OpenText Data Protector Reviews

I provide Data Protector as a solution to my customers, but I have fewer clients using the product these days. 

Data Protector's GUI is the most useful feature.

The GUI could be updated. The GUI hasn't changed since version 6. It's on version 10 now. The reporting could also be better. Also, while Data Protector is excellent for backing up physical hardware, it needs more features for backing up VM images because many environments use hypervisor. 

It's not as good as some of its competitors. One image backup job should be able to restore the file or database level, but Data Protector has to create three separate jobs.

I have been using Micro Focus Data Protector for more than five years.

Data Protector is stable.

Data Protector can scale up, but I have never used that feature.

I rate Micro Focus support six out of 10. In the past, I contacted Micro Focus support frequently, but most of my customers stopped using Data Protector. I had a good experience with their team five years ago, but their technical support has gone downhill since then.

Setting up Data Protector is straightforward. I rate it 10 out of 10 for ease of setup. 

I rate Data Protector six out of 10 for affordability. I don't know the exact cost, but the Micro Focus license is expensive compared to other products like VM. You can back up VMs for free.

I rate Micro Focus Data Protector six out of 10 overall. I would recommend something besides Data Protector. It isn't competitive with other products and doesn't support replication features. So it's less competitive with other products in the market. So I wouldn't advise.

We don't use Micro Focus widely. It's used as a backup-to-tape system. Overall, we have about five users because a couple of our clients use it as well.  

I like that Micro Focus keeps a separate catalog of our data. 

Many of our users complain about the GUI. You still need to rely on the command line interface. Because it originated as a Unix system, Data Protector is still a command line-driven solution, which makes it seem rather dated compared to systems that are built around a GUI from day one. It doesn't affect the functionality, but some people don't find it user-friendly.

I have been using Micro Focus for almost 20 years. 

Data Protector is stable.

Data Protector is highly scalable.

We don't use Micro Focus support often, but it has been pretty good when we needed it.

We also use Acronis Backup, but it's hard for me to compare because I don't have as much experience with Acronis relative to Data Protector. It's also one of those difficult situations because we haven't really pushed Data Protector to its limits. It has a lot of functionality that we don't use. We tend to use more of Acronis' functionality, so it would be unfair to compare them.

The initial setup is fairly straightforward because it was historically a Unix system. It takes about half a day to install. 

Data Protector has an annual license, and it's reasonably priced. 

I rate Micro Focus Data Protector eight out of 10. It's a highly stable solution that does the job. To use this product, you must comfortable with a command line interface, and many people today can't deal with anything that's not GUI. You need to be in control of the command line to use it properly. 

What we find most valuable in Micro Focus Data Protector is that it provides Japanese data protection, for example, it protects information such as the full Japanese name, address, etc.

We have a lot of requests for the Micro Focus team, particularly in terms of the Japanese data pattern, as it's not as good now. The Japanese data pattern accuracy of the Micro Focus Data Protector needs to be improved because there are a lot of false negatives and false positives. We are currently testing this and our product team has been communicating with the Micro Focus team.

What we'd like to see in the next release of the solution is better compatibility with other products, apart from a more accurate Japanese data pattern.

I've been dealing with Micro Focus Data Protector for two years.

Micro Focus Data Protector, in terms of stability, is not so bad.

I'm not sure how scalable Micro Focus Data Protector is because the DLP service goes through my company's SaaS product.

There's no need for me to contact technical support for Micro Focus Data Protector because my company's product team is there to answer my questions.

I didn't use a different solution before using Micro Focus Data Protector. It is a first for me.

The deployment for Micro Focus Data Protector was easy.

Pricing for Micro Focus Data Protector is reasonable.

My company and its customers use Micro Focus Data Protector, though I'm not sure which version of the solution is being used. It's deployed on the public cloud and via a SaaS service.

My rating for Micro Focus Data Protector is eight out of ten.

I'm a reseller of Micro Focus Data Protector.

It works excellently only with Oracle.

It has a lot of undeveloped functions like window searching and patent searching, and within the main backup processes like VMware and Microsoft Exchange.

It's completely not user-friendly, and it has no built-in antivirus software. In my opinion, Micro Focus Data Protector is not an enterprise level solution.

I would like to see the quick search bar working without complexities and would like to see the building reporting. I would like to see it deny the architecture of the client and server and work directly via APIs.

I would like to see Micro Focus Data Protector be completely web based with fast HTML files. That would reduce a lot of installation time with all those script integrations and so on.

It would be good to have automation of the broken backups. For example, NetBackup had a great feature when the backup broke for some reason. It would automatically try to resume it eight or nine times and only then would give a fail error.

The stability depends on the environment because there can be some special cases where Micro Focus Data Protector is not stable at all.

The technical support from Micro Focus is terrible in terms of the quality and problem solving. For example, let's assume that something went wrong when running Data Protector in a large infrastructure environment with permanent backups going on. When we contact technical support, they will ask us to provide logs. However, if we turn the bug mode on it will affect all of the systems, and we simply will not be able to collect the requested logs for that purpose. So, it becomes impossible to provide the necessary log files because we cannot stop the critical backups.

