Azure Backup Reviews

Currently, I have Many Azure VMs for clients, and We are  doing the backup, disaster recovery, and tactical replication for all of them.

We install the backup stack for our clients. We explain the situation and have our technical team complete the installation for the clients.

With set up managed retention using the backup policy. We do retention, and we do security. 

The level of security is high on it.

Most of our clients used to have Mac storage in all of their offices, such as NAS (network-attached storage) by 20, or 30 terabytes. We have informed our clients, rather than keep their storage on-premises and risking it getting damaged with no disaster recovery, it would be better to synchronize it and move it to the cloud. Some of the clients will keep it on the cloud while some others have to keep it on-premises and on the cloud at the same time for direct synchronization.

The backup is configured as replication or synchronized between both of them.

When we install for the client, they have a full solution. All of their computers are connected to a single sign-on with Office 365. They all have a domain on the Microsoft cloud. Included with this we add Azure, all of their HR software, ERP, and accounting on the cloud. The add-on backup to the environment will be with Microsoft.

One of the most valuable features is security and connectivity to the data.

The hardware is nice. We configure the hardware and can choose anywhere from two cores to 56 cores. 

We configure the machines the way we want.

We are using two different types of technology. Side to side and tier to side. Recently, we sent an email regarding this issue. Maybe they could improve the fees. The cost is a bit high.

If we had 100 users, and we are using the backup on servers, it would be helpful if the user could know the level of synchronization that he has done. It can only be done by administrative forces. As an example, if I am the administrator and I have users getting data online, I can see what is happening. However, for the user, if they are experiencing some kind of failure with their data, they do not receive any notification and do not know. It will work, but it will need a lot of customization.

We would like to see some kind of notification given to the user that a file was not synchronized properly or what may have happened. What we are doing now is through a third party system where they will notify us if a file is not synchronized properly inside of his computer.

We have been using this solution since 2016, so it's been almost four years.

We are now using the latest version.

The solution is stable.

With our clients, there is a 95% success rate, for the remaining 5%, sometimes it's a problem with the network or a problem with the files.

If we give them a server and storage they need to choose a security method if they want to protect their data. They need to add more to be available inside their servers. If a client hasn't chosen protection for his data and his data has malware or any virus, it is not under our umbrella, they must choose their security methods. For most of our clients, we provide security for them.

This solution is scalable and it's easy. It's like you are using your computer folder. We will be mapping. We would map the file to the server. It's like a new folder, a C, D, E, or F. New storage inside the servers will be created.

One of the clients that we have now has 50 terabytes of storage. We have created another server on a cloud backup for these 50 terabytes. They have 100 users that are using this backup through file sharing.

We always get direct support. I am supported well.

We use to have SAN storage , attached to our physical server 

But after being shifted to azure , we felt the performance and security more 

You need someone with experience to complete the initial setup. If you bring in an engineer or a computer science person who doesn't have experience in Microsoft then he cannot do it. They might be able to install the Windows Operating Systems and Active Directory but they won't be able to connect to the VM online on the cloud. They need some experience. If someone trains them, they can get it in one day or maybe two.

In my experience, each installation with us can take 18 days if the client requests an on-premises deployment. If they need just a server to create a backup, we will create a virtual machine online, which will take one or two days.

It will take time for an on-premises installation because we will install the server locally. This includes the operating system, the links, and connecting them to the server and then to the cloud. It will work online or offline. This will take 15 to 18 days.

Again, to backup online, for the server and Active Directory, it will be one day to complete.

We are using a file-shared backup; one for on-premise and one on the private cloud.

Our clients are seeing that it is cost-effective.

The fees are a bit expensive. When clients see improvements and see a product out of the box, clients will not look at the price, but the price could be lower. 

Support payment works by the level of partnership and the number of shares.

As a gold partner, we have more than 50 hours of support per year and this is more than enough. With the 50 hours, I get a one hour call. If I have a problem and I call, they have one hour to call me, and I have unlimited calls if I need them to call me after 24 hours or the next day. 

