Veritas Backup Exec Reviews

Veritas Backup Exec is one of the most dominant software based backup solutions in the industry. It is a reputed and well known product.

This solution is suggested for small- to medium-sized enterprises. 

It is not a recommended software when it comes to large environments where there has to be a minimal Recovery Time Objective (RTO) and/or Recover Point Objective (RPO).

• The backup solution comes in different versions to support different platforms. 
• Deployment is a pain, but once the setup is done, it works like a charm. 
• One of the most stable backup solutions.  

Enhanced support for cloud backup needs to be added. However, offsite backup to the cloud can be done. 

The recovery success rate is not very convincing.

Initial setup is a bit complex and needs some expertise for troubleshooting when something goes wrong. 

I was previously an ADV engineer at Veritas. I have witnessed different types of users utilizing the product.

As I mentioned earlier, if we have an environment which has only a file system and SQL backups, then it is a good product, i.e., only for small environments. However, for large environments such as Oracle, SAP HANA, Microsoft Exchange, DB2 and the VM backups, you can go for Veritas NetBackup, EMC Legato NetWorker, Simpana Commvault and Tivoli Store Manager (TSM).

Backup Exec 2012 R2 is a very good product for the Windows file system and SQL backups. It is very user-friendly, but the next version Backup Exec 2014 that is released and the other next versions of Backup Exec product is not so friendly. The entire GUI has been changed and has changed multiple options as compared to Backup Exec 2012.

Firstly, the GUI for 2014 is mostly confusing, i.e., if you need to add any additional technical features, then it doesn't require a change to the GUI.

Regarding its stability, Backup Exec 2012 R2 is the most stable product for the file system and SQL backups.

There were no scalability issues.

Technical support is good. I give it an eight out of 10 rating.

I have worked on multiple backup solutions as I have worked in the backup-shared domain.

It's a very simple configuration for the Backup Exec 2012 R2 solution.

It is cheap compared to the other backup technologies. It all depends on the requirements.

I have worked on this product, so I am just sharing my experience on this. I have worked on multiple backup products, such as Veritas NetBackup and EMC Legato NetWorker.

Before implementing any backup solution, you need to understand your environment, as well as the requirements, and based on that you need to choose the product. If you are considering the Backup Exec, it is good for small environments.

One of the latest improvements is the Azure Cloud connector integration.

One of the valuable features is the instant recovery for VMs. It reduces the RTO (Recovery Time Objective) drastically.

There still a lot of room for improvement in synthetic technologies, especially when targeted to deduplication media.

Backup Exec does not support any technology similar to Netbackup´s Accelerator feature, or even Arcserve Incremental Forever (at least for physical systems or virtualization platforms other than VMWare and Hyper-V). The Synthetic option that we have on Backup Exec does not allow us to target backups to a deduplication media.

Any technology that can synthesize previous succeeded backups will result in a drastic reduction of time to complete backup jobs, giving us subsequent Full Backups for the price (effort) of a incremental.

It is very stable.

This solution was designed for a middle-sized market. It scales properly for a small business.

I would give technical support a rating of a six and a half out of 10.

I have worked with many other vendors. They all have some strong and weak points.

The initial setup was extremely straightforward and it was full of wizards.

Make sure you verify the V-RAY Extension when licensing your virtual environment. Depending on the scenario, it can cost less than half of the price of other methods.

Our customers, who have chosen Backup Exec, normally evaluate Veeam or ArcServe.

Try the cloud connectors. They can become a replacement for long retention tapes in some cases.

It just gave us the ability to have valid backups most of the time.

The interface easy to use and it is compatible with most backup devices.

• Ability to backup to cloud
• Virtualization backups availability
• More stable environment in a WAN infrastructure

There were issues with stability, such as big issues/error messages when trying to restore SQL instances, Exchange datastores, or single files

In terms of scalability, if you get rid of a server that belongs to the CASO, the catalogs won´t work. Restores get even more difficult. If you need to replace the CASO, it is very frustrating.

I would give technical support a rating of 5/10.

We were hoping to get scalability and a stable backup environment.

The initial setup is complex when you are replacing an existing server.

Pricing is similar, but they don´t offer the same options/technology.

We evaluated many other options back at that time.

Check Veeam first.