I have some experience with NetBackup. It was more stable, user-friendly, and had the best support. However, the decision makers decided that Micro Focus Data Protector was the better way to go, and we had to switch.

As for the initial setup, it's perfect for small- and medium-sized companies.

The pricing is acceptable for enterprise level companies, but it's not acceptable for small- and medium-sized businesses. Micro Focus Data Protector is not an enterprise level solution, and it should cover small- and medium-sized businesses with acceptable prices.

I would advise you not to use Micro Focus Data Protector and would rate it at four on a scale from one to ten.

We use Data Protector for backup and recovery.

The most valuable feature of Data Protector is its integration with VMware. A lot of software these days integrates with VMware, and you can run some of these things on virtual machines. You can even have your backup manager running on a virtual machine and use physical managers to move data around. Their VMware integration isn't too bad, but Commvault has that feature, and many other backup products do.

We're not satisfied with the robustness and stability of the software since Micro Focus took it in-house. The GUI is one thing they could improve. It's still a bit archaic. Data Protector needs a more functional, user-friendly GUI.

I started at this company in 2018, so I have been using Data Protector at this company since then or maybe a little before. They were using the solution before HPE sold it off to Micro Focus. The company was initially using it with MSL Tape Libraries. When I joined, StoreOnce had just been installed.

Data Protector isn't stable.

Data Protector is sufficiently scalable for our purposes, but our site isn't that big.

I rate Micro Focus Data Protector six out of 10. We were unsatisfied with the support, and that contributed to the decision to migrate to Commvault. The quality dropped when they outsourced support. It's not the only company. HPE also took its service and support to Bangalore in India.

You should only outsource if your service level won't drop, but it always drops. When you mention that to management, they say, "Okay, we know, but everybody is doing it." Accenture does it and Cognizant, too. All the big services companies are all down there.

Neutral

The company is considering a switch to Commvault. It's a global company, so the transition will be worldwide, and we don't have a say. I still don't have any hands-on experience, but I know HPE has tightened its ties with Commvault, and they're producing technical best practices for the product. They are even promoting Commvault as their backup solution of choice when providing backup solutions to customers.

Data Protector used to be their product, so they did have the chance. Once Micro Focus acquired them, even HPE was not satisfied with the level of support and gradually started looking to Commvault. At the same time, if somebody asked me which backup solution I would suggest, I couldn't recommend Commvault because I don't have the experience yet.

I rate Micro Focus Data Protector six out of 10.

We have two different systems. We use Microsoft Azure Backup for VM machines and Micro Focus for our file server, database, and cloud backups, like Exchange Online and so forth.  

The online backups of Office 365 have room for improvement. This is now available for the Exchange Online part of Office 365, but we're still waiting for SharePoint Online, Teams, etc. We know that it's coming, but it takes time.

We have been using Data Protector for more than 20 years. We started using it when it was an HP solution, but then Micro Focus acquired it. It was always the same product.

Data Protector is highly stable.

Data Protector is scalable. 

I've never heard any complaints about Micro Focus support, so I think it's okay.

Data Protector is quite simple and easy to deploy. The deployment is always the same. It's on a server, and the agents are deployed to the machines in a straightforward way. We have two engineers who deploy and manage all our backup solutions. 

We switched from device licensing to volume-based licensing for Data Protector.

I rate Micro Focus Data Protector eight out of 10. We chose Data Protector years ago because it supported all the systems and databases we needed. Other software packages covered a special range of products but didn't offer broad support. This was a long time ago, so I don't know the situation in the market today.

I am a manager at a mid-size non-profit and we use this to backup HPE UNIX servers.

I like that it supports HPE UNIX servers since many backup solutions do not - this is the main reason why we chose this solution.

I do not think that this solution is relevant in the current IT market. They have not upgraded their features and functionalities which makes it difficult for them to remain competitive. 

I have been using this solution for about fifteen years.

It is a stable solution, we have not experienced any bugs over the past fifteen or so years.

I would say that it is scalable.

Support could be better. Right now, for us, their preferred communication method is via email which takes quite a bit of time to resolve even small issues.

The initial setup in general was simple. However, if you want encryption, you need to install something else, and there are other models for reporting. This can get a little complex since it is not a single solution that gives everything out-of-the-box.

We have four or five guys from our backup admin team who work in here regularly.

The solution was implemented by a partner of Micro Focus and it took about one to two days to setup for our mid-size company.

There is a perpetual license involved in addition to support which needs to be renewed annually.

I would rate this solution a six out of ten.

We primarily use data protection in complex environments with large Oracle databases, Hyper-V, and VMWare hypervisors with replication of backup sets to DR site. 

It's used for data protection of large Oracle Databases, backups of small branch offices, zero-downtime backup of mission-critical databases with HPE storage (XP or 3PAR), data protection of most common NAS appliances through NDMP protocol, and the backup of Microsoft Exchange, Microsoft Sharepoint, and the Microsoft SQL Server. 

It provides a consolidation of backups to the tape library and to the cloud provider. 