As gold partners, we generate the licenses for our clients and we pay monthly. Our clients pay annually or make two payments per year.

Sure , like any solution we just make evaluation and testing 

That’s what we have done before starting with azure backup 

Before doing a backup or getting any cloud solutions, you must first check the environment and the systems. Most companies will have computers in a workgroup. Each must have its own domain and Active Directory. 

You will have to do the know-how technologies inside the company for the basic configuration. Then they can choose and start. You know longer have to use storage that will stay inside the office because anyone can unplug it and take it with them.

With a cloud solution, you can specify which MAC address, user, environment, or region can get the data from the server.

I have been using Microsoft for 16 years. I am very familiar with all of the Microsoft technology.

Now they have the cloud, Microsoft Office 365 and Microsoft Azure, so we transfer and we have been awarded the digital technology transformation three times.

We are a cybersecurity company that cares about security for our clients.

As a gold partner and CSP partner, we have our portal. If a client needs 100 Azure servers then I can create them directly for him, without having to contact Microsoft or anyone. I can create them and the charges will come to me monthly. Also, I can choose the mode of payment, be it monthly or annually. There is also the rebate and the cashback that will come with yearly or monthly billing.

I don't see any problems with Azure. It gives our clients peace of mind. Data is important.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.

Azure Backup is best suited for people who have their workloads on Azure. 80% of the use case is for people using compute instances or compute capacity on Azure.

There is a smaller use case for people who want scalable storage, which some can scale up and down, even though their workloads may not be in Azure and maybe a data center workload instead. Azure backup is a good solution if one needs scalable workloads on a cost-effective platform. Those are two primary use cases.

Azure lets you classify your backups as per the user, such as if they are archival backups or if it is something you need to use on a more frequent basis. You can select the tiering for your backup and manage your cost. It's not one single monolithic cost. You can choose your backup storage requirement and choose your storage tiering. And then, of course, you can get a more cost-effective backup at the end of the day. As you move into more cloud-native solutions, which means cloud-native applications developed on and for the cloud, your allocation or backup configuration becomes much more seamless. Moreover, the integrity of your backups is retained without you needing to manually check them. And then configuring your backups integrating your backups is almost seamless for your cloud-native application.

It still does not have a lot of customization, especially if your workloads are not in Azure. More and more customers are looking at hybrid solutions when they have something on Azure, a data center, and a private cloud. Your backup solution may not be customizable enough to suit your requirements when you have a hybrid environment. If it's completely Azure, Azure Backup is an excellent solution. However, there are better alternatives when discussing a multi-cloud or hybrid-cloud solution.

In addition, Though not in my personal opinion or experience, certain security and compliance questions have been raised around Azure, and that's where Azure needs to buckle down as well.

I've worked with the solution for five to six years.

The product is stable. We have not seen any concerns or issues with stability.

There are some medium-based clients, but the bulk of our clients are enterprise clients.

Azure's technical support is good, but there is always room for improvement. It's much better than its competitors.

Positive

Azure Backup is pretty simple to deploy if your applications are hosted on Azure. And the more cloud-native services you use, the easier it is to deploy. The closer you are to Azure's native environment, the easier it gets. It's almost seamless. It's just about checking a few boxes, and it's done. The complexities come in when you are in a hybrid environment.

The time taken to deploy the solution depends upon your backup policy. At most, deploying would not take more than a few minutes. Configuring the backup policies will take time, but actual deployment takes minutes.

Azure Backup is simpler to maintain compared to an on-prem backup. It's a managed service from Azure. With a backup solution, the important thing is to check your daily, weekly, and monthly schedule and the integrity of backups. That's the most time-consuming part, but all that gets highly automated in Azure.

