IBM Tivoli CDP for Files vs OpenText Data Protector comparison

"The restoration and infrastructure is extremely reliable."

"What I like the most about this solution is that I can change and access the Oracle backup file."

"Deduplication implementation with CAPA is very good."

"OpenText Data Protector is good for physical backup, specifically for physical servers."

"The solution is easy to use."

"What we find most valuable in Micro Focus Data Protector is that it provides Japanese data protection, for example, it protects information such as the full Japanese name, address, etc."

"It's supports Unix, Linux, all of the OS's. It's very stable software."

"The command-line interface is user-friendly and well documented in the reference guide."

"The most valuable features of this solution were the features we worked most with which were telemetry, and the scheduler."

"We would like to have the opportunity to omit data from being backed up. For example, we have three virtual machines, each with three disks. When running the backup, it will automatically take each disk rather than allowing us to select what data we want backed."

"If you compare the solution with the same specific features and enhancements on another solution, Data Protector is expensive. This is especially true when compared to, for example, Veeam."

"We face challenges with its stability."

"In terms of what can be improved, I would say integrations with MongoDB. We use MongoDB and we need to go to scripts to do backups. We need more integrations."

"Recently, clients have raised concerns about the lack of comprehensive documentation for Data Protector."

"The scheduler setup could be better. We are facing some issues scheduling the job based on our requirements."

"We faced some certification issues after we upgraded to version 10.2."

"The technical support was very slow."

"We have a lot of requests for the Micro Focus team, particularly in terms of the Japanese data pattern, as it's not as good now. The Japanese data pattern accuracy of the Micro Focus Data Protector needs to be improved because there are a lot of false negatives and false positives. We are currently testing this and our product team has been communicating with the Micro Focus team."

"It's expensive, but it's worth for it due to the volume of critical information within our database. We are currently paying about $22,000 per year."

"The license for the solution is very expensive compared to the other products in the market."

"Pricing for Micro Focus Data Protector is reasonable."

"The pricing is around $3,000 to $5,000. The charge additionally for support and to scale."

"Pricing/licensing is Data Protector's single best offering. In its most basic environment, the only license required is for whatever target device is required."

"They have two types of licensing, one is for storage capacity and the other is client licensing. The capacity licensing here is a bit expensive."

"The pricing is acceptable for enterprise level companies, but it's not acceptable for small- and medium-sized businesses. Micro Focus Data Protector is not an enterprise level solution, and it should cover small- and medium-sized businesses with acceptable prices."

"Data Protector's pricing is very competitive and we have no issues in this regard. I would give it an eight out of ten in terms of pricing."

"In Data Protector, if you need extra features, you need to buy the agents for these features. Some of the features are Terabytes, some of them are agents. There's some complexity in the pricing and licensing."