OpenText Data Protector Reviews

This is our only backup product and we've used it since the beginning because HP was a partner of our organization.

It seems to me that HP is not focused in their backup and recovery division. They're going to release other products which integrates with Data Protector and which use special licenses for functions that Data Protector already can do. I wish they'd focus on one product that does everything, and that product should be Data Protector.

One particular improvement I'd like to see with Data Protector is the user management. A user in a group is limited to only some rules without rights to do more backup and recovery functions.

We've had no issues deploying it.

Data Protector is absolutely stable for us. We have no issues with instability.

We only have one terminal shelf so we have only one data center, but they are all backed up, so scalability works just fine. We don't really have a large environment to manage.

I think their support is OK, but not very good. The problem is that Data Protector is spread across so many hardware and software combinations that its development can't keep pace with all the changes in heterogeneous environments. So we have issues with IBM DB2 databases. The integration with Data Protector was old and unstable.

The release cycle for Data Protector was way too fast for customers, going from 7 to 8 to 9. When we had issues, they instructed us to upgrade to version 9, and then we had two or three more problems. We could never fix every problems because new ones kept coming up.

It's been better in the last year, however, because version 9 seems to be stable with some patches.

It's a very good product for backup and recovery. You should do the trial for 30 or 60 days and implement it on Linux or Windows, but not UNIX

The most valuable feature for me is the duplication.

With Micro Focus, which works with the HP hardware, you don't need to use interfaces. With other solutions like Backup Exec, etc., you have to run an additional API in the background. It impacts your systems. It's not the same when you are using Micro Focus directly with the HP hardware. This solution is more efficient. If you use another solution, you need to use an additional API. The people who designed Micro Focus were from HP, which is why they work so well together.

The solution would be improved if it would work with OpenStack.

People prefer Veeam because the interface is easier, and Data Protector is difficult in comparison.

Data Protector is beginning to integrate virtual machines. Customers, however, find it more comfortable to work on a virtual machine, for example, with Veeam Backup. They find it easier, once again, because the interface is easier.

Stability isn't perfect. You have issues from time to time. 

I'm working on multiple cases, so I'm able to see what is not working with the software. Micro Focus, however, continues to refine the product, which is one of the strengths of the solution. They have new versions every month to fix problems. We advise clients from time to time to upgrade to improve stability. 

With new installations, incidents can occur sometimes. If you have an incident that affects the backup server, it can impact the software and create a bug. There are people from Micro Focus - high-level people - that can help and take control of the solution remotely to troubleshoot issues.

Regarding scalability, it's unlimited with Data Protector. You can link multiple installations and let them work together. They can share backup devices. You have many possibilities with Data Protector. It's very proficient.

I didn't previously use a different solution.

The initial setup is complex. You have software to install on all of the machines and communication to set, including security communication. It's a delicate process, and it's not something common and easy to do. Normally we plan downtime with the customer. For a big enterprise, we take nearly a week to upgrade the solution.

Occasionally, we have problems when upgrading. Sometimes there's something that's not automated and you need a specialized person that can do the upgrade or the installation for you.

We installed the solution. We are an integrator.

We essentially handle enterprise solutions. We work with enterprises that have their own cloud and machines to back up their systems.

I would rate this solution ten out of ten.

If you are an enterprise, and you need a strong backup solution, Micro Focus is for you. For me, it's the best.

Originally, the benefit from Data Protector was that it fitted in because we buy HPE storage. So as an ecosystem, it was quite easy and smooth.

Although the ecosystem is good, development of Data Protector isn’t as fast as other products.

Actually, we're moving away from Data Protector due to lack of support on newer operating systems and latest products. For example, it takes time to support new products such as Windows 2016. Since we want to move faster, we're moving towards Tivoli Storage Manager. The reason being our infrastructure partner is IBM.

Improvements should be brought about in regards to the support for VMware. There is limited support for VMware, but it's not as good as other products.

We're running quite old versions. We're now running unsupported versions.

However, when it was relevant for this kind of work, the product was fairly stable.

The technical support was pretty good from HPE; better than usual. They're not bad.

It was more on the development side and that is why we are moving away.

We have not used any other solution and started off with Data Protector. Our company started using Data Protector from day one, as it was a free solution.

It was very much cross-platform. We run H-DOX, Solaris, Windows and Linux and it fit in.

Originally, we did have a vendor shortlist. We were looking at NetBackup, Veritas and similar products. We also looked at IBM and since we use them a lot we decided to go with their solution. That was very easy.

Globally, TSM is a well-known product. It is another old legacy product that has been used for decades.

You need to look at the applications that you're backing up. For integration, it's case by case. The integration piece is the key. As a piece of technology, it's good.

Integrations with others systems are the most valuable feature. With a little setup, you can connect and make online backups of entire structures like SAP/Oracle/MS Exchange.

Data Protector allows us to improve our SLA in successful backups and the reporting tools integrated with our management console make possible 99% backup success in our clients.