Azure Backup can be expensive if you are not vigilant about your storage steering. You need to monitor your usage. After your backup, your data goes into your storage solution, and the storage can escalate. It should be actively monitored and managed. Otherwise, Azure Backup can get very pricey. But the solution can be very cost-effective if you are smart and have the right governance. Looking at the long term and your usage fluctuates over time, it becomes a much more cost-effective option.

With Azure backup, there is an on-premises option using your Azure Stack, but my experience on that is limited since I deal with Azure cloud-based backups.

If anyone plans to adopt Azure Backup, first understand your backup requirements. Especially if you operate in a multi-regional environment if your workloads are spread over multiple regions and subscriptions, it makes sense to have a cloud-based backup on Azure, especially if you operate in a multi-regional environment. That helps you scale out as required and simplifies the deployment of web-based or Azure-native applications. The word of caution is to be vigilant about your backup consumption and be proactive in choosing the right tier so that it remains cost-effective for you.

I rate Azure Backup an eight out of ten. The solution is great with cloud-native applications. But if you go into a hybrid environment or a multi-cloud environment, that's when there are complexities. Moreover, you need to be vigilant about what you're using. Otherwise, the cost can spiral out of control.

We use Azure Backup as part of our disaster recovery solution. If there is a problem in the entire building then we can restore our data from over the cloud.

Azure Backup is very good for our clients that need to back up data securely and reliably.

Azure Backup is good because it is entirely cloud-based, which means that you can be 99.9% sure that your backup is safe. This is the reason that I suggest its use for companies that need to back up critical data.

The compression ratio of the backup data should be improved. Compared to our on-premises solution, the compression of Azure Backup is not as good. For example, if I am backing up up 100 GB of data then it should be compressed by at least 70%. Instead, it is being compressed by 30% to 35%. Because of this, the utilization of resources in terms of cloud storage is increasing. Given that the cost of cloud-based storage is not cheap, this is an area that is in need of improvement.

The interface should be more user-friendly.

The Azure team in Microsoft technical support needs to improve.

More guidelines and information about use-cases should be available for reference online.

We have been using Azure Backup for almost two years.

The day-to-day usage of this solution is quite normal.

This is a scalable solution.

I am generally satisfied with the technical support, although I would only rate them a six and a half out of ten. From what I have seen, the engineers are not well versed in all of the possible backup scenarios. The knowledge that they have is limited.

For example, in my two years of experience, I think that I was able to better troubleshoot some of the issues better than they were. My intention is not to berate them but I think that they should be more knowledgable about the product.

Level two and three seem to have enough knowledge, although it still takes a significant amount of time.

We use Azure Backup in conjunction with Veeam. Veeam is responsible for our on-premises backup that includes data and file systems. It also put a copy of our data onto the cloud.

We have a hybrid solution because the bandwidth in my country is quite expensive and if we have to do a restore, it is better to have an on-premises capability for that.

The initial setup was not as straightforward as I expected. I was facing certain challenges and I was deeply in contact with the Azure team from Microsoft technical support. It took quite some time for them to resolve my issues. My case was escalated to level three support and to reach that level, it took 10 to 14 working days.

It takes very serious research or good troubleshooting skills to eliminate some of the complex problems that can occur.

In total, it took us about a month to deploy.

This is an expensive solution because of the requirements for cloud-based storage. We are paying about $100,000 USD per year, just for a couple of servers.

My advice to anybody who is considering this solution is that if you can afford it, then I would highly recommend it because the service provides very good value.

The software is very capable but the information available for support is limited.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

We use Azure for our application and back end software. Most of our servers are on Azure. We have our fleet management and system tracking, and all the data from our thousands of clients are connected to Azure. We provide each client with their own backup solution to help them with disaster recovery.

Azure Backup has helped us reach needed information wherever we are. The compression features reduce storage costs and allow us to store more data using less space. It significantly lowers costs, especially in cloud-based solutions.

As a cybersecurity company, we value the data encryption and security offered by Azure Backup. 

