Dell NetWorker Reviews

We use this solution for backing up our systems.

It can support many different versions, both newer and older.

The interface is the same, so when we are trying to troubleshoot the logs, it doesn't display properly.

There doesn't seem to be a lot of development with this solution. You don't see any updates with the features, or any development with the features. In general, Dell EMC doesn't seem to be investing much in the R&D of this product. They are selling it off.

I would like to see an improvement with the features in terms of troubleshooting and ease of use.

The documentation is very poor. It takes quite a bit of experience to understand the documentation. A new person who is going through the documentation will not be able to understand. There is no detailed documentation.

The product itself is good, but it takes a lot of time to troubleshoot.

I would like to see the user interface improved, more documentation, faster support, and it could be easier to configure.

I have been using this solution for five to six years.

We are using the latest version.

The stability is okay. When it works, it works perfectly, but when we run into issues it requires a lot of effort to fix it. 

You can't rate it as good or bad, because this is how it works.

It's a scalable solution. We have 10 customers and we plan to continue using it.

Technical support should be a lot better.

It takes a few hours for a smaller implementation. I can plan and implement it.

It takes more time for a larger implementation.

We have one engineer to deploy and maintain this solution.

I completed the implementation myself.

There is a licensing fee.

Recommending this solution would depend on the customer. Certain customers will require this it.

Deployment is easy, but managing is more difficult when you run into issues.

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

Our retirement system in Chile is private. In short, in our social security system, when you put funds in every month, you'll have some money for your retirement. One of our client companies uses this solution for backups. There are a lot of terabytes that need to be backed-up.

They have been using this solution for eight years. They are upgrading their hardware every day. Their hardware solution is EMC Data Domain and they use Dell EMC NetWorker in order to store the data. It works fine.

Another one of our clients is a telephone company. They need to keep call data for long periods of time. Our other client is an astronomical observatory — the largest observatory in the world. They use Dell EMC NetWorker to keep track of their astronomical images, etc.

We plan to extend our use of this solution. It's our life — we sell and deploy depending on our clients' needs.

They need to take off the tape and allow us to use different repositories in order to keep the data for five to 10 years. The data storage capabilities should be improved.

The next release will include better integration with Data Domain, which is a really good product.

This solution is very stable.

The technical support is okay, but it could be better.

You need to have some knowledge, but overall, the initial setup is not that complex.

Deployment depends on how many machines you want to back up — but that's not really a big issue. I think it's fast but it depends on if you have virtual machines, and on the size of the machines that you need to backup. The first thing you have to do is design. If you design everything properly, the setup is easy. Once this stage is complete, it's not a problem.

We have some integrators and consultants that help us with deployment.

Just one person is required for deployment, but you need some client representatives, some telecommunication guys, some storage guys, and some virtual machine guys. In reality, only one or two people are necessary — one technician and one project manager.

One technician and one project manager are enough, even for a big project. As long as you plan and you control the different phases of a project, there won't be a problem. 

On a scale from one to ten, I would give this solution a rating of nine.

We primarily use the solution for backup systems at the company. Ther is also a secondary use case whereby if our customers have this software, we can supplement it.

The solution has a longer lifespan. The customer doesn't have to change their solution and upgrade every four years. It's much better for the customer to have a stable piece of software that has a lifespan of maybe ten years or more.

The scaling can be difficult when updates are involved.

Sometimes the systems come in faster than a producer of the software can react to the new features.

The solution should have better access to Linux or virtual systems of files based on Linux. It doesn't matter if it is a hard installation or only a virtual installation. Sometimes the client doesn't need a backup of the whole system and only needs a handful of files. 

The initial setup is complex.

Technical support should be more accessible.

While the company may have been using the solution for ten or more years, I'm new to the organization. I don't have as much experience with it.

The solution offers excellent long-term stability. The product doesn't have a short lifespan, meaning clients can use it and rely on it for ten to 15 years or so. It helps with continuity.

While it might be scalable, every day we see some new operating systems and some new updates, and so on. Occasionally, there is a problem with these new one updates, due to the fact that something is changed in some settings in the new system. Therefore, when you use the old settings for such a backup, sometimes it doesn't work normally. You need to go back and recalibrate.

Technical support is okay. They often have patches and other solutions that can help resolve issues. However, sometimes they are not accessible. It's a big problem.

The initial implementation is not straightforward. It's a bit complex. I wouldn't say the process is easy. You have to create a map of the main points and storage. There are three levels of the agents. While it's easy to use for the customer, setting it up is a bit tricky.

It may be helpful to get the help of an integrator during the implementation process.

While it's my understanding that the solution is a bit expensive, I'm not in sales and therefore can't really comment on actual costs. I can't compare it to other options on the market.

We are an authorized service provider of Dell.

The company is working on a hybrid cloud solution currently.

In general, I would rate the solution nine out of ten. If it offered better access to Linux or virtual systems of files based on Linux, it would be perfect.

I'd advise potential new users to take a look at the product if they are looking for a long-term solution. It is not software for one year. It is likely something that can be used for five or more years. That is why it is better to really research and compare to see if it really is needed as it's a bit hard to install it. And, once implemented, it's likely going to be hard to change.

We use Dell EMC NetWorker for several solutions we have had such as Exchange, Microsoft SQL, Linux, Windows File, File data backups, and Oracle Databases.

It's easy to use.

NetWorker is coming to end-of-life in a couple of years, and even Dell has said that they are not going to continue with it. They no longer develop it.

They put their efforts into the new Power Protect products instead. 

Support for the cloud could be better and with the existing features, it could be a bit more robust. Also, the flexibility could be improved.

They need more support for image backups.

The company has used this solution for 15-20 years.

We are not working with the latest version.

It's a pretty stable solution.

It's not scalable. Once you have created a backup server and you have configured it for a specific load, then you can't change it. 

You have to estimate how big the load is that you are going to have. If that increases, suddenly, you will need to create a new server. 

I wouldn't suggest that it is scalable. Scalability is an area that needs improvement.

We are an admin group and we have several technicians that look into it as well. We have 40 users in our organization.

Experience with technical support varies, sometimes they are very good and other times they are not that good.

However, their higher levels of Technical support are very good.

I used other solutions in earlier employments. This company has been using NetWorker for as much as 20 years.

I did not participate in the installation. It was already installed when I arrived.

We have a team of 5 engineers to deploy and maintain this solution.

They are not cheap. I don't know the fees specifically but they should definitely be cheaper. Everything should be cheaper :-)

Since they are going to stop developing this solution, I cannot recommend it to others.

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

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.