The product could be better in a "policy assignment". Each job requires you to have your own device selection, and it takes a lot of setup work in a large environment.

I've used it for five years.

No, Data Protector is very easy to deploy itself. The final touches are more complicated because of the specificity of each environment.

The StoreOnce software has a few problems with housekeeping jobs, requiring us to contact support.

The software itself is a very robust solution. The database in new PostgreSQL architecture allows a large cell without problems.

The customer service works well, but we don’t have a lot of specialists/vendors here in Brazil.

We never have problems with technical support.

We have a lot of customers who migrated to Data Protector. The main motive was cost X benefit of the solution. Data Protector is a simple software with a very huge potential to attend to mid-high businesses.

Initial setup was very simple. With GUI or Command Line Interface, it's just a few steps and the software is installed and ready for the setup the jobs.

We always implement in-house. We had a bad experience with a vendor team's lack of expertise.

Licensing of HP Data Protector is one of the best things about this product. We have a lot of flexibility to choose TB or number, Online Extension, etc. Also, one Cell Manager license grants unlimited file system backups, so you can use one or a number of licenses in a small environment. This makes the product very attractive.

Yes, we evaluated BackupExec and ArcServer, which are better in some ways, but lost to Data Protector in a lot of ways.

Stay in focused to make things work simply and use the software feature without fear. Data Protector offers a lot of customization, so know your environment particularities before setup and optimize the functions.

• Integration with a lot of OS and applications, e.g. SAP, Oracle, Exchange, SQL Server, SharePoint, VMware, Unix, Linux etc.
• Very reliable SAP and Oracle integration.
• Licensing is based on a backup library/drive instead of a licensing model based on the involved servers. This library centric model allow you to add some new backup procedures very quickly.
• Intuitive user interface
• Easy and reliable client agents installation
• Backup log files accurate and clear
• A lot of customization is possible through the configuration files and script integration
• Preview for backup and restore
• A powerful CLI interface is also available

• Fantastic SAP backup resilience and reliability
• Offline and on-line consistent backup possibilities
• Oracle log treatments for archive log mode databases
• Affordable restores with preview possibilities

• Reports
• Possibilities to personalize the GUI adding desired columns
• Windows image backup (similar to Symantec Backup Exec System Recovery that allows you to restore an entire Windows system through the network without the need to create DVD or boot devices)

We've used it for 10 years, starting with v5.1.

No, but it depends on the application platform you want to work on.

No. Recently I accidentally destroyed my backup server and the HP technicians restored my backup server in the entirety in a few hours using Data Protector's own backup. We often use Data Protector for disaster recovery tests, and the results were always successful.

No issues encountered.

They're honest and helpful.

Until last year it was very good, but in 2015 we felt a drop in service because some technical resources disappeared.

In the past we used the different manual operating system approach. We also used Symantec Backup Exec System Recovery to backup Windows images and files. Our schema is a specific tool for OS system images (Symantec Backup Exec System Recovery for Windows OS, to do net recovery for HP Unix OS) and Data Protector for the data.

It's a very simple deployment on file systems, Exchange, SQL server, and VMware, and more difficult on SharePoint, SAP and Oracle, and even these difficulties are derived from the Applications architecture itself. It depends on how large is your backup scope; the wider it is, the more time you need to dedicate to the implementation of the product. However, the Initial set-up itself is not complex.

We implemented the initial version of the product through a vendor team. They were experts, and helpful, and we have done some upgrade projects within the team.

We implement the initial version of the product through a vendor team, the team was expert and helpful, we also have some upgrade projects with the team.

The licensing approach is very convenient and useful because if you purchase the license based on physical drives, you can backup everything on them. If a new server application is deployed, you can start backup to it immediately. Other license, possibilities are available, for example if you have some D2D appliance you can acquire licenses based on the per-terabyte approach. The maintenance contract grows every year by 5%.

No, but we know different customers that use more popular backup product like Legato, Tivoli, and Netbackup. Often, they tell us that these products are good but very expensive or complex to use. Often when competitors suppliers visit us for marketing, they always says that Data Protector is not an enterprise backup solution. This is a typical vendor approach and I really think that this is not true because in our experience, Data Protector does its work well, and this is what a customer need.

Trust in Data Protector. It's probable that HP doesn't push it enough in marketing but the product works well.

Backup View by Type

Client View

Restore View

Sessions View

Tape Slots View

We can back up Oracle databases, SQL databases, Windows machines, Linux, and virtual machines like VMware with this product.

In terms of configuration, it's very flexible. 

If you have an idea of what you are doing, it's very flexible and very stable. We've been using it since 2010 without an issue.

The downside of the flexibility on offer is if you over-configure it, it may fail to function as some configurations may not match. That said, it's a very flexible tool to use it. It helps to start with minimal configuration to avoid misalignment of parameters.

The scheduling could be better. We thought they had made some improvements, however, the scheduling of backups needs to be more flexible and we need to be able to apply different policies at different times.

