Veritas NetBackup Reviews

In terms of most valuable features, I like the fact that if you have a bunch of backups, NetBackup gives you the ability to have one master and multiple media servers. What that means is you can have a bunch of sites that all have libraries and you have one master server that controls all the functionality of all the jobs. You don't have to deploy a standup NetBackup solution at each site. You can just deploy the media version for their tape library and have one master server that controls all the jobs.

What I also like about NetBackup, as opposed to most solutions like Rubrik and Cohesity, which don't really support backing up to tape environments, is that NetBackup does. If you are running on a legacy tape environment NetBackup is best. Most of the guys I've seen that use NetBackup have a tape environment.

The flip side about NetBackup is that it is not policy-based. NetBackup doesn't give you that feature. For example, Rubrik is a policy-based type of app, so when you create a backup job with it, say you have 30 servers in that backup, you can make one policy and apply it to them all. NetBackup doesn't do that. With NetBackup, you need to create a backup job for each server you want to back up and for each server you have. That is the only thing I don't really like about NetBackup. I can use Rubrik or Cohesity where you can create one policy, and apply it to many servers at one time where with NetBackup, you can't do that. You create a backup for each server. That takes more time.

If they can improve on policy-based backups, that would be great.

I have been using Veritas NetBackup for about 10 or 11 years.

I think that the last version I used was version six. They're probably up to eight or 10 now. But really nothing has changed. Maybe additional features from the last time I saw it, but not really much has changed. I think they made a version 10.

The last time I went online I didn't really see much difference from a feature perspective since I began using it. I think the GUI interface looks a little different, a little cleaner, but functionality-wise, I didn't really see much change.

In terms of stability, no problem. Like I said, if you have multiple tape libraries, you can have one master that has a bunch of multiple media services. So you can have tape libraries all scattered at different sites. The one master server you set up controls all the job functions. When you log into it, it just kicks off the jobs and you can pause jobs. For different sites, you can keep the job turned off. It controls all the functions and all the backup jobs for all the multiple sites. That's all the master server does. It doesn't actually do any backup. It's responsible for making the kicked off jobs to get backed up.

Their customer support is not bad. I don't have any issues with technical support. Technical support is okay.

The initial setup is very easy. Commvault has a lot more convoluted setup. NetBackup is really easy to set up. I've never used Commvault, but from other colleagues I know who use it, you need professional services because it's so convoluted to set up. NetBackup is not that convoluted. Commvault is nice. It's a very nice application, don't get me wrong. I'm not going to put it down or anything like that. Once it's running, it's a good product. But from being exposed to Commvault a little, I like NetBackup better. I just think the downside to NetBackup is that it's not policy driven. That's the only thing I don't like about it.

Pricing depends on the number of licenses and on the number of servers you have. It varies based on the number of servers that you're trying to back up.

My advice to anyone considering Veritas NetBackup is to validate. If you have multiple sites, it's better to have the setup. If you have multiple sites that are running a tape library and media servers, you can set up one master server. But if you only have one site, you can set up a backup as a media server and a master server. If you have multiple sites, you want to look at how many sites you are backing up. If it's multiple sites, then you want to set them up with one master server.

If you only have one site, then you have the media server and the master, and it does both. That would be my suggestion - to validate if there is more than one site you're going to be backing up. If you are going to be backing up more than one site, you want to properly set up the first time. If you only have one site you're backing up, set it up as a master media. If you have multiple sites to set up, you want to set them up as media servers and then set up one master server that controls all the functions for the remaining sites. That is really the biggest thing, to be honest with you.

You might want to confirm if it supports backing up to Azure or AWS. Some people want to do long-term archiving. You want to confirm whether or not NetBackup supports backup to Azure or Google Cloud or AWS from a long-term archiving perspective.

Some people backup to tape. Some people are going to say that you can't back up the disk with NetBackup. I just don't know if it supports backing up to cloud providers.

On a scale of one to ten, I'd say NetBackup is an eight. It's pretty strong. I don't have other problems. I would say it's definitely a strong eight. It's a pretty good product.

The use cases for customers are across the board, but they're all for data backup. Veritas is a legacy system. To be perfectly honest, a lot of people are moving away from the legacy systems and moving more towards the cloud-oriented backup solutions. A lot of my customers look at Veritas NetBackup as an antiquated solution.

The most valuable features of the solution are basic backup and recovery. It's a very solid product. Standard backup recovery, that's pretty much it. Other than that, they do some good database stuff, but otherwise, it's somewhat antiquated.

One area for improvement with the product would be better messaging and better solutions around cloud, both on-prem and off. And along with that, which is actually mission critical to every company today, would be ransomware prevention. 

