Dell Avamar Reviews

The solution is easy to use.

We've found the product to be stable. 

The scalability is there if a company needs to expand it out.

The initial setup is easy and the deployment is fast.

The solution should offer a better data domain.

It would be helpful if the product offered more integration potential.

I've dealt with the solution for three or four years at this point. It's been a while. 

The solution is stable. there are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. The performance is quite good. 

The scalability potential is good. If you are a company that needs to scale, you can do so with this product.

We do not have a lot of customers using this solution. Only maybe five to six percent of our customer base uses it.

The technical support is quite good. they are helpful and responsive and we are satisfied with the level of support they provide. 

We did not find the initial setup to be overly complex. It's pretty straightforward. 

The deployment is fast. You can have everything up and running in three to four hours. 

We have four to five people on staff that can handle deployment and maintenance duties. 

I handled the implementation myself. I did not need the help of an implementor or consultant. I can do it alone, in-house. 

At this time, we do not pay any licenses to Dell.

We don't have a lot of customers that use the product, however, we are recommending it often.

Our customers are using the latest version of the product, however, I can't speak to the exact version number.

On a scale from one to ten, I'd rate the solution at a seven. 

I'd recommend the solution to other users and companies. It's worked well for a few of our customers. 

My customer has a huge virtual environment — vCenter and VMware. They need images backed up, they have different workloads like Oracle, SAP, and NetWorker. They have a compliance policy that they have to tape out but Avamar, out of the box, cannot do the tape out. That's why I had to introduce NetWorker into the picture.

Graphically, it's very user interactive. It's got a very nice interface. Compared to NetWorker, although Avamar is more user-friendly, it lacks support for certain plugins, like SAP HANA, for example. In this particular project that I'm working on, they need to back up SAP HANA but Avamar does not support that. Also, regarding compliance, they need to tape out. Avamar does not support that out of the box. 

I have been using this solution for over six years. 

For the project that I am currently working on, I will be using Avamar to migrate their old historical data to the new environment because this new environment is attached to Data Domain. Scalability-wise and stability-wise, I don't see any issues.

I haven't had to contact support as of yet. 

The initial setup is pretty straightforward. It's good that Dell EMC provides the virtual additions of these appliances for people to practice beforehand. Otherwise, you might be familiar with a certain version but not understand the subsequent versions. You would never know unless you could get a production set up, which is not possible. You can't go and play with the client setup. For this reason, Dell EMC, like other good vendors, offers virtual additions. Data Domain, NetWorker, Avamar, everything you can practice.

The client has directly bought this solution from another partner. I've been subcontracted for this. I don't know anything about the pricing.

Regarding end-users, I would say stick with disk-based backup. Avamar does it very well with the VMware virtual environments, even Hyper-V for that reason.

Overall, on a scale from one to ten, I would give Dell EMC Avamar a rating of seven.

The reason I am giving it a rating of seven is because of the plugin issues and the inability to tape out. Frankly, there are still a lot of clients in this region who need to be in compliance — they need the tape out. It's really a nightmare if you want to tape out with Avamar. There's a way to work around this but you've got to install an ADME node, which is actually a small brother of NetWorker. Still, it's a really painful process.

We use a basic called a DPS. Typically, we are using mostly networkers just to back up most of the workloads, like cellphone audio ware and the connection, et cetera.

The solution is very stable.

We've found the solution to be scalable.

The initial installation is pretty straightforward and quick to set up.

The user interface needs to be improved. It's not as good as it could be.

There are certain bugs in terms of support. It's too slow. It needs to be more responsive.

We've found the product to be a little costly.

I've been likely using the solution for five years at this point. It's been a while.

The solution is stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable in terms of performance overall.

We've found the solution scalable. If a company needs to expand the solution, it can do so with relative ease.

We are mostly using it for the server backups, not for the end-users.

We do plan to continue to use the solution.

The technical support isn't as good as it could be. They are rather slow to respond. They should work towards getting their support staff to be more responsive to clients when they have queries. We're not overly satisfied with the level of support provided to our organization.

We did not the initial setup to be overly complex. It's pretty straightforward and relatively easy to deploy. The deployment process itself is fast and only takes a few hours.

We only needed a product manager that handled the implementation and can handle any maintenance required.

We did not need the assistance of an integrator or consultant during our implementation process. We handled it ourselves in-house.

The solution is a bit expensive.

We are Avamar partners.

I'd rate the solution at a seven out of ten.

I'd recommend the solution to other organizations.

We primarily use the solution the database replications in web hosting, mostly.

The duplication capabilities are very helpful.

The native data protection capability and remote data protection capabilities make it a unique solution. It makes it possible so that it will fit with any kind of vendor the customer needs.

The backup features. for example, the exclusionary statement, are excellent.

Overall, the solution offers some really great reporting.

It's very flexible when it comes to the end-user device backup.

In general, the product has been extremely easy to use. It's one of the best aspects.

The solution is very stable.

The solution does not scale. It would be nice if there were much more scalability capabilities.

The solution could get better at data process managing. It can take more than three or four hours for supporting images. It's critical to do this faster.

It would be helpful if the product could support Linux patches. It's my understanding it only offers HTML.

The product could offer more integration capabilities. 

