Veritas InfoScale Availability vs Windows Server Failover Clustering comparison

Veritas and Microsoft are both solutions in the High Availability Clustering category. Veritas is ranked #3, while Microsoft is ranked #1 with an average rating of 7.5. Veritas holds a 27.9% mindshare in HAC, compared to Microsoft’s 24.4% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Veritas users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Microsoft users who would recommend it.

Veritas InfoScale Availability

Read 2 Veritas InfoScale Availability reviews

543 Views
543 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Windows Server Failover Clu...

Read 8 Windows Server Failover Clustering reviews

878 Views
878 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Veritas InfoScale Availability

Windows Server Failover Clu...

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Veritas InfoScale Availability and Windows Server Failover Clustering based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out in this report how the two High Availability Clustering solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.

To learn more, read our detailed Veritas InfoScale Availability vs. Windows Server Failover Clustering Report (Updated: July 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Veritas InfoScale Availability vs. Windows Server Failover Clustering

July 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 865,295 peers since 2012

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Categories and Ranking

Veritas InfoScale Availability

Ranking in High Availability Clustering

3rd

Average Rating

8.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Windows Server Failover Clu...

Ranking in High Availability Clustering

1st

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

5.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the High Availability Clustering category, the mindshare of Veritas InfoScale Availability is 27.9%, up from 20.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Windows Server Failover Clustering is 24.4%, down from 33.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

High Availability Clustering

Featured Reviews

it_user281973

Storage and VMware Expert at a comms service provider with 1,001-5,000 employees

It provides a stable SAP environment, but deployment does require someone with experience.

It offers High Availability for many applications, including Oracle and SAP environment In my last job, it provided a great SAP environment that was stable and running on Veritas Cluster. I've used it for six years. It's not so easy in some cases, and you will need some experience. There were…

Read full review

Saad Khoudali

System Administrator at Confidential

A scalable solution to create clusters, and auto-assign a master

The solution has some downsides related to the election mechanism, meaning that if the servers or the cluster services or cluster server elect one server, they will attribute to that server an object that is called a quorum. This quorum does the server or the service that has that quorum, it is taken as the master. So when you have, for example, something happens in your data centers like a power outage or an unexpected shutdown, and you can't start the master server what sometimes will happen, is since the shutdown was unexpected, the cluster didn't have time to do some post configurations before the extension of the shutdown of the servers, sometimes that quorum can't be removed from the crashed master and the cluster wants stuff. This is part of the architecture of this service, the Failover service. So sometimes we face this type of problem. In the past, we had a lot of power outages and when we started after, our server, we faced this problem. Meaning that the cluster won't stop because one of the servers, the master crashed, and they didn't want to start. So we need to access and do some line configurations so that we will force the cluster to elect a new master and ignore the crashed one.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros

"It integrates well with other solutions."

"The reliability is pretty good."

"Some of the advantages, are it can give you the ability to choose."

"The product is stable."

"The most valuable features of Windows Server Failover Clustering are the ISS, failover cluster, and DC."

"The most valuable feature is the ability to easily create clusters supporting geo-redundancy."

"The solution switches over to another server in case the server goes down."

Cons

"It could be more stable and more secure."

"The standard, non-enterprise technical support could be improved."

"They could drop the price or improve the cost of the hyper-converged component of it all. Right now, licensing is expensive and complex."

"The product should be less dependent on network configuration."

"There are times when we do the system security updates and have to restart the server which is difficult because we need to wait until the end of the day or when working hours are finished. There are service updates that have a requirement to restart the system and it is not convenient."

"The stability is good, except for when something crashes or shuts down unexpectedly, then it can be a bit difficult to reestablish the service in a stable state."

"The tool's pricing is high."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Our clients pay for licensing on a yearly basis."

"The functionality is included in Windows Server licences."

"So if you acquire the Windows server license, you will also get all of the Windows services licenses."

"We are on an annual license to use this solution."

"I would rate the solution's pricing an eight out of ten."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which High Availability Clustering solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

865,295 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

24%

Computer Software Company

Real Estate/Law Firm

Insurance Company

Financial Services Firm

11%

Computer Software Company

10%

Government

Manufacturing Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

Questions from the Community

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Windows Server Failover Clustering?

There is no extra charge except a service fee for some professional work. I rate the product’s pricing a five out of ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Windows Server Failover Clustering?

The solution uses external storage, while third-party solutions don't use external storage. They're using a mirror to create a partition on each server and synchronize the data in the background. I...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Windows Server Failover Clustering?

We use the solution for warehouse purposes. We built an SQL server on the solution.

See all answers

Comparisons

IBM Platform Computing LSF vs Veritas InfoScale Availability

Compared 25% of the time

HPE Serviceguard vs Veritas InfoScale Availability

Compared 14% of the time

DRBD vs Veritas InfoScale Availability

Compared 14% of the time

IBM PowerHA System Mirror vs Veritas InfoScale Availability

Compared 9% of the time

More Veritas InfoScale Availability Competitors

DRBD vs Windows Server Failover Clustering

Compared 33% of the time

More Windows Server Failover Clustering Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

High Availability Clustering

August 2025

Download Veritas InfoScale Availability product report

Buyer's Guide

Windows Server Failover Clustering

July 2025

Windows Server Failover Clustering report

Download Windows Server Failover Clustering product report

Also Known As

InfoScale Availability, Veritas Cluster Server (VCS), Veritas InfoScale

No data available

Overview

Veritas InfoScale is a workload-centric storage virtualization solution that abstracts applications from their underlying infrastructure, enabling enterprise-grade functionality around business continuity, performance optimization, orchestration and agility.

Veritas

Windows Server Failover Clustering provides infrastructure features that support the high-availability and disaster recovery scenarios of hosted server applications such as Microsoft SQL Server and Microsoft Exchange. If a cluster node or service fails, the services that were hosted on that node can be automatically or manually transferred to another available node in a process known as failover.

Microsoft

Sample Customers

Wayne State University, Zenith Mart

Karl-Franzens-Universit_t Graz, NAV CANADA, Magnachip, ólectricit_ de France, Cambridgeshire Constabulary, Bank Alfalah Ltd., Local Government Association of Queensland

Buyer's Guide

Veritas InfoScale Availability vs. Windows Server Failover Clustering

July 2025

Free Report: Veritas InfoScale Availability vs. Windows Server Failover Clustering

Find out what your peers are saying about Veritas InfoScale Availability vs. Windows Server Failover Clustering and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

865,295 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Veritas InfoScale Availability vs. Windows Server Failover Clustering report.

See our list of best High Availability Clustering vendors.

We monitor all High Availability Clustering reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.