The encryption, both in transit and at rest, provides additional security against data breaches. Azure Backup is also reliable and scalable, allowing for scalability and different storage options like cold and hot storage. 

The compression features save us money and speed up the backup and restore process.

Azure sometimes provides reliable recovery that can be slow for large-scale scenarios. They can add features that allow quicker recovery for large databases or virtual machines. 

Easier configuration and automation would be helpful for cross-region backups, improving disaster recovery for global operations. Enhancements in reporting and analytics could be beneficial.

I have been working with Azure Backup for around eight or nine years.

The solution is very stable. Over the years, we never had any problems with it.

For scalability, I would rate Azure Backup an 8.5 out of ten. Everything needs to be scalable, and it is important for us.

Azure offers 24/7 support and multiple support plans. It depends on what you choose. If you choose the basic, it's limited. 

We've been satisfied because we provide our own support. I understand that if you choose premium support, Azure can dedicate resources for you.

Positive

I tried AWS and Google, however, we have been with Microsoft for more than 18 years. AWS has limited support, which is a problem for me as a consultant.

The setup process can be challenging for someone new or with minimal technical background. However, Microsoft has simplified its interface. The backup interface with the Azure portal is user-friendly, with a wizard guide system. 

Complexity can arise when connecting to databases, but the wizard simplifies the process.

Pricing is middle plus, and it's a bit high. We always wait for prices to reduce, however, Azure sometimes offers special discounts or packages if you commit for more years.

Amazon Web Services (AWS) Backup is a competitor. AWS is good for heavy environments but lacks support compared to Azure.

Reporting and analytics improvements with AI technology would be helpful. The setup process is brief and user-friendly with clear steps at each stage.

I'd rate the solution ten out of ten.

The principal use cases of the solution are attached to SQL databases and virtual machines.

The most valuable feature of the solution is the speed of the recovery tasks.

I have been using Azure Backup for six years. My company is a customer and has a partnership with Microsoft.

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

With Azure Backup, I have not had to deal with any issues like bugs or breaking down.

Scalability-wise, I rate the solution an eight out of ten. I don't have any issues related to the product's scalability.

Around 90 people in my organization use the solution.

Previously, in our company, we used a different solution before going ahead with Azure Backup. The reason my company chose Azure Backup was because of the simplicity it offered.

I don't know if the product's setup phase is easy or difficult since I am not involved in the setup process. I am only responsible for the team that carries out the steps related to the product's setup phase in our organization.

Azure Backup is a product that is priced at a cheap rate, and it is a great tool. The product is worth the money you pay for it.

The solution's features are enough to meet our company's use cases.

Whether I recommend the solution to others or not is something that depends on the necessity of those who plan to use it. I recommend the solution to those who have a simple infrastructure.

I rate the overall solution a nine out of ten.

With Azure Backup, you can readily make your environment if your setup somehow fails on the cloud or on-premises. You can immediately get your system from the backups within five or ten minutes.

While Azure Backup allows ingress data, the egress data is chargeable, which should be excluded. Our clients mostly complain that taking a backup with Azure Backup is free, but retrieving the backup from Azure is chargeable.

It is easy to back up small data and run your system in Azure Backup. After your system is ready, you have to sync your system with Azure Backup, which costs more. There are two segments of people. One segment is happy because they got the emergency recovery of their system. They mention that they feel better if they have to pay for the backup or the egress data because their system is okay. Some people are unhappy because their backup is available, but they have to pay for it. Only a small portion (around 20-30 %) of people fall into this segment, but most are happy.

I have been using Azure Backup for almost more than five years.

The solution's stability and performance are good, except for an issue with its servers.

Azure Backup is a scalable solution.

The problem with technical support is the same for all Microsoft products. Azure Backup's technical support team responds well to severe cases. Their response is too much slow for a non-severe case due to being overwhelmed by severe cases. The support team rarely responds to less severe cases; sometimes, it takes two or three days for them to respond. The support team complies with the SLA for severe cases, but sometimes they fail to do it.

