Dell NetWorker Reviews

Dell NetWorker is used as a backup and recovery solution.

Feature-wise, the most valuable ones stem from the fact that it is the most flexible and easiest backup for your virtual machines, along with being the backup of a wide range of databases using modules.

The API side of the solution has certain shortcomings. However, I don't think much improvement because we already have APIs in place, but I think there is a scope to improve the API side.

I have been using Dell NetWorker for seven to eight years. Also, I am using the solution's latest version.

In my experience, I haven't seen many issues with the network, though there are some incidents that come up here and there. I don't see any regular issues until you have good resources. I mean, resources like CPU, RAM, and all.

It is scalable software. All you need to increase is its RAM and CPU. It's pretty easy. Apart from that, if it's the backend, where the data is stored on the data domain, it is again a scalable product.

Most large enterprises use the solution. With the storage and with the databases, Dell NetWorker has a wide range of modules to cover these databases and backups.

I contacted technical support. It's always there in any product. Usually, for backup failures, we contact support. The support you get depends on the support level that the customer takes. You have dedicated support and normal line support. Customers can always ask to escalate.

The initial setup is easy. As you go on to configure the databases, multiple teams are involved, like the database team, the Unix team, and the backup team. Even then, it's pretty easy and straightforward unless you run into some infrastructure issues.

The solution is deployed on the cloud and on-premises.

The time for deployment depends on the size of the environment. If it's a small environment, and everything is in place and works, it takes just two or three hours. If the customer has a larger enterprise, then, obviously, it will increase because you need to install extra storage nodes.

The issues are not straightforward. For example, with the issues in the documentation, there are other products where if you get an error, it's completely code-based, or error codes, so it's pretty easy. Going through the document of Dell NetWorker, I see it's a bit different. You need to dig into the issues.

I rate the overall solution a nine point seven or nine point eight out of ten.

We have around 700 VMs and maybe 200 terabytes in standalone servers. So we are successfully backing up both VMs and the file systems of standalone servers. Altogether, we are backing up maybe 500 terabytes. 

In Dell NetWorker, it is very simple to back up VMs. Finally, the backup of VMC is working reliably and is simple. We are also backing up to data domains, which are well integrated with NetWorker. 

Additionally, we are backing up to tape. Everything works fine. There is mutual compatibility so that we can move backups and clone backups from data domains to tape. It's great. Also, we are using a cloud tier to offload backups on Data Domain 6800s.

There is a significant weakness. It's the advertising of the product by Dell. They are doing everything to discourage people from using NetWorker. So that's a weakness, but it's not a weakness of the product itself. It's a weakness of Dell as an organization. We would be pretty happy to use NetWorker because we don't have any functional problems with it. 

The main issue is the lack of a clear vision for the future of NetWorker. Generally, the preferred backup solution is PowerProtect, and it probably has some benefits. But from our point of view, the disadvantage it has is the lack of support for a tape library. We made an investment into a tape library because it's still a pretty good option, especially for off-site backups. So, that's the only weakness of NetWorker.

Moreover, I would like to see additional features in future releases, especially with the growing importance of cloud integration and ransomware protection. The current offering of Cyber Vault for analyzing backups feels a bit clumsy. Real-time protection and more active ransomware detection features would be beneficial. 

Additionally, NetWorker is not integrated with contemporary storage solutions like Pure Storage. While solutions like Commvault and Veeam are integrated with Pure Storage, NetWorker lacks awareness of Pure Storage. Pure Storage provides snapshots that could be used for backup purposes, but NetWorker and Pure Storage are not compatible or communicating with each other.

I have been using Dell NetWorker for ages. So in the past, we were using Legato. Later on, we switched to backing up from Sun Microsystems. And eventually, it ended up with Dell becoming NetWorker. Altogether, we have been using it for 28 years, I believe. We currently use version 19.7.

It's been very stable.

It is scalable. We have around 3000 to 4000 staff and maybe 50,000 students using this solution. Just one person is required for administration and backup tasks.

