Dell Avamar Reviews

There are two main use case for Dell Avamar in our organization. Firstly, it was used for virtual machines in our virtualization environment, but we replaced it with Veeam as it wasn't working well for us. Secondly, we use Dell Avamar as a backup solution for our clients and employees, and it performs very well in this role.

The function I find most valuable in Dell Avamar is its ability to take differential backups for users. This feature is very effective for both backup and restore operations. We've had multiple cases where we needed to restore files directly from Avamar, and it worked perfectly. The Delta feature, which captures changes in user files, is particularly useful.

Reporting in Dell Avamar needs improvement. The current reporting tool is very basic, and you have to dig deep into each function to get the information you need. For example, getting the status of failed and succeeded backups is very difficult in Avamar compared to Veeam.

As for additional functionality, I would suggest improving WAN optimization. It's very important for getting offline or off-site backups. It should also include a tool to check for ransomware which would be beneficial. If a backup is vulnerable to ransomware, there should be a way to detect it, like using ARR rules to ensure your backup is ransomware-free. I haven't had any experience integrating Dell Avamar with AI solutions. It’s also a good point that Avamar doesn't offer such integrations, which is an area where Dell could improve.

I have been using Dell Avamar for the past three years.

Regarding stability, I would rate Dell Avamar eight out of ten. It is very stable, depending on your infrastructure.

I have had experience with technical support from Dell for Avamar. It's not very good, as it takes a very long time to get what you need. The main issues are with response time and quality. It seems there are no mature or scalable people working in this area. They need to build their own consultants or have better first-line support.

We also use Veeam backup along with Avamar. Veeam is used for virtual machines and covers usability, reporting, deduplication, and notifications, which Avamar does not. However, Veeam is not working well for end users, which is why we use both environments. If we had all functionalities in one solution, it would be easier for us, as it currently requires two teams to manage both solutions.

Regarding pricing, I would say Avamar is slightly expensive compared to its functionalities. It's not high-priced or low-priced but somewhere in between.

I would recommend Dell Avamar for small and medium enterprises. I don't think it would be suitable for large companies.

Overall, I would rate Dell Avamar a seven out of ten. It's not a bad product, but it needs some improvements in functionalities, support services, and overall maturity. If these improvements are made, it could be one of the best backup solutions in the world.

As a user, I would recommend Dell Avamar for backup solutions for end users, but not for VMs, SQL, Oracle, or any application running at the application level. For end users, I would recommend it 100%, but not for backend infrastructure at this time.

In our company, we handle five different types of data from VME, Windows, SQL and other sources. The complete backup of forty lead machines is implemented daily using Dell Avamar in our organization. 

A huge storage space needs to be bought with Dell Avamar, even when it's unnecessary for an organization. The upgrades of the solution are highly time-consuming; it takes 10 to 12 hours to upgrade Dell Avamar or Dell IDPA. The aforementioned upgrade arrives once a year, but it takes an entire day in our company.

I have been using Dell Avamar for ten years. 

The product offers satisfying stability. The disc failures with the solution are usually replaced within the next way with Archwap discs, and it doesn't affect the stored data. 

The solution can be easily scaled. When your solution is running out of space, you need to apply for a new license and it can be obtained in multiples of 12 TB options. Only one professional in our company uses the solution to manage the IDPA backups. 

Our company has availed tech support, they are quite helpful and efficient. The maximum turnaround time I have witnessed, depending on the issue, is two days; otherwise, the support team sorts my issues in minimal time. I would rate the tech support an eight out of ten. 

Positive

The solution isn't easy to deploy. Dell IDPA comes with numerous tools demanding several configuration requirements. Storage and index manager are inputted in separate VMs. There are multiple components during the initial deployment of Dell Avamar, but client migration and workflow onboarding can be implemented in a straightforward process. Agents need to be stored and new connections have to be found as part of Dell Avamar's deployment. 

The initial setup of Dell Avamar took about three months in our organization. The aforementioned long duration was due to the need to deploy the solution separately for backups and DR purposes and also for arranging network logistics. I deployed the solution with assistance from a Dell partner. 

It's an expensive tool. 

In my experience, Dell solutions are more user-friendly than Commvault. The deployment and management of Dell products are a lot easier than Commvault. There are a lot of complexities in Commvault, but the solution has multiple great features, including troubleshooting. 