Neutral

Azure Backup has the most user-friendly interface compared to AWS, Google Workspace, or Google Cloud. The Azure platform is much easier to work with than AWS and Google Cloud.

The setup for insight cloud backup is easy. However, site recovery from on-premise to the cloud can be tough because we have to set a lot of parameters.

The initial syncing process is tough in case of site recovery. However, it performs better once your system is synced. It is difficult in specific situations, like if you stop syncing, if storage is full, or if your on-premises server storage is full. The initial setup is difficult for site recovery and backup. It becomes easy once the initial backup is completed.

We strongly recommend to our clients that if they already have a primary backup system, it is advisable to complement it with a cloud or secondary backup for added safety. This is crucial because your backup could crash at any moment due to malware. We recommend all our partners and clients have a cloud backup.

We advise our clients to keep a backup on Azure Backup Cloud. We suggest financial organizations keep a tertiary backup. It would be helpful if the solution introduced a reserve system for backup. The clients would only pay for storage and backup service price. They need to reduce prices so that more people would use cloud backup.

Although some customers already have an on-premises backup for their environment, offering a slightly lower price and the option for one-year and three-year reserve systems may draw more people to opt for secondary backup on the cloud.

Overall, I rate Azure Backup an eight and a half out of ten.

The product is used for disaster recovery. We worked for a bank that needed disaster recovery. The bank was using a VMware solution. They also had some critical virtual machines. So, we deployed the solution for them.

The tool has a lot of features. It is really useful.

We faced some issues synchronizing the information in Azure when the storage was changed. We have to troubleshoot a lot. We do not know the reason for the issue.

I use the solution in my organization.

The tool is stable.

The tool is scalable. Only three to four companies use the solution in our region.

Our customers contact the support team to troubleshoot their issues.

I have used Nutanix. There was a big difference in the cost of Nutanix and Azure. Azure has a pay-as-you-go model. Azure is better than Nutanix.

The initial setup was straightforward. It is a cloud solution. We download the agent and scan for the VMs on-premise. Then, we connect the on-premise server with Azure. Later, we do the network and storage configuration.

We save money because we do not need a data center. We pay only for storage, and it is not very expensive.

The product is not expensive. We just pay for the storage. The storage is not expensive.

Overall, I rate the tool an eight out of ten.

Our company was facing a lot of difficulties maintaining the servers, and we did not have a solid backup solution. So, we moved to Azure.

The product is very reliable and easy to use. Microsoft tools are very user-friendly.

The product could improve its performance.

I used the solution in my previous organization for about two years.

The tool had stability issues. The support team took care of it.

The tool is easily scalable since it is cloud-based. Around 1500 people were using the solution in our organization.

The support was superb. Whenever we had any issues, we called the support team.

Positive

The installation was easy. We took two to three months to deploy the solution. We had to plan since we had a lot of servers.

We had a partner who assisted us in installing the solution. We had a SPOC who was taking care of everything. We required two or three people on the back end to deploy the product. The partner assisted us, and we did the planning and strategy. The solution was easy to maintain. We needed two people to maintain it.

The product is neither too expensive nor too cheap. It is moderately priced. We pay a monthly subscription fee for the solution. We have to pay additionally for the ticket cost for support. We also have to pay for any extra services that we avail.

The solution is neither better nor worse than other products. It is on the cloud, so we don't have any backup appliances on-premises. The drawback is that it relies on network bandwidth and other factors for recovery. If we had a backup appliance on-premise, it would be easy to recover.

We had branch offices in India, headquarters in Hong Kong, and multiple offices in Singapore, the UK, and the US. All the branches were using Azure.

People who want a purely cloud-based solution can use the product. People who want a hybrid solution must consider other vendors. Though Azure has secondary data on the cloud, it still recommends using some third-party tools like Veeam and Commvault. Having data on Azure and backup data on another third-party vendor is fair enough.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.