We've been using the solution for a few years at this point. It's been a while. I personally have been dealing with the solution for four years or so.

The solution is very stable. It doesn't crash or freeze. There are no bugs or glitches. The performance is very reliable.

The product does not scale. If a company needs something that can scale, they need something else.

We have three customers that are currently using the solution.

Typically, we handle support-related queries from customers, however, we have dealt with Avamar's technical support in the past and they have been helpful and responsive. The response time in particular has always been very good.

The installation process is not complex at all. It's very straightforward. A company shouldn't have any trouble with the process. It's easy.

Deployments typically take about one and a half hours or so.

Currently, we have five technical engineers. Each one has its own specialization that they are capable of deploying Avamar. We can deploy the solution for our clients.

Customers do have to pay for a professional license in order to use the solution.

We are integrators.

We tend to work with relatively new versions of the solution. It may not always be the latest version. Typically the versions we use have been released in the last six months or so.

I'd recommend the solution to other organizations and especially to end-users.

In general, I would rate the solution at an eight out of ten.

We are using Dell EMC Avamar for backing up our virtual environment.

The most valuable feature is the virtual backup.

The reporting should be improved, as we currently have to use another tool for that purpose.

We have been using Dell EMC Avamar for two years.

This has been a stable solution, so far.

This is a scalable product. We have three people who administer it.

The technical support from EMC is quite good.

Prior to Avamar, I have worked with Veem and with IBM Spectrum Protect.

All of these are specialty tools and from my point of view, all of them are good. For the needs of my organization, EMC Avamar is the preferred option.

The initial setup is of average difficulty. It is not very easy and not very complex.

I did not evaluate other solutions.

My advice is that this product covers all of your needs as far as backup is concerned.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We use this product for Windows and Linux servers, and we have both file and database backups stored on them. We use them at smaller sites, which are small offices that are located around the world.

The most valuable features are image backups and file backups.
Image backups are very good to use, since they don´t require a backup agent.

Technical support should be more knowledgeable.

I have been using Dell EMC Avamar for more than 10 years.

The newest version is not very stable, which is something that should be improved.

We have perhaps 70 clients/server and have not tried to scale beyond that. We have about 40 users in total and do not plan to increase our usage at this time.

The quality of technical support varies. Sometimes they are very good, and sometimes they are not. They should be faster and more knowledgeable.

We also use Dell EMC NetWorker.

I was not involved in the initial setup but from what I understand, it's pretty simple.

There are five of us in the technical team who deploy and maintain our solutions.

The price of this product should be cheaper.

This is a product that I can recommend for small sites without anything special.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

The primary use case of this solution was for projects to backup customer laptops for the application capabilities.

The product could be easier to troubleshoot. When I had a problem with the software, I invested a lot of time to find out what the problem was. Once I found the problem, I realized that it was a simple solution, but there were no helpful indications.

As an example, with Avamar, you have a different storage node and if one of these nodes had a problem with an NTP server and there was a different time on the node, nothing would work. Finding the solution to this problem involved many steps, which was not easy to determine.

I have been using the solution for 5 or 6 years.

The solution is stable.

The solution is scalable, but I prefer a solution like NetBackup when I am networking.

When we used the solution, it was still new, and so the customer service/technical support was not the best.

The installation of the solution is easy.

The cost of the solution is very expensive.

In a data center, the entire workloads are virtualized, and they are backing up the content, and sometimes because of bandwidth, operations need to be backed up quickly. In that kind of scenario, this source site replication is very supportive. Avamar evaluates the data that's already backed up, and only the chain blocks can be transferred via the network. There won't be any heavy network traffic, and the time it takes to backup is quick and within the window.

On the client-side, we can also backup clients with Avamar. These days with the pandemic, most of them work from home, and we're using less network bandwidth to backup end user transfers.

The source site replication feature is valuable. 

It would be better if we could integrate easily with other platforms. I would like to see better integration with VMware vCenter. We normally integrate Avamar with VMware vCenter Server and virtualize Avamar within the VM. Once, we wanted to backup only a few VMs within the vCenter, without integrating it to the vCenter. But we come across some problems. Without adding the vCenter directly, there was some difficulty in adding the VMs. When we replaced more clients in the OS, this problem was solved.

I have been using Dell EMC Avamar for three years.

Dell EMC Avamar is stable so far. As we have worked with software engineers trained to use this product, they can configure and provide support on their own.

Dell EMC Avamar is a scalable solution.

Support is okay. We don't use it frequently as our engineers can manage well. Only when they can't handle a problem, they call support. We also use technical sites and the web portal, and these help our engineers capably handle day to day requirements.

The initial setup isn't complex. Because the engineers are trained, they're familiar with the product and can do this implementation.

The implementation time depends on the data center. The issues we face are mainly on the network. For example, sometimes, their policies on implementing the communication between the servers lead to some downtime. Other than that, we can implement Dell EMC Avamar between two-three days.

We implemented Dell EMC Avamar ourselves, in-house.

It was very expensive before, but after integrating it with Dell EMC Avamar Data Protection suite licensing, we are getting better discounts.

I always see improvements on the Avamar side, and we are happy with that. 

On a scale from one to ten, I would give Dell EMC Avamar a ten.