Carbonite Server vs HPE Zerto Software comparison

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

"The solution is very stable."

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

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

"The efficiency and convenience are excellent."

"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 solution has helped me reduce downtime in situations where, during a weather event, we were able to maintain 100% of our operations."

"Zerto has helped reduce our organization's DR testing to seconds to minutes. We have been able to save probably close to 200 hours a year."

"The ability to quickly bring up VMs within a test environment allows us to test our disaster recovery functions and ensures that they would function just as well in an actual disaster scenario."

"When we need to failover or move workloads, Zerto significantly decreases both the time it takes and the number of people involved. It only takes a single person to activate a failover and we can pretty much automate everything else."

"Some of the most valuable features are the synchronous replication and migration with RDMs. I really like the conversion of RDM VMs for migration."

"The ease of setting up replication, the speed, and the ease with which I can fail over and fail back are all excellent aspects of the solution."

"We use the solution for one-to-one replication from data center one to data center two, from server one to server two, or from the cloud to on-premises."

"Files can also be extracted from the VMDK at the remote site even when the VM is off."

"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 The dashboard is a little outdated.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."

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

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

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

"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."

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

"Expanding the product to compete more fully with products such as Veeam would be a big benefit in the market."

"When setting up Zerto, you have to set up VRAs. I would like to see those not be needed as much. They're a little cumbersome and take up a lot of VM counts."

"The solution hasn't decreased our organization's DR testing time; in fact, it has increased it because we use it as a tool in our healthcare business, doing it every month to verify that everything is working correctly."

"The backup end of this solution could be improved. We tried using it as a full backup solution and it took way too long to complete at least one backup."

"For special situations, there are options within advanced settings. You don't have to dig too far for them, but they're not quite as straightforward."

"Zerto requires these thick provision walls for virtual machines that are always running."

"The ease of setup can be improved in the next release of HPE Zerto Software. The initial setup of the DNS environments and backup environment took us time to implement, and if the process was wizard-driven, that would have been really beneficial."

"The primary concern expressed by all server users is the lack of robust integration features."

"The solution is open source."

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

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

"Its price is reasonable."

"It was pretty appropriate. It was not too cheap, not too expensive. It was just about right."

"In general, it's pretty fair because it is software. In our case, we built our own colo. So, the cost of the colo was very expensive, and that's where a lot of the equipment is. The same thing is there if we were going to spin up in the cloud, but as a solution, in general, it's pretty fair for what you get out of it and how it works. It's not cheap, but at the same time, you get what you pay for, and it's definitely worth the cost. You just have to understand that the cost of the software alone is not the total cost of the project of doing ransomware protection or disaster recovery. It's a piece of the pie, not the entire pie."

"Compared to other options like SRM, Zerto is a more expensive solution, making it primarily suitable for larger organizations."

"The pricing is slightly above average, but the immediate and comprehensive support makes the price acceptable."

"Zerto is a little expensive."

"The cost per VM is a bit high."

"Nothing is cheap, but Zerto represents decent value."

"In a world where others are catching up, e.g., VMware High Availability, there needs to be a less expensive option as well. When a customer has approximately 100 VMs, if you multiply by 40, we aren't charging a very high margin on it at all since the license is so expensive. We feel their pain. That is the most expensive part of it. The storage, CPU, and RAM are a lot less. It is the licensing that is really expensive. Whereas, with an option like VMware High Availability, it is a couple dollars per month. That is our spend that we are charged by VMware, then our margin is higher on those VMs. Giving us some ability to have higher margins, as an MSP, would be a good thing."