I've been using the solution since 2010. I've been using it since version six onwards. It's been more than ten years at this point.

The stability is great. For the most part, there are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable. However, when it comes to new versions, there are certain issues that crop up. They may be due to new developments.

It's scalable. You can have multiple Cell Managers. For example, let's say your environment is very large. You can have the backup server dedicated to a certain group of targets, and then you can have multiple backup servers. You can have another backup server that manages the other backup servers, which means now you can have a global view of all the backup servers. 

At the same time, when it comes to storage, you can integrate it into several storage areas. Instead of just using tape, you can use the backup directly to disk. That means even the disk capacity can scale up to many terabytes depending on the storage you are using.

In terms of users, I can't say we have so many users as we are an enterprise, and within an enterprise, there'll be people dedicated to managing the backup. 

As we have a couple of hundreds of systems that we are backing up, I would say that we use it quite extensively.

We've used technical support in the past. For example, recently, we were changing our licenses from the traditional licensing to capacity We had to ask them to help us apply the license. That was the first time we were applying that license. For the traditional licenses, we've been doing it ourselves without a problem. They helped to show us how to apply the license, which means next time we can do it ourselves.

The initial setup is straightforward if you know what you are doing. However, due to the flexibility, you may find that you need someone who can guide you in terms of doing the minimum that is required, instead of just over-configuring it. 

In 2010, when I started using it, the backups were actually failing every day, only to find that there were too many mismatching configurations due to the flexibility. 

The deployment process can take a couple of days. For us, we are a large environment. While the installation itself doesn't take long, the configuration will take time in terms of configuring the backup devices and making sure that everything is working. We need to test and then add new clients. Most of the time required is just to configure the backup devices, like the disks to the virtual tapes, and add that line. However, the installation itself doesn't take long. That part you can do in half a day.

There are just a few people managing the backup environment, however, there are a couple of hundred systems that are being backed up. In terms of the people, we have about five users who look after the environment. However, it's stable. They are not busy with the environment every day. It's just to manage backups.

In general, the size of the team needed to watch the system depends on the size of your environment. The platform itself doesn't need a lot of people. One person is enough. That said, just looking after backups is what makes you look for more people. Looking after the platform, we've been using one person for a long time. 

In terms of licensing, you just pay for the licenses you use. That said, it depends on what you want to do - depending on the functionality you need. With capacity-based licensing, you just pay for the size of the backups, and you have all the functionality that comes with the platform.

We've tried Veeam for VMware, for virtual machines. At the time, it had limitations. We have since stuck with Data Protector. We have evaluated other solutions, however, for some reason, we decided not to go further.

I'm a customer and an end-user.

We are almost using the latest version of the solution. We are actually using 10. We haven't yet upgraded, however, we are just a step away from the latest.

I would recommend the solution to others. They are 100% perfect. Just like any company, they have their own issues. That said, I would still recommend it as a comprehensive backup and recovery solution. 

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten.

I would like to see an improvement in the reporting feature of this solution as it is really bad. It needs to include important views and dashboards so that we can configure the functions we need. They should also improve their technical support to make the response time faster.

This solution is quite stable because we have only three users. I am not sure if we will increase our usage soon.

The technical support was very slow.

The initial setup was really complex. I am not at all impressed by this solution. It was difficult to find anyone here in Denmark to help us with the setup because my experience was that everybody was moving away from this solution. So we had to do the installation ourselves.

I really wouldn't recommend others to use this solution - especially when it comes to the technical support. I rate this a five out of ten.

I use the Micro Focus Data Protector for our corporate data backup requirements. That is the main business need for this product by our company.

I don't like any function of the Micro Focus Data Protector. Honestly, I hate the Micro Focus Data Protector. It's not really good.

I have used Micro Focus Data Protector for the file backup facilities. My primary use of the software is to backup file data.

The software needs to redesign the UI and they should organize the functions so that they are much easier to use. It's very hard to understand how to use the software.

Micro Focus Data Protector is stable. I have one customer using it. The data center utilizes it. 

It is scalable. We use it for our data center and website.

We haven't contacted the technical support with Micro Focus.

The initial setup is very complex. It's hard to understand how the components work together and how each component is related together. I read a lot of information but I still don't really understand MFDP. I don't spend much time on it, therefore it's hard to understand. 

The information about MFDP is easy, but the application of it is not easy. When I deploy the software, I only understand it because I have written down all the information.

It just takes a few hours to finish the installation and the configuration.

I have deployed Micro Focus Data Protector myself with some technical issues and problems.

The Micro Focus Data Protector solution is not really good, but it is "good enough" that it can help our client requirements. If I compare Micro Focus Data Protector with other solutions, MFDP just does not have enough complexity in the UI.

On a scale from 1 to 10, I would give Micro Focus Data Protector a seven. They should design the solution so that it is much easier for deployment and make the UI easy to use.