The backup responsibilities are handled by two people, but there isn't even a dedicated person for it. We also have other responsibilities, so we are two part-time administrators.

Since the product is not on the front banner of Dell, the support may not be the best. We encountered some issues, and despite escalating the matter, the Dell team couldn't assist us. But the problem was more related to VMware than Dell. We were using an old version of VMware, and that caused problems with scheduling tags. We tried to seek help from Dell's support because we couldn't back up the so-called dynamic groups. These groups should automatically classify sources for backup based on tags, but it didn't work as expected. So, we had to manually allocate the VMs to groups. It wasn't a significant issue for us, though. However, I understand that Dell's attention is currently focused on its PowerProtect products.

We are generally satisfied with Dell's support. All our servers are from Dell, including all ESXs. Support for other products is excellent, without a doubt. However, Dell NetWorker can be a bit complicated, and when it's functioning properly, we have no issues. But when we face specific problems, it becomes extremely difficult to debug and provide feedback on the issue. Even with the assistance of Dell support, we couldn't make much progress. There were numerous rounds of joint sessions, but unfortunately, it didn't resolve the problem.

Neutral

The initial setup is very easy. It's incredibly fast. We once attempted to install Commvault, but it took us several days, and we couldn't get it to work. 

While deploying NetWorker was a breeze and could be done in just a few minutes. I even demonstrated this to the Commvault team, and they were bewildered. They couldn't believe that I could set up a new NetWorker installation within 20 to 23 minutes. So, for me, it is simple and intuitive. I personally don't face any issues.

We are in the educational sector, and I believe we receive significant discounts.

I don't know the exact RRP (Recommended Retail Price) for this product. We have some sort of a deal between the local Dell for Asia Pacific and our university. Our pricing is very good.

Firstly, I would suggest finding out the future prospects of NetWorker within Dell. I don't know how many more years Dell will support NetWorker. Dell seems to be pushing its new product, PowerProtect, which is a discouraging fact for me. 

If Dell intends to maintain both products, it should make it clear that the future of backup solutions lies in both PowerProtect and NetWorker. However, this is not clear at the moment.

Overall, I would say it's an easy nine.

We have used the solution largely for backups, including all our databases and UX machines.

The solution offers very good backups and has all of the basic features any other solution would have on offer. 

There's tight integration between Data Domain and NetWorker as well. Data Domain is an EMC product. They have very good integration between the two.

The initial setup is simple. 

Its stability is very good. 

The solution can scale. 

The web console could be a lot better. All the customers are dependent on a separate console server. If they want to access NetWorker, they need to have a separate console server to access the management window. I know they've come up with a browser-based management site in order to monitor day-to-day backups and to perform the administration or the setup within the web console. Yet, for the web-based console, they still need to do some improvements.

The documentation could be better. I find the solution is not properly documented. If you want to set up a SharePoint, there are certain steps to be followed, which I have to discover myself, I have to find out myself, which was not found in those installation setup guides. That's something I would suggest. We have already passed this suggestion to Dell EMC, letting them know that there are a few steps missing. The documentation was not properly maintained or properly updated. Previously, the older documentation was good. However, it seems that now, when they update and move forward it's not properly documented.

I've been using the solution for ten years. 

It's stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable and the performance is good.

The solution can scale. We only need to get an additional license if we want to do a scaling of our infrastructure. We just need to buy the capacity we need. We can just upgrade the RAM in case it needs additional resources also. We can even deploy another NetWorker server. 

Scaling is purely based on capacity. You don't have to buy it per server either as most of the servers are virtualized. As you have the socket license and the capacity license, then you can actually deploy a new server.

We have more than 1,000 users on the solution right now. 

We've used EMC, Veeam, and Rubrik.

We do have Rubrik and I set up Rubrik a few months back, and it's working fine. 

EMC, in terms of cost, is more expansive. I would definitely go for NetWorker instead as, when you compare it with the Veritas NetBackup, NetWorker is cheaper. Rubrik is cheaper than NetWorker, however, with  Rubrik, we're only using it to back up our VMs. For the other kinds of workloads, such as Exchange or SharePoint, we are still using NetWorker.