The biggest additional features needed are more cloud capabilities and security from ransomware.

I've worked with the solution for the last fifteen years. I'm a solutions architect. I work with customers to help them design their solutions or improve their current situation.

Veritas NetBackup is very stable.

The solution actually scales out very well.

I'd give the technical support team a B to a B+. They've always been good.

Most companies that have moved to NetBackup were probably on a even older architecture, something that might have been from IBM, NetView. NetView was even an older architecture, it was very difficult to use, and a lot of people moved away from IBM NetView over to Veritas.

Veritas is a pretty straightforward initial setup. It's not difficult to install.

The deployment times vary depending upon how widely it's going to be used, how many backup instances are going to be, how many policies you have to create for recovery time objectives, recovery point objectives. It's all relative to how many policies the customers have, for retention cycles, for backup recovery, as well as archive and disaster recovery. Some can be deployed in a day, others take weeks.

Most people have felt this solution was somewhat expensive. It's licensed for 12 months, 24 months, 36 months, all the way up to 72 months. As long as you're current on maintenance, everything is included and there are no additional costs.

Sometimes we would look at other options before going with Veritas NetBackup. For example, Backup Exec, which is like a sister product of NBU, and they were really for smaller size companies. Commvault was another one that we were looking at.

My advice to others looking at this solution would be make sure it meets all of your requirements. Do you have an on-prem, off-prem, cloud requirement? Do your homework to make sure that whatever product you're looking at meets all the requirements that you need.

I would rate the solution a seven out of ten. It's a very rock solid product, but I wouldn't give it a 10, because it doesn't have some of the newer features of the newer products. But it is a solid product.

We use Veritas NetBackup for backup.

I am the head of the institution and my team is using this solution. It is used by my team. It is evaluated and secured by me, but my storage team uses it 100 percent. I manage this product.

I am comfortable with using this product.

I don't believe that it is flexible enough for business operations and other things.

Unlike Veeam, Veritas does not provide a Community Edition.

The restoration method and the compression ratio need improvement.

I had been using Veritas NetBackup for ten years.

I am now working with the Veeam Backup solution. I have been working with Veeam Backup for two and half years. I am using the Community Edition.

I am very satisfied with this product. It's stable and scales well.

We never approached Veeam for technical help as a community addition because community addition does not include technical support.

I would rate Veeam Backup a nine out of ten.

The restoration method and the compression ratio, appear to be slightly better than Veritas.

Both are different, it is difficult to compare. I am comfortable in both they are neck in neck in terms of competition.

It is reasonably priced.

It is dependent on the institution as well as the company's requirements. Veeam provides a free corporate license for their platform, whereas Veritas does not. Perhaps there will be a trial version period, after which we will need to purchase it.

Veeam, for example, has a Community Edition, which is free for usage, without any support. This does not exist in Veritas. You can try it for 30, 40 days, or a month trial, then you need to pay for it and start the obligation. For example, I use Veeam without any subscription or license. There is a big difference.

I would rate Veritas NetBackup an eight out of ten.

We are using Veritas NetBackup to take backups at every level, from VMware level and SQL to the bare metal level.

I like NetBackup's anomaly detection and Linux storage features. 

NetBackup's Windows-level reporting could be improved. 

I have used NetBackup for more than two years.

I rate NetBackup 10 out of 10 for stability. 

NetBackup is scalable

I rate Veritas support eight out of 10. We have issues reaching them during some hours, and we need to escalate through several levels to get a resolution. Sometimes tickets stay open for days.

Positive

NetBackup is too complex to set up. 

NetBackup isn't cheap. 

I rate Veritas NetBackup 10 out of 10. It's a flexible platform that isn't technically complex. 

Overall, the solution is great. We have no complaints in terms of the quality it provides.

We have been using Veritas NetBackup in our environment for the past 10 years. Although the features don't change much, it's extremely user friendly for us. We have widely deployed the solution as our sole backup solution for the past few years.

The solution offers a lot of really great features that organizations can utilize and take advantage of.

The only pain point we have with this solution is the cost. It's very expensive. In fact, it's so expensive we are looking for other platforms. We want to move away from it in order to save our organization costs.

We've been using the solution for ten years. It's been about a decade since we first started using the solution.

We are growing, and, at the same time, we are also doing some sort of consolidation in Singapore. Due to the fact that we are growing at a very rapid speed, we are looking at other products in the market that can deal with the big amount of data that we are going to back up and we're focusing on those that can do the work very efficiently.

I have contacted technical support in the past. Actually, in fact, I am very close to the account and product team operators in Singapore. They're great. They've been very supportive. We've quite satisfied with the level of service provided.

