Dell NetWorker Reviews

We are system integrators.

We have many systems that are being backed up using NetWorker, mainly in a virtualized environment, with several typical workloads.

It's a good product that can be integrated easily with the Data domain. 

They have many different products but they don't integrate all of the features into one product. This is an area of failure with this solution. For example, if we want source-side deduplication then we have to use Avamar because this kind of feature isn't available in NetWorker.

Some features in NetWorker are good as well as some features in Avamar are good. If they could combine the features of both products into one single product, it would be better.

In the next release, I would like to see better pricing and more integration with the other products in Dell EMC.

We have been using Dell EMC NetWorker for three years.

We are using the latest version.

It's a stable solution and we have not had any issues.

It's a backup system that is backing up more than 50 different systems.

We plan to continue using this solution. It's a good product.

We have contacted technical support and they have provided us with good technical support. 

We have no issues.

Because NetWorker does not provide all of the features such as source-side deduplication, we have had to go with some other products.

The Installation is quite easy. 

The deployment took a maximum of three to four days.

The complete installation needed a bit of extra time due to some downtime for adding systems. But generally, the basic installation and configuration are done within three to four days.

We have a good engineering team and the internal team is capable of handling the implementation.

The price is a little on the high side, but it's reliable and provides a good service.

There are other products on the market with better pricing, which makes it a challenge to sell NetWorker.

I would definitely recommend NetWorker to others who are interested in using it.

I would rate Dell EMC NetWorker an eight out of ten.

We have everything - we have Oracle databases, SQL databases, Windows platforms, Linux platforms, Exchange Servers. We have many servers along with several different storages. This is a very big group with a variety of systems.

Although Dell EMC NetWorker is a little bit more complex to combine with other products, it is really a very strong product. It became stronger when we started doing backups to disks instead of to data simulators when we import the Data Domain. The solution became stronger because the backup to disks is faster and the duplication ratios and compression are very high so it will save lots of space at this storage size. The granularity of the Exchange Servers is very good.

In terms of what can be improved, they need to be compatible with the cloud because EMC NetWorker cannot compete with other products at the moment. The other products like Veeam and Commvault are more flexible and are more compatible with other cloud vendors. EMC cannot do the same thing. EMC focuses only on their own cloud and do not take into consideration other cloud vendors.

I started using Dell EMC NetWorker in 2012.

It's stable. It is very, very stable software.

There are no problems in terms of stability. But as I said, the configuration, the deployment, etc... are more complex when you compare to the other products. That's the only thing. But from a stability point of view, it is very stable.

In terms of scalability, unfortunately, we were unable to upgrade the EMC NetWorker. We're still on version 8.1. So I have no idea of the capabilities of the latest release in terms of scalability. But for sure, when you compare to other products, EMC NetWorker will not be able to compete because other products are more agile and more compatible with many cloud vendors. They need to put more effort into that.

Despite it being more complex, it is a very powerful solution but still requires effort so that users can have good access to it. I cannot see people choosing EMC Networker. At the moment everybody chooses to go for Veeam and Commvault. At the moment everybody is waiting for BIM to go to Commvault. I've been in a deep study of the previous one and backup solutions, and I met many people and everybody prefers to go with Commvault or Veeam. I didn't see anybody preferring to go with EMC NetWorker.

The initial setup is complex. It requires a long brainstorming because you need to consider servers, storages, storage nodes, client servers, and the main backup server. It's quite complex. Brainstorming and designing will take time. You need the full verification and sometimes more than that if you have many servers where you need to install the client.

In order to implement, a consultant is needed. Without that, you cannot do it yourself. You can do it but there is a risk. So it's better to have another person.

In terms of pricing, yes, of course, EMC is cheaper. Commvault is more expensive. Maybe with the latest release, EMC Networker became more expensive, but I have no idea about the latest prices from EMC. Whatever we spent on EMC NetWorker was far cheaper.

What I've seen is renewal prices. Maybe the price of the implementation would be more expensive. But, at least from what I've seen, Commvault is more expensive than EMC NetWorker.