Data Protector works in conjunction with a Catalyst-based deduplication feature and HPE StoreOnce appliances to provide us with the tools to build reliable DR solutions for backups through Catalyst stores replication using ARS between the sites. 

The wide variety of parameters that can be used to perform fine-tuning of integrations helped us to reach stability with the backups of complex environments. 

The push install feature helped us in completing large migrations from other backup software vendors in a short amount of time.

Oracle DB instances backup is one of the main script integrations in the backup specification of the NDMP three-way backups. It lets us use StoreOnce Catalyst stores as a destination through an ethernet connection, bypassing the SAN and avoiding the use of physical and virtual tape libraries. 

Catalyst stores replication using ARS between two sites - each with a distinct cell manager. 

The command-line interface is user-friendly and well documented in the reference guide. 

Push install from DP GUI interface lets us deploy/upgrade clients of most common platforms in a short amount of time.

The VMware GRE is still limited and complex to implement with differences in behavior between Windows and Linux mount proxies. 

ZDB has too many constraints (e.g. it doesn't work for Linux volumes mirrored with software different from LVM). 

Microfocus needs to build a partnership with other vendors in addition to HPE as far as cloud consolidation of backups. 

With the 11.0 release, there have been improvements in terms of security (Secure communication) however, the bar is still not high enough. 

Data Protector advanced scheduler should be replaced with a more reliable scheduler such as the Veritas One.

I've used the solution for 12 years.

The solution, especially if it's implemented in the Linux platform, is very stable.

The scalability is good, however, being a solution that relies on HW from other vendors (HPE, EMC, etc.) scalability isn't a mess for Data Protector itself.

The customer service is discreet.

Neutral

In the past, I used EMC Networker and Veritas Netbackup and I switched to HPE Data Protector for business needs.

The initial setup was straightforward. The installation manuals are well done and there are several setup wizards at our disposal.

All implementations were handled in-house.

Information is reserved and cannot be shared as per company policies.

The setup cost is not so large compared with other software, while as far as licensing goes, I suggest one per capacity (Front End TB) if the environment is heterogeneous with both physical and virtual servers.

We did not evaluate other options first.

We primarily use the solution as a backup. It basically backs up all of my premium items.

It's a good product that's pretty easy to use.

The solution is scalable. 

The initial setup is rather straightforward.

It would be ideal if they could improve their level of support.

We've been using the solution for eight years or so. It's been a while. 

The product is scalable. If a company wants to expand it, it can do so. It's not a problem. 

We have less than 100 people on the solution right now. 

The level of support is lacking. They need to step up the level of service they offer. We aren't 100% satisfied. They are friendly, however, they aren't really flexible. 

The installation is pretty straightforward and simple. It's not too complex or overly difficult. A company wouldn't have any trouble setting it up.

The deployment is fast and likely you can have it up and running in a day.

You don't need a big technical team to handle deployment and maintenance. You might just need two people who are engineers. 

I handled the implementation by myself. I did not need the help of any integrators or consultants at the time. 

The product is reasonably priced. It's not too expensive. 

We're currently using version 10 of the solution. 

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten. It's pretty good. 

I'd recommend the solution to others. 

We primarily use the solution for our server backup and some Linux system backups as well as a backup for our SQL.

The main reason for usage is to protect our information. However, we've searching for new tools for increasing the volume of information and increasing platform protection. Unfortunately, Data Protector is not exactly the tool for that task.

The stability of the product seems to be quite good.

The solution isn't ideal for big data or large CRMs.

We have been lacking proper training on the solution. This seems to be a weak point of the product. They should offer better training for their users.

Other tools seem to be easier to use.

The solution should offer support for the backup of cloud platforms. The same system needs to work with replication and mirror sites, for example.

I've been dealing with the solution for five years or so.

The stability of the solution is quite good. There aren't bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze at all. It's reliable.

As this is an appliance, the scalability is limited to the sizing. There's only so much capacity that is possible.

It's difficult to get technical support and proper assistance for this tool.

I've only worked with this particular company for eight months and they've had the solution for a number of years previous to my start. I did not play a role in the implementation and therefore can't speak to how easy or difficult the setup or deployment was for them.

I'm not sure how many people the company used for deployment or how many are needed for maintenance.

I don't have any insights into the licensing or costs. It's not an aspect of the solution that I handle directly.

We're currently planning on changing out backup tools. At the moment we're looking at Veeam and Barracuda. We have some systems deployed by Spanish users and they already use Barracuda, which is why we are considering it. We're taking licensing costs into account, however, we're finding that the most visible difference is the user interface as well as the style of use - for example, how to backup and recover data.

We're just a customer and an end-user. We don't have a special relationship with this company.

I'm not sure of the exact version we're using. It may be some iteration of version six.

I'd advise new users to implement the solution using a support person and good documentation and to make sure they are putting the correct data policies in place.

In the past, it was quite a good tool, however, now, due to a lack of training, or due to having a lack of staff that is trained in it, it is likely much easier to have something like Veeam, which isn't as complicated of a solution.

On a scale from one to ten, I would rate this product at a five. In comparison, I'd rate Veeam at an eight.