The initial setup is not complex. It's straightforward. Once you have all your prerequisites ready, then you are good to go.

As integrators, we are able to handle the initial setup. We handled the setup ourselves mostly in-house. 

I don't have any information on the ROI.

We'll have the solution for about five years. I can't say how much it will cost in total. 

We are users and integrators as well. 

My advice would be to have, once you have started to use it, something more on the Windows-based tools. If you see the commands, all those commands are as if you're running a query. The underlying structure of NetWorker is a skill database, so it's actually running on a skill database. Mostly you'll be running some queries, or querying commands to get the reports using the command prompt. For someone who is familiar with Windows, they'll find it very easy to use.

I'd rate the solution a nine out of ten. 

I use the solution in my company for data protection, backup, and system restoration.

The tool's most valuable feature is its ability to recover the data.

The tool should be more streamlined and have the possibility to set up a backup for a bunch of clients who are different in nature. You have a few SQL servers with different credentials for backup, but you have to specify a single object for each of them because you have different credentials. The tool should have something similar to IAM tools and allow integrations with fiber channels and some IAM solutions so that it can be streamlined, resolving the problems with the management of the access to databases and backup.

The features of the tool meet my requirements. I have no such new requirements in the tool, so I cannot say what needs to be added to the product for me at the moment.

The tool should be more streamlined and simplified to create a backup to receive objects.

I have been using Dell NetWorker for twenty-five years. I recommend the tool to my company's customers.

It is a stable solution.

It is a scalable solution. You can use the tool on one computer, but at the same time, you can use the same binaries to make a system that will protect thousands of them.

Everybody wants the response time to be less or zero, but no support team can meet such expectations. I rate the technical support an eight and a half out of ten.

Positive

I have experience with Tivoli Storage Manager, HPE, NetBackup, and Dell Avamar. Dell NetWorker is the best option in the market if you know how to implement and use it. If you know how to use it, the tool is very good.

Considering my twenty-five years of working experience with the tool, implementing it is easy. The implementation phase of the tool can be easy for beginners because the product has an interface that is quite okay. There are a lot of wizards now, so it is more streamlined from the point of view of how to create the protection policies and so on, making it an easy process.

The solution is deployed on an on-premises model.

I am not a customer of the tool, so I never paid the price for the tool. My customers or end users use the tool because they pay for it.

The tool's automation is very good because you can automate all the traffic to run the backups. We don't want to run the backup but prefer to restore the copies of the backups to the client's systems. You can use the system easily and customize things to meet all the requirements from the point of view of automation. The tool is a very flexible system for both automation and protection.

I think there is no integration with any AI-driven management tasks. AI is more or less very popular nowadays, but I think there is nothing like it in the tool.

I recommend the tool to others, especially to those who use Dell Data Domain. If you plan to use the tool on one computer and then go to thousands of them, then I won't recommend it to you.

The integration of the tool with third-party products is fine.

I rate the tool a seven out of ten.

I primarily use NetWorker to back up over 1,200 virtual machines and over fifty databases. 

NetWorker's most valuable feature is recovery, including the policy-based backups that can be configured.

Currently, the NetWorker server only supports the Windows server bare-metal recovery, so an improvement would be built-in support for Linux and UNIX BMR. In the next release, NetWorker should include support for container backups and Kubernetes.

I've been using NetWorker for over ten years.

NetWorker's stability and reliability are very good, but it still needs monitoring by external software solutions to be maintained properly. NetWorker requires monitoring by the backup administrator to check for failed backups, and it also sometimes has issues pop up that require patching.

NetWorker isn't scalable - you can't add more nodes to it, although you can add some data zones. If you want to add environments to NetWorker, you have to deploy more standalone solutions. 

I'm very satisfied with Dell's technical support. It's very easy to open an SR and get support from them, and whenever we open a request, we get a response, and they ensure our issue is resolved.