It provides our daily backups and restores. It gives us the ability to locate and restore critical files which users may have intentionally or unknowing deleted a while ago. We also enjoy the feature which allow us to set up a backup job on one location, to be backed up to media on another Backup Exec server.

• Backup to Disk: It restore files very quickly.
• vSphere infrastructure backup option: Useful to keeps VMs on disk and it is done fast.

They can work on the issue of the job timing out when it is unable to reach a selection item. It sometimes hangs up on the selection item, thus preventing the job from continuing.

There were issues with version 2010, but since our last upgrade, we are comfortable again.

There were no issues with scalability, because we had all the necessary licenses.

I would give technical support a rating of nine out of 10.

We did not use a different solution before this one.

The initial setup was straightforward.

If your company can afford it, go for it.

It is simple to set up. Once the backup jobs are clearly defined, the rest is history.

I can give examples in term of the databases: the Exchange databases, the email databases or the flag files. It has improved the working of our organization in such a way that you can even go to a block-level restore and can go to a demo-level file restore.

The the technology we have been using is much better than the other software providers in the region. The other companies are OK now but Veritas started out first with this technology.

We are using this application as a corporate standard and we feel it's a better application compared to the others.

The most important feature of this product is the backup of any data, i.e. it could be databases or Z files, or anything.

For us, the main two features that we appreciate in this application are backup and restore. They are the main purposes for which we are using this application.

The stability, reliability of the product and the features that are available in this application are very good.

However, it's not too stable for client-server architecture. Center Management is not so interactive, and then there are some issues regarding the complex licensing which needs improvement.

There are small issues are going on. I am not sure if it is the product or the environment or the hardware that we use to support this application. So there are various potential factors. However, if you go back to the application, the support is really good. We get support in a timely fashion and are happy with it.

The product has limited scalability. It comes down to the hardware, i.e. what we are using, based on its limitations. It can support anything. If you're OK to scale in terms of your hardware, it's going to support you; that is not a problem. But, the licensing structure is quite complex and, as mentioned, this is where they could improve. Licensing is quite complex to understand, we have to go back to the vendor every time to get the right product.

Technical support depends upon the person who answers the call. If they are in your time region, then you get better support, but if they're not in your region then there is a delay in the support and you lose valuable business for backup and restore. Overall, it is much better than the others.

We are actually using two to three solutions at the moment. We are using the Arcserve Backup as they have also been a major player in the market for many years. We were using it and it was OK, but they have not advanced in terms of their technology for many years. for this reason we had to switch to Veritas.

Setup can be both straightforward and complex. If you're talking about just a single installation, it's straightforward. But if you come back to the client-server architecture, it's complex because it has to match the versions and it has a one-version backup compatibility. If you had to go back to a previous version, then you struggle. Thus, it's simple for standalone but is complex for the client-server architecture.

Definitely, we evaluated different options. We evaluated this product on different levels. We evaluated it for various backups such as the Linux backup, and we also used it for several other purposes and found that it's a better solution. That was why we chose this application.

The only challenge we are facing is that the Center Management is not as good as Arcserve, but it still works. The Center Management dashboard is not so user-friendly and that is the only thing we struggle with.

It's an easy software to set up and also, to backup and restore your files.

It's user-friendly, it's not very complex and a person with limited IT/technical support knowledge can manage this application.

The Exchange restore is the most valuable feature. The restore granularity that the product offers is great, right down to the individual emails.

It saves a ton of time and effort for the admins. There is far less frustration for the end user that equates to more time for admins for addressing more burning issues within their areas of expertise, thus, increasing the employee's productivity.

The speed at which one can restore offers much faster recovery times for our clients.

Make the product more user-friendly for users who aren't familiar with Veritas Backup Exec. The product is better utilized if you've used previous versions of the product.

The Veritas Backup Exec GUI is familiar to users who have used the product before. However for a new user the GUI could prove to be slightly challenging to get used to. Veritas should provide an update where the GUI layout is redesigned and provides a certain level of comfort for new/first-time users of the product.

I have used this solution for around six to ten years.

There were no stability issues.

There were no scalability issues.

Technical support is good. Veritas is good, overall, when it comes to the technical support.

I have used numerous backup products. My personal preference would be IBM Tivoli Store Manager (TSM). Cost is always a factor and Veritas Backup Exec is very competitively priