Carbonite Server vs Dell NetWorker comparison

"I find the BMR/image and the recovery pieces are valuable."

"It seems reliable and easy to use."

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

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

"The efficiency and convenience are excellent."

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

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

"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 backup software has been much faster since we've deployed the solution."

"The solution is very user-friendly. After setting up five machines for our customers we teach them how to set up the agent and start doing their backups. It is very easy for them once they see how to do it, they like to do it on their own."

"It is an extremely stable product."

"The GUI is user-friendly."

"Technical support is good."

"The solution offers compatibility with many types of database systems. It is one of the largest backup solutions. Additionally, it gives important information about data domain systems with deduplication."

"The solution has a longer lifespan."

"The updated graphical interface is better than it used to be."

"It could be a little bit easier or faster to be able to access data files without having to download anything."

"In the next release I would like to see an improvement in the auto failover option."

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

"The Hyper-V backup has room for improvement."

"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."

"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."

"When you're working with VMware, you need to use vProxy machines. You have to install the vProxy for every host in the VMware environment."

"In some cases, solutions are not found in one method of call and it escalates to many levels until an experienced person can join to resolve the issue."

"The user interface is hard to use, it should be simplified. There are a lot of web-based management interfaces which they should consider."

"The support is an area with concerns where improvements are required."

"We encountered challenges during the solution's deployment, particularly integrating our database system and Microsoft Exchange. This area needs improvement."

"There should be more vendors incorporated into the solution."

"They need to be compatible with the cloud because EMC NetWorker cannot compete with other products at the moment. EMC focuses only on their own cloud and do not take into consideration other cloud vendors."

"The implementation process could be improved."

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

"Its price is reasonable."

"The solution is open source."

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

"The tool is pricey."

"The price of the license could be cheaper and it would be a benefit if they came up with a new pricing model. The competitors here in Oman sell universal licensing where a number of virtual machines are hosted at the customer place which can be licensed, or you can license the CPU sockets in those servers. However, NetWorker offers only CPU sockets or overall storage capacity to backup, but there is no universal licensing where you can provide a number of VMs. They should offer more options to stay competitive with other solutions, such as Veeam."

"It is a relatively inexpensive product compared to one of its competitors."

"It is not very expensive and not very cheap."

"If you purchase Avamar, NetWorker is free with Avamar, for one terabyte license capacity."

"Dell NetWorker is an expensive solution. None of the backup products are cheap. The licensing model offered is usually a five-year one."

"The pricing of the solution is not the cheapest compared to other similar solutions. The Networker is available as a component of the Dell EMC Data Protection Suite package and it should have the ability to be purchased separately."

"Pricing is cheaper for this product, compared to its competitors."