The initial setup is a little complex as you have to deploy a virtual machine or  NetWorker on a physical server, depending on your architecture and environment. However, once that operating system is deployed, the NetWorker installation is quite simple. The deployment takes about half an hour, but the integration with the virtual machines and the environment takes two to three weeks.

We used a partner team.

I'd advise anybody thinking of implementing NetWorker to look at their environment, virtualization solutions, and infrastructure requirements and then decide how their environment should be designed. They should also consult with the EMC architect who will be designing the data zones and will be responsible for migrating their environments. I would give NetWorker a rating of seven out of ten.

I've been using this solution for backups and restoration.

Backup reliability for this solution is fine. It's good.

Dell EMC NetWorker is still not mature, compared to its competitors. For example: the TSM (Tivoli Storage Manager) of IBM is very accurate in error logs, and it is very rare to get failure alerts when using the TSM. It's fast and reliable which I didn't see from Dell EMC NetWorker. Another example is the Veritas which I also have experience with. Though Veritas is lower in level compared to the TSM, Veritas is more user-friendly than the TSM.

All features for Dell EMC NetWorker are good, but they are not something to be happy about.

Sometimes this solution shows some errors, e.g. related to open files. It is based on Java, which is very bad. There's so many issues not reflecting what's really happening in the background.

Reporting is very bad in Dell EMC NetWorker. It's also very difficult to get whatever you need based on the backup time duration.

Dell EMC NetWorker has so many versions in a short span of time, which contain a lot of bugs that need to be fixed because each upgrade has its own issues. For every new update of this solution, bugs get fixed, but something new, e.g. a new bug comes up in each version which needs to be fixed. 

I've been using Dell EMC NetWorker for four years.

This solution is 95% stable.

This solution is scalable. It's easy to scale. The only thing that matters in terms of scalability is the storage for the data domain, e.g. adding the disk and another unit, and that's it.

Support, especially from the Middle East region, is very bad. Sometimes support is good, but it's usually bad.

Setting up Dell EMC NetWorker is not complex. The setup was straightforward.

We implemented this solution internally, with guidance from the Dell team.

The price for this solution is cheaper than other products. The price is the only reason we are renewing, otherwise we'll be moving to Veeam.

I evaluated IBM TSM (Tivoli Storage Manager) and Veritas.

We deployed Dell EMC NetWorker to 300 machines. It took us six to seven months to stabilize all issues during the upgrade and complete the deployment.

We only did maintenance for the upgrade and for versions such as the kernel, or the code slash code upgrade, or the version of the software. No major maintenance was needed for this solution.

There are two users in our company working with Dell EMC NetWorker. The backup is a daily process, while administration is not done on a daily basis. For checking and reviewing errors and failures, this solution is used daily.

Usage will depend on the company: how much activity they have and the types of activity they have, e.g. registration or development through IT.

The main reasons we're thinking of switching from Dell EMC NetWorker to another product include the reporting, support, and the bugs. There are so many issues we find annoying which require additional resources.

My advice to people looking into implementing this solution is that for big environments, it's so complicated. For example, for a clustered environment, you have a clustered environment for Oracle RAC, where you have so many firewalls in between, but Dell EMC NetWorker is not mature enough to handle that kind of environment and setup. Oracle RAC works well in big environments, but not this solution. Dell EMC NetWorker would be good for smaller environments where it won't be heavily used. We are an airline company with 300 machines, but we're not comparable to a big company like Google.

My rating for Dell EMC NetWorker is a seven out of ten.

We use Dell NetWorker in the banking sector.

It optimizes Backup and Recovery procedures, making them exceptionally swift.

The types of data and systems we predominantly safeguard with Dell NetWorker include VMs. It enables us to protect infrastructure, bare metal clients, databases, and applications.

Dell NetWorker itself cannot replicate, hence relying on Data Domain for replicating data and backup configurations. 

Integrating Dell NetWorker with other Dell products can bring significant advantages to both our organization and our clients. Utilizing NetWorker enhances our understanding of the backup environment and workload.