There are some main differences between Commvault and NetWorker and a lot of people prefer Commvault. First of all, worldwide ranking. If you look at the ranking starting from 2017 until today, you will find Commvault is always ranked first of second. EMC is not at those levels. Whenever you want to buy a backup solution, you need to look at the worldwide ranking. You need to conduct customer feedback. This is the first main difference between EMC NetWorker and Commvault. The second thing is their architecture, which is easier with Commvault. Commvault is easier to deploy.

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

They need to allow EMC NetWorker to be more agile and flexible with other cloud vendors. It has to come into the cloud arena because now everybody's talking cloud. They shouldn't be only restricted to on-premise. Everybody now is talking cloud, so it has to talk the latest language in IT. You need to make it more compatible with cloud vendors. When you talk about Commvault, it is very compatible with many cloud vendors like AWS. But you do not see the same thing with EMC NetWorker. They need to work on this point.

I would not hesitate to go to Commvault. Undoubtedly, Commvault is better. It is the best. If somebody would ask me which one to choose between EMC or Commvault, I would not hesitate to say go for Commvault rather than for EMC NetWorker.

We are customers of Dell and I'm a Data Protection Supervisor Engineer at a Telecommunications company.

Data domain is the best feature in this solution. I think that this application was better when it was a backup window for a huge number of VMs. 

Networker with Data Domain  has a great value in integration with VMware regarding the enhanced backup window and high value of deduplication and capacity saving we can get with this setup especially in case of protecting high number of VMs.

Things could be improved in several areas beginning with support. If you compare it to Commvault or Veritas solutions, their support is better than Networker. In terms of features that are lacking, I think the restore feature is important and it's not available on NetWorker. The other solutions have more programs. 

For additional features, I'd like to see integration with any storage place. NetWorker finance also doesn't enable deduplication, there is no source deduplication while using NetWorker, it's only accessible if it's on a different domain. I hope to see that in the next release. I also think the data protection adviser should be embedded in the NetWorker software so there is no need to install another server to collect logs. Finally, the PMR is no longer supported in Linux. 

I've been using this solution for 5 years. 

We have a few bugs but it's generally a stable solution. 

Technical support really needs improvement. Getting assistance is a long journey starting with collecting logs. If we're lucky, we can have things sorted in a day. If the issue is related to an application or a link or a restore issue, anything regarding the performance, it's very difficult to get assistance. 

The initial setup is easy, it's not complex.

The best feature in NetWorker is the data domain. If you're not using that then you cannot use NetWorker with any media or any storage vendor. There's no protection adviser to get selective reports and the graphs, so you need to get other products for that and it will consume a new server in your infrastructure. If you're providing customer support the solution is limited. I don't recommend this for dealing with customers. I do recommend it for internal use and for data domain only. You can get the best performance and best deduplication value and capacity saving.

I would rate this solution a six out of 10. 

We are using Dell EMC NetWorker for backup and restore purposes.

The support for legacy products is very good.

The components for container support such as Docker and Kubernetes need improvement. They are lacking.

Stability needs improvement. Also, scalability could be better.

I would like to see better support for the container systems, and we would like to see more support for image backups instead of pure file backups. Image backups are faster.

I have been using this solution for more than 15 years.

We are not using the latest version, we are one major version behind.

We have had some issues with stability, but we can't say for certain that it is an issue with the client's environment, or if it's an issue with the server.

It's a scalable solution.

We have approximately 5,000 clients per backup server, and we have six servers.

We have not contacted technical support. We have only had a few issues that we were able to resolve.

For newer software, EMC has expressed that they will not be supporting NetWorker for much longer. It is my understanding that they will continue for the next two years only. 

We are looking for new technology, and we are in the middle of an RFI.

I would not recommend Dell EMC NetWorker, as the product will end in a few years.

I would rate Dell EMC NetWorker a seven out of ten.

We use the Dell EMC NetWorker to make backups for our virtual environment. We have about 14 servers and we backup everything using NetWorker.

The backup capabilities and the automatization of the backup - along with the potential to make the back up on a virtual machine - are the solution's most valuable aspects. 

It's not just about making a backup on a file level. It's about backing up the entire machine all at once that's very useful for us.

Technical support could be improved. They shouldn't just serve those who speak English. The technical support should be in the national language of the country they are servicing and not only in English due to the fact that it's sometimes difficult for us to explain all the things that are going wrong in an unfamiliar language. It creates a communication barrier and makes getting problems solved harder.