The solution's ease of use simplifies the disaster recovery processes in our company. Once implemented, Dell Avamar performs as a complete solution. The advanced DR backup from varying locations is easy to recall using Dell Avamar.  

The backups are performed by the solution with superior stability. The product is easy to manage as frequent troubleshooting is not required and reliable backups are procured. 

The interface of the tool was quite bland previously; it was a Java console, but recently, it got upgraded to a WIP console. The WIP console is easy to comprehend and navigate in Dell Avamar. The product is more expensive when purchased as a stand-alone solution, but with Dell IDPA, the cost is reduced significantly as a suite of tools. With the IDPA bundle, a user pays for only the features used. Dell Avamar requires pre-purchase of the entire storage.

For example, with Dell Avamar, you might need to purchase 36 TB storage when you only require 16 TB. Dell IDPA offers a huge storage device, and payment needs to be made as per the license procured. I have a 96 TB storage solution with Dell IDPA, but I am licensed to use only as much as required; if I am using 12 TB, the cost for only 12 TB needs to be paid. I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

Potential customers should be aware that the solution is initially provided with 96 TB storage and can possibly be scaled further. I haven't faced any downsides or setbacks with the solution; it's quite easy to use.  

It specifically caters to the backup needs of our data, ensuring secure and compliant operations.

The scale is small, yet it efficiently handles all tasks in a unified manner. The entire system operates seamlessly, with minimal hands-on involvement, allowing us to focus on monitoring rather than constant adjustments or deployments, as seen in larger, more dynamic environments.

The challenges we do face typically revolve around aligning specific features with our accustomed tool usage.

I have been using it for a year.

I would rate its stability capabilities eight out of ten.

Since it's limited to the PCI pages, it might not necessarily be scalable to serve as our enterprise-wide tool, especially when considering larger-scale environments. Focusing on the requirements outlined in the RFP and the demonstrations conducted as part of the RFP process, I find it satisfactory and that it meets our needs.

Its technical support is excellent. It stands out as a primary factor in our decision to choose Dell. I would rate it nine out of ten.

Positive

We transitioned from using Veritas appliances to the Dell solution in the same environment.

The initial setup was straightforward.

The installation process was smooth as we transitioned from using Veritas appliances to the Dell solution in the same environment. A third-party company, Plus House, subcontracted by Dell, handled the installation remotely, working closely with our junior team members. The initial setup was completed within a day for each site, and an additional day was required to configure the clustering of backups, including SQL backups. This extra day was dedicated to finalizing the clustering and ensuring that all configurations were in place. Maintenance is handled by a team of approximately seven individuals who undergo training and manage regular tasks.

They deliver substantial value in return.

I am highly satisfied with the pricing structure provided and the discounts we get. The overall cooperation with Dell has been exceptional; they consistently go above and beyond to align with our budgets. The global transition and the impact of exchange rates, particularly the fluctuation between the South African Rand and the U.S. Dollar, have introduced some complexities, but nothing major. The current pricing is generally satisfactory. I would rate it nine out of ten.

Despite falling under Vodafone globally and dealing with VBC, the procurement company, there were instances where Dell offered superior deals in South Africa compared to what VBC could secure with other vendors. This was a key factor in our decision to stick with Dell rather than exploring alternatives like Huawei or HP.

Overall, I would rate it nine out of ten.

Our use case for this solution is robust and involves backing up various systems.

The solution is very user-friendly.

The product could be improved by simplifying the components available. Currently, there are many endpoints and GUIs to run.

We have been using this solution for approximately three years.

The solution is scalable. Currently, only three employees utilize the solution in our organization, and thousands of clients use it.

The initial setup was complex. It took about a week to complete the deployment, and we required an engineer to assist.

The solution costs approximately 20,000 annually.

I rate the solution a seven out of ten. 

We're using it in our company. We primarily use the solution as a backup.

The backup functionality with Data Domain is good.

Overall, it works quite well.

It's very easy to install the solution.

The product is scalable.

It's stable and offers good performance.

It cannot replicate the backup, it can only do the backup. If you want to replicate you need RecoveryPoint.

Avamar cannot back up Nutanix as a virtual solution.

I've been using the solution for one year. 

The solution is stable. The performance is good. It's good for vSAN. We haven't dealt with bugs or glitches, and it doesn't crash or freeze.

We have found the solution can scale well. If you need to expand it, it's not a problem.

All of our production is backed up with Avamar.

