AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery vs Carbonite Server comparison

"​The initial setup is really straightforward."

"The initial setup is pretty straightforward, it's not complex."

"CloudEndure is easy, and block-level replication will happen."

"We went from an organization with minimal to no disaster recovery, and I was able to spin up the disaster recovery environment with AWS rather quickly and meet business requirements."

"The initial setup is pretty straightforward, it's not complex."

"The ability to replicate our database and our data from one cloud to another is the most valuable feature."

"CloudEndure Disaster Recovery is a fairly stable solution."

"For regular backup and restore solutions, this product is fine."

"The advice that I have for people looking into using Carbonite Server is that it seems reliable and easy to use."

"It seems reliable and easy to use."

"Technical support handled all our issues quickly and effectively."

"The solution is a free engine to help work with the container."

"It does not slow down your computer or use a lot of resources as it works."

"Easy verification of things is the most valuable feature."

"The Granular Restore of SQL feature has been a lifesaver more times than I can count. One of the main reasons for looking at Carbonite was their support for platforms like AIX and AS/400 Series."

"The solution is very stable."

"The only thing I would like to see is, they don't have a formal ticketing system. There is no way I can go back and see what questions we had six months back, what issues we had, and how they were resolved."

"However, the user interface and monitoring features could be improved to make the overall experience better."

"The solution's network setup and a lot of the control tower setup could be improved."

"The cost of AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery is seen as expensive."

"Since I have to view everything on the console, the previous application solutions like IBM and Sanavi showed the RPO and RTO status directly. In AWS Disaster Recovery Service, these details are not available, making it difficult to check my replication status."

"I have not seen any areas that need improvement at this time."

"I set up a test, deleted the source, and went to fail it back, and it didn't work."

"Definitely there should be better logging. From a customer perspective I would like to see more logs on what is happening."

"The stability has room for improvement."

"The support for object storage isn't quite there yet. Its public cloud support can be improved. I would love to see the public cloud support for object storage, and it would be great, but what I always hear from the folks at Carbonite is that in a lot of cases, it directly competes with their cloud offering. So, I don't know when or where that will go or if that will go anywhere, but we are hopeful to see something. The dashboard is a little outdated. If they gave it a facelift and put some better design around their dashboard, that would be tremendous. I generally care less about the visual aesthetics of an application as long as it does what it needed to do, which is true in the case of this solution. We also have the Microsoft 365 platform. Because they're two separate platforms, I have to log in to my Microsoft platform to manage it, and I have to log into my Carbonite server backup platform to manage it. Having these two coexist together in one management console is really what we're looking for, but we went for it knowing this. We also knew that there would be some integration coming down the road. So, we're again hoping to see some of that coming in 2021."

"They do not yet have USB recovery but they are adding it in coming releases."

"I would like to see an improvement on the management user interface, as well as Kellion integrations."

"When you have to restore it, Carbonite takes a lot of time."

"The support for object storage isn't quite there yet; its public cloud support can be improved."

"The only thing that I would like to see improved is related to marketing. Currently, it is very difficult to find the right paper and stuff for me. Their marketing department should provide better information because currently, it is very difficult to find information on the internet. It was bought over by OpenText, and you won't be able to find a lot of information about this solution on their site. They should also provide training facilities for commercial purposes. Some of my colleagues recently went for pilot training, and they were technical. If I want to get trained, the training has to be more commercial. Currently, there is no such training for users like me."

"They do not yet have USB recovery but they are adding it in coming releases."

"I feel the product's pricing is a good value. Licensing is pretty straightforward."

"They license us on a per machine basis. We have a set number of machines, which we have licensed.​"

"We were happy with the pricing that they gave us."

"The pricing is better now that they had come out with the Tier 2 which replicates a little less often. In comparison to what I would have been spending with any other type of solution, the pricing is fair."

"On a scale from one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive, I rate the solution's pricing an eight out of ten."

"It has saved us money from having to buy hardware for disaster recovery."

"CloudEndure Disaster Recovery is charging clients $20 to do the DR backups. It is an expensive solution."

"Where the price adds up, there are CloudEndure licenses, then there is the AWS environment, and finally, there is the AWS storage, so cumulatively, it adds up."

"We pay 9,000 dollars per year for our license."

"The pricing is between $120 and $150 per year."

"Its price is reasonable."

"The solution is open source."