The solution is not easy to administer unless you are very familiar with the product.

The licensing rules are difficult to navigate and understand.

The administrator's interface should be much easier to navigate.

I've been using the solution for four years.

It would be hard to judge the scalability as we have never tried to expand the solution. However, I suspect it may be challenging as the solution has difficult licensing rules.

Technical support is okay, however, they only offer service in English. If you don't speak English, or English is not your first language, you will have issues with communicating.

Before Dell EMC NetWorker we used to use Novell NetWare and the Novell Network and Backup. We needed to switch due to the fact that Novell is no longer available in Europe.

We didn't handle the implementation ourselves. I wouldn't be able to discuss the procedure or if it ultimately was complex or straightforward.

The reseller took about one month to help us internally understand how to work with the solution. We were grateful for the help as the solution is not easy to administer. 

We have two people who are responsible for the solution and the backups.

Our reseller handled the initial setup on our behalf. They did a good job. We were satisfied with their level of service.

Licensing rules are very complicated in NetWorker. The license depends on, in one version, the value of the backup data, and, in another, the physical workstation. It changes from version to version.

I do not know other solutions very well. I know of Hewlett Packard's backup solution. That said, I only know NetWorker and Avamar. These two products are from Dell. 

We're Dell customers. We don't have a business relationship with the company.

I am the administrator of our Dell EMC NetWorker and I make backups of the servers and also run the solution. We only backup our server. We do not back up a user's workstation. The only backups are made by the administrators.

From my perspective, Dell EMC NetWorker is a good solution to make backups. I'd rate the solution nine out of ten. I'd rate it higher if the administrator's interface was easier to navigate.

We use this solution to protect our numerous file servers. We have SAP HANA servers, some Oracle servers, and we have an eM server. We have several partnerships and Dell is one of them. They are very good. I'm a solution architect and technical team lead. 

This is a very precise and simple solution which is a great feature. It's also very stable and straightforward if you follow the documentation. 

This is a good solution and I can't think of any additional features they could include. I went for NetWorker because it's a good physical as well as virtual environment, and the best possible solution compared to the other products on the market. The others are also good but I like NetWorker better. 

I believe that the reporting could be improved and the report templates should be easier to understand and more comprehensive. I believe they are already working to replace the Java console with the HTML web browser-based administration console which is the other issue. I hope they are able to do this quickly. In terms of my expertise, I can't think of any other issues. 

I've been using this solution for four months. 

The solution is very straightforward and very stable if you follow the documentation properly. When I've been in trouble it's because of my lack of knowledge or not following the instructions. 

We're not such a big organization that we need to scale and it would take a few years before we did that, if at all, so I can't comment on scalability. We have two administrators using the solution. Primarily we just go to the backup console every day to check things are okay. It could be managed by one person but having an extra backup doesn't hurt. 

I'm very satisfied with the support that Dell provides. As soon you create a support ticket, someone immediately contacts you to provide the support. The person might not be an expert, they are generally not techie guys but they are often very helpful. They immediately take the remote of your system to understand the problem and I appreciate that. 

The initial setup was a little complex but that was my issue. It's worth spending a couple of hours to go through everything thoroughly beforehand and take proper notes. If you don't follow the documentation, you can get into problems. Otherwise, it's pretty straightforward.
Deployment time depends on the situation. Implementation probably took three or four hours. Once it's running smoothly there's no maintenance required. 

For anyone planning to implement this solution, it's essential to read the documentation, otherwise you will face a few issues. If you deploy having done all the reading, you won't have any problems. I believe that if something works as expected, it deserves a 10. In my case, it is working as per expectations so I don't have any complaints. 

I would therefore rate this solution a 10 out of 10. 

I feel that it is a good product. However, if its setup is configured correctly, it will work well but if it's not, it's a total disaster. I think that goes for any backup product. Coming into architectural design thinking, for example, we introduced a backup network. This has helped speed up our backup time and the time it took Windows to backup. That has made a huge difference without impacting reduction systems elsewhere that connects into the same systems. So the main thing would be to optimize scheduling and do the setup correctly, then it will improve the backup features. 

