it takes time compared to instant recovery.

In terms of additional features I would like to see included in the next release of Micro Focus Data Protector, I will be looking for instant recovery features and for better reporting. To sum up, instant recovery and cloud ability (backup to cloud, return to cloud and restore).

I have been using Micro Focus Data Protector in my current environment for about one and a half years and almost seven years total.

Currently, I can only give negative feedback because my experience in its current state is not up to the mark.

It is a traditional backup model. If you talk about file server and the official Windows database, it's a stable product.

But in the VM, nobody is looking for backup for the sake of backup, you are looking at backup for the sake of recovery. It's not frequent, but it happens, so any backup solution should not be focused just on what to backup but focused on how fast they can recover the data. That is the idea of Rubrik. The other competitors don't focus on backup, they focus on recovery. They talk about the instant recovery in backup, the RPO and RTO. When you talk about relation, the focus is towards stability and client complaints. And they still don't have their own dedicated hardware for the backup.

Nops

So I went from the Omni Backup to HP Data Protector to Micro Focus Data Protector. I have seen all three transition products. They have stopped developing. I don't know why that happened.

High in SA renewal cost for not future development 

Yes, at that time they are leaders in the backup

On a scale of one to ten, I would give Micro Focus Data Protector a three or three point five at the highest. If somebody wants to argue, I can go up to three point five, otherwise, three. It is very simple - they have not adopted the latest technologies. Micro Focus Data Protector works, but it's very slow and for the environment I'm running in there are better backups.