The feature that offers the greatest benefits in ensuring data integrity is its backup capability. This feature significantly enhances speed and efficiency, which is crucial for our operations. Additionally, NetWorker can be installed on Linux systems, and it offers a virtual appliance option, which enhances security measures.

There's an issue with the management environment. Regarding improvements for NetWorker, I believe implementing cross-platform restore functionality is essential. This feature would allow for compatibility with various backup software solutions, similar to Veeam. Additionally, enhancing features related to virtualization infrastructure would be beneficial.

I have been working with it for four years.

It exhibits remarkable stability. One of our clients has utilized it for over a decade, encountering only a single issue during that time. I would rate it eight out of ten.

I would rate its scalability capabilities seven out of ten. Our clients are mostly large enterprise organizations.

I would rate the customer service and support nine out of ten.

Positive

I would rate the initial setup six out of ten because technical expertise is required for the process.

Deployment typically takes approximately thirty minutes if you are familiar with the required steps.

The pricing for the telecom, government, and banking sectors is relatively affordable. Dell offers bundled packages, making it cost-effective, especially when considering the inclusion of DTS data protection.

Before implementation, I recommend investigating to determine the types and sizes of workloads, as well as the expectations of their usage. Overall, I would rate it eight out of ten.

I am using Dell NetWorker for backing up mission-critical business databases.

The most valuable feature of Dell NetWorker is its quick configuration and handling of large databases.

Dell NetWorker could improve the GUI to include rack recovery.

I have been using Dell NetWorker for a few months.

The solution is highly stable.

We have four engineers using this solution in my company and we plan to increase our usage.

Dell NetWorker is a scalable solution.

The support from the vendor was quick.

I used IBM Spectrum Protect prior to Dell NetWorker. We choose to use Dell NetWorker because it has quicker recovery time objectives and the integration into DD is a lot better.

The initial setup of Dell NetWorker is straightforward. The process took a few days to complete.

We had some assistance when we did the implementation. However, after a while, we can do it ourselves.

We have observed a return on investment by utilizing Dell NetWorker, and we deem it a worthwhile expenditure compared to not having the solution.

The solution follows a subscription model for licensing. We pay annually to use the solution and the price is high.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate Dell NetWorker an eight out of ten.

This is a very good product. The administration is very good when it comes to backup scenarios. However, maintenance and support are very difficult. The creation of jobs and backups could be easier.

It helps improve the jobs of administrators. It can make things more compatible from an end-user perspective. 

The most valuable feature is the Dell EMC-based product backups. We were using Dell storage, and it offered good compatibility with it. 

The solution is stable.

It can scale.

Technical support has been helpful. 

The end-user experience is not good. They need to improve the product to make it easier to use. We're missing that right now. 

The integration with Hyper-V needs to be better.

They need better compatibility with Exchange backups. 

It is difficult to set up.

While the stability is good, the troubleshooting is hard.

I've been using the solution for seven or eight years. 

It is stable. I'd rate it eight out of ten. There are no bugs or glitches and it doesn't crash or freeze. 

It is a scalable product. I'd rate it eight out of ten. It extends well. 

Technical support is very good. 

Neutral

I've also used Veeam and Microsft DPM. Veeam and Microsoft are very easier to use. They are also less expensive.

The initial setup was not straightforward. It is complex.

We had two people managing the process. 

We have not noted any ROI.

The pricing is relatively high compared to Microwsft DPM and Veeam.

I'm not sure which version of the solution I'm using. 

New users can try it. It is good when it is in the right landscape. In certain cases, it could be a very useful tool.

I would rate the solution eight out of ten.

We run a software-based service. You need a network of software, and for that, you need one physical server with the connectivity of fiber cables and fiber cords. The server configuration has to be high.

I like that it's stable and scalable. 

It could be more user-friendly. 

I have been handling Dell NetWorker for about a year and a half. 

Dell NetWorker is a stable product. 

On a scale from one to ten, I would rate its stability at seven.

Dell NetWorker is a scalable product.

On a scale from one to ten, I would rate its scalability at seven.

I have a capacity-based license, but I don't know the exact cost of that license.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give Dell NetWorker a seven.