After we buy Nutanix and an Azure Stack, since we are a service provider and in the future, we will make our service catalog on the Azure Stack and Nutanix Cloud.

Technical support is pretty good. We are pleased with their level of support.

I also work with Veeam and NetBackup.

With Veeam, the advantage is you can back up and replicate with the same product, and it is compatible with all virtual solutions.

The initial setup is simple. We buy the service from Dell. 

I was not a part of the deployment as I am a pre-sale manager. I do not handle the setup process directly and cannot speak to how long it takes. 

The cost is lower than Veeam, however, how much it actually costs depends on the customer and the use case.

I'm not sure of the exact licensing costs.

We were a partner and resellers. In my last job, I was a preferred partner.

I'm not sure which version we're using. I'm not the backup administrator.

We will stay with Avamar for this platform, however, maybe we will look into Nutanix, and that's why we are searching for another solution. Avamar cannot back up Nutanix as a virtual solution.

I'd warn potential users that it's not the best solution if you have other products other than VMware in your production. If you are just using VMware, it's a very good option.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten as it doesn't work well with every solution, only VMware.

The solution's performance is between satisfactory and good.

It's a stable product.

The solution scales well. 

The performance takes up a lot of resources, unfortunately. We'd like it to be less heavy.

I've been using the solution for four years. 

The performance has been okay. It's pretty stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

The solution scales well. That's not an issue for us.

We have five to seven users on the solution currently.

We do not have plans to increase usage.

We haven't contacted technical support recently. We want it decommissioned right now. 

We are using Microsoft Escort Server for the applications we try to develop. For the active directories and for SharePoint, for those solutions, we are using Microsoft Escort Server.

We are planning to bring on a new solution to replace Avamar.

Before, Dell Avamar, we did not use anything.

Compared to the solution we are looking at now, it seems pretty straightforward to implement. 

It doesn't take such a long time. Within an average amount of time, after you have the product, you can finalize everything within five working days.

Since we are a government institution, commonly, the setup process is actually done by the supplier.

You can get a three-year license if you like. You can subscribe for three years, and if you want a 30-month subscription for the support and service, you can also do that.

It can be expensive. 

We are not using the latest version of the solution right now. 

I would not advise people to use this product. 

Maybe it depends on the case of the organization. The performance is a big issue for us and maybe the support service. If the supplier is enough to provide support to the end user, I might maybe recommend to others, however, it needs a capacity built internally and maybe in the market. That's the big issue with it. Otherwise, if any users have skills to manipulate using it, utilize the resource, I would recommend it. 

I'd rate the solution five out of ten.

When Avamar started out, it used to be for a small to medium environment, but now it's done a lot of changes and it's a good backup solution, especially within your VMware environment.

The most valuable feature is the integration with Data Domain and your VM stacks. One of the good new features is that it integrates with Azure and AWS, and it has the potential to scale out into multiple cloud platforms.

If you don't have DPA, the reporting features are not as user-friendly, so reporting is something that they can improve on.

I've been working with Avamar for close to ten years. 

The solution is very stable. 

If you have Data Domain integrated, the solution is scalable. 

I would rate the tech support for Avamar as a nine out of ten. 

The initial setup is a bit complex, especially if it's a new installation, but once you get the hang of it, it's pretty smooth. 

The length of the deployment depends on your plan, what you need to back up, and if you order Oracle and whatever else you need beforehand. Worst case scenario, it would probably take a week to set up, but if you have all your ducks in a row, it'll be maybe two days, max.

It is not difficult at all to maintain. 

I have previously worked with Networker and Data Domain. I also worked with PPDM. When I logged calls with PPDM, there was always an issue and it would take a day or two for support to come. I don't know if it was a skill issue, but the guy would usually take the information and go and discuss it with guys at a higher level and then come back to me a day or two later.

This is a great product and the integration is easy with other solutions, like the cloud or Data Domain, and it's scalable. I think to some extent Networker used to be the big brother, but now Avamar is taking over that space.

I would rate this solution as a nine out of ten. 

We've been using this solution to backup our servers. It is a simple backup and restore data application.

It's very slow to backup and store information. It has two consoles and an application which are more difficult to use than a solution like Veeam. 

For future releases, Avamar should improve on the compression speed of their backups. This is a core feature of a backup and restore solution. The interface of Avamar could also be improved but this is something they are working on. In comparison, you don't need to wait three hours to restore Veeam.