There are too many reboots and the software requires constant updating - just like Windows. I don't like that so I feel that it isn't very stable.

The technical support from EMC is 10 out of 10. I am really impressed by it. 

The pricing of this solution is very good.

I will rate this solution an eight out of ten, based on my knowledge and experience on it. In the next version, I would like it if Dell EMC could back up IBM. They call it IBMi, or the A400 system. That would be awesome for the networker. My advice to others would be that they should be very specific who they use to set up the software and make sure they check references for successful installations.

The backup software has been much faster since we've deployed the solution.

The system needs better integration with other toolsets.

Support could be improved. EMC also needs to offer more information for users online.

The solution needs more automation and more reporting, so we don't need to check everything manually.

We use the solution every day, for all of our backups. We don't plan to increase usage, but we do use it extensively right now.

I haven't had a good experience with technical support. It takes them a very long time to resolve issues.

We used to use HP DataProtector. It took too much effort to manage it, which is why we switched.

The initial setup was very straightforward.

We did the implementation ourselves.

It's approximate, but I believe we pay around $20-30,000 a month in licensing.

We did not evaluate other option before choosing this solution.

We use the private cloud deployment model of the solution.

Networker is a fine solution, but there are other more modern automated solutions on the market. We are considering changing to one of those. They take up fewer resources, which is why we are considering switching. I believe this solution is better than Data Protector, but there's another one, Rubrik, that saves a lot of time and effort.

We should have involved EMC with the implementation because it was difficult. I would recommend others consider this lesson that we learned from our attempt.

I would rate the solution seven out of ten.

Most customers are integrated with the hypervisor environment. It's a mix between VMware and Hyper-V. The database and integration with the database is SQL and it has since changed to Oracle. This is mostly what we are using to unify everything.

The solution has minimized the recovery time objective, and the recovery point objective, the RTO and RPO. Most customers are looking to minimize downtime. The solution has helped ensure this.

The backup and configuration for the virtual environment have been the most valuable features, especially with VMware.

The operating system could be improved. The interface could also be much easier.

The stability is very nice.

The solution has very good scalability.

Technical support is good, but it depends on the time zone. I've noticed that some areas offer better support than others.

The initial setup isn't straightforward or complex. It's somewhere in between. Deployment took about two weeks.

I did the implementation myself.

The pricing is mid-range. It's not the cheapest, but it's not too expensive.

We are using the on-premises deployment model.

I would rate the solution eight out of ten.

It's not easy to integrate. We have to read a lot of documentation in order to configure the solution. 

We have a Hyper-V installation, with a mixed Linux environment.

We have an on-premises deployment.

Configuration for Hyper-V needs to be improved. Our original configuration did not work because of an issue that differed between versions.

We are able to do direct backups, but analyzing the logs is not straightforward. There are a lot of things that have to be done from the client-side in order to locate and identify errors. This should be made easier.

This solution should support part-loaded data.

I would like to see support for the enactment of errors, where the error should be very clear-mannered, on board, with NMC control only. When some backups fail, we investigate all of the possibilities and sometimes have to enter the admin from the client-side. We then have to render the log and investigate that. If it is a Microsoft issue, for example, then we will contact Microsoft. This entire process needs to be enhanced.

As long as all of the requirements are met, this is a very stable solution. It is used for our daily operations.

Scalability of this solution is very good. We have approximately four hundred employees using this solution.

Technical support for this solution is very good. They are nice people and whenever we need support, they turn up and investigate. Within an hour they will start an investigation.

The initial setup is a little bit complex, but it is very good. In terms of configuration, you have a basic administrator account. If you are going to be configuring Hyper-V or another technology then you have to have an admin account for those, as well. Without a proper administrator account, you will not be able to perform backup and restore functions.

There are also other things to consider, such as the network port and user compatibility. Hyper-V has issues to consider with respect to configuring the backup.

My advice to anybody who is researching this solution is to first check to make sure that your environment is stable, and compatible with this product. Even before doing a POC, the environment needs to be considered. Once any incompatibilities have been ruled out then a POC should be done, where everything needs to be tested.

This product can be complex and difficult to understand, but once you have some experience it is very good.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.