The initial setup is quite straightforward. The solution itself is very user friendly, so we didn't find the implementation very complex.

Deployment took about half a day of work.

Currently, we're evaluating Cohesity. It is a new solution that we are starting to assess. We're looking at whether it's the right solution to replace our existing NetBackup.

Right now, our entire organization is a NetBackup supporter. However, we also understand that the cost of the backup is actually extremely high. We are actually looking at some sort of alternative at this point.

We're a NetBackup customer and we have a close partnership with Veritas. We don't provide any services to clients. We just happen to use it.

The product itself is great, however, the pricing is very high compared to the competition. 

Veritas has been quite well known in the market for some time now. They have a lot of features as well. However, at the end of the day, it's always the cost that we have to consider.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

We are extensively using this as a single backup solution.

We rely on the certainty of the data recovery. Also, if you want to replicate something, it gives us a very good option to replicate the application or server into different enrollments. So it saves a lot of time for us.

It covers all kinds of different architectures. Plus, it's very user-friendly and it is very reliable. Reliability is the most important thing because once the backup is done, if it is successful, then we're sure that it was successful and we will be able to restore it.

They need to work on the GUI. It has been the same for the last 10 years.

I have been using Veritas Software for about ten years. 

It's a very stable solution compared to other solutions. We faced some issues in the past, but this one runs very smoothly. 

It's quite scalable. We can extend it to more capacity if needed, and licensing also is available, so we are happy with it.

Support is excellent. We found that they were giving proper support. They really work to help you in resolving your issue.

Before switching to Veritas, we were using IBM Spectrum Protect, but it was quite difficult to manage it because it was mostly command based and it did not have the GUI features. 

The initial setup was straightforward. You will not find much difficulty in setting up clients.

The pricing is good. You need to pay an additional cost if you want to fully utilize it. Like we are having virtual enrollment, so we go with the enterprise one. It has more features compared to standard license.

We evaluated other solutions but nothing else fulfilled our need for hybrid enrollment. We were not confident that other solutions would support other architecture. So we went ahead with this solution.

I rate this solution a nine out of ten because there is always room for improvement.

We primarily use the solution for backup and recovery.

Overall the solution is very good. It's a lovely appliance.

They are among the top in the world for backup and recovery. 

The solution is very robust. It covers most of the features that I need and it's able to back up legacy items efficiently.

Technically, it's quite good.

We've found the scalability to be very good.

The stability and performance are excellent.

The solution costs too much. They should work to make it less.

The licensing needs to be improved.

I've been using the solution for ten or 12 years or so. It's been about a decade. We've used it for a long time.

The stability of the solution is very good. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable and the performance has been excellent.

The scalability is okay. It covers a lot of areas that other backup solutions are not covering - such as Unix.

We're using the appliance. It's based on size and not on users.

Support wise, we have local support and it is quite strong. We've very satisfied with them overall. They are helpful and responsive.

The initial setup is pretty straightforward. It's not overly complex. We have a PC. We are familiar with everything as we have 10 years of experience using it. It's not an issue. A company shouldn't have too much trouble with the process either.

The solution is quite expensive. It's like buying a normal car for the price of a Rolls Royce.

I'm a customer and an end-user. I don't have a business relationship with Veritas.

If you have money to spend, I would recommend the solution. If you have a unique environment, it's the best option.

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten. Aside from the high cost, it's an excellent solution.

We use Veritas NetBackup as a backup solution for virtually everything. Everything you can imagine can be backed up with this solution.  

Within our organization, there are roughly 2,000 employees. We definitely plan to continue using this solution.

The virtual SAN is good. All backup products have the same features but it's all about your ability with the code when you are using them. It's durable — we achieve what we expect from it.

It's not a user-friendly solution. It's a little bit complicated. The UI is not very friendly.

I have been using this solution for six or seven years.

Veritas is stable and flexible. When you're talking about virtualization backup, Veritas is great in a secure environment. It's totally virtualized. It's a good solution.

This solution is very scalable.

The support isn't that great. It could be improved. They should have a faster response time.

The initial installation is quite straightforward. Overall, installation takes roughly one hour.

I've installed this solution many times by myself. If you don't have experience with backup solutions, I think it may be challenging for a beginner.

Our technical team consists of four people, including myself, that handle the installation process.

I am currently evaluating NetBackup as it's required for use on the cloud.

I trust Veritas. I would recommend this solution to a friend or to any company. But remember, what you'll get from it depends on your personal ability.

Overall, on a scale from one to ten, I would give this solution a rating of eight. If the support was faster and the solution was more user-friendly, I would give it a higher rating.