This is a stable solution but does not offer fast performance. 

In certain scenarios, the support for this solution has been good. Often, the team take too long to resolve issues. 

Neutral

I have previously used Veeam at a different company. It is very good as a backup and restore solution. For example, I could restore a server on Veeam that has two terabyte storage used and it took approximately 20 minutes. On Avamar, it would take three hours. 

Veeam has a support team is very good with good technical skills.

This is a fairly expensive solution. It cost approximately 21,000 each year. 

I would advise others to use Veeam over Avamar. 

I would rate this solution a six out of ten. 

We have three sites. We deployed Avamar on one site three years ago then added the same setup for the other sites. Following best practices, we're using Avamar with Dell Data Domain for data compression and deduplication.

Avamar is mainly for backing up the machines.

Avamar's user interface could use some work. When we open a ticket, they are working with Linux commands. It's not easy to manage everything through the web interface. I would like to do everything through the interface that you can do with Linux commands.

I've been working with Avamar for two years. 

Avamar is stable. We don't face any daily issues, and it sends clear notifications directly to your account if anything happens.

So far, Avamar covers everything we want. We are replicating to other sites for disaster recovery, so it's working well for us.

We have an annual subscription for support, so we contact them for upgrades and stuff like that. There is some inconsistency. Some of the support engineers are experienced, but others are new. It sometimes takes time at the first level of support, but all our issues get solved in the end.

Setting up Avamar wasn't so easy, and we had a partner doing the installation for us. Though it was hard at first, it's getting better. The main difficulty was finding plugins for Oracle Database. It took some time to open a ticket with Dell, but everything was fine after that. I would rate the overall deployment experience eight out of 10. We have two system engineers for deployment and maintenance as needed. They're not managing the solution full time, but they handle new bundles, fixes, etc.

We had a partner, but they weren't so experienced. It seemed like we were the first customer that had implemented Avamar. 

It was a package, so I don't know Avamar's exact price. However, it was nearly $200,000 for the VxRail nodes, Data Domain, and Avamar. That includes everything for three years. Then we have to pay annually for support. 

We were looking for Veeam at the same time. It's good and has the same features, but we were buying all our solutions from Dell, like VxRail servers, Data Domain, etc. I think it's more complicated but otherwise fine. 

I rate Dell EMC Avamar nine out of 10. If you don't have Avamar experience, you need to work with a partner. It's not straightforward, but it's effective. However, Avamar only takes what has been written in a day. It takes a backup of a short time and doesn't do any duplications.

My primary use case is backend storage for our VMs. We are fully virtualized, using VMware for our virtualization layer, and we use multiple VMs for our applications, so we have multiple workloads for the education school information systems. Then we have our ERP and HR systems, and our infrastructure monitoring the networking solutions, and so on. All these VMs are backed up using Avamar.

By bringing in Avamar and keeping the repository on the data domain, we got a very high DDU and high compression and reduction in data size.

The most valuable features are data deduplication and compression, backup and replication, and instant backup, which allows us to restore our data at any given point in time.

There are two areas for improvement I would suggest. First, some integrations are not in place, such as the email alerts, which are not compatible with Office 365 SMTP gateway. Secondly, Avamar has no APS for monitoring or alerting.

I've been using this solution for three years.

Avamar is very stable - we've hardly seen any issues with it. We have had some problems with the virtualization layer but not with the product itself.

It's very scalable. We did face some issues with using multiple applications, but we added a couple of proxies, and it's gone very well since then.

Dell's support is excellent - if any issues occur, we open the case, and the maintenance gets done. The only problem is that sometimes they can be slow to respond.

I previously used Veeam Backup & Replication, but it wasn't very reliable or cost-efficient because there was no deduplication or compression, so we switched to Avamar.

The initial setup was very straightforward and took about a week.

I used a partner involved by the principal vendor, from a company called MDS. They were really professional and were experts on the product.

We have seen huge data reduction and data deduplication and compression, which is very cost-effective and cost-reducing for the company. Overall we've saved around $200,000 when it comes to storage.

Avamar's pricing is quite competitive compared to other vendors. We don't pay any costs in addition to the standard licensing fees.

We evaluated Veritas and had previously used Veaam, but when we compared overall cost, integration, stability, and agility, we found Avamar was one of the best.

Before choosing any backup solution, run a use case so that you can evaluate the product and have proof of concept. I would rate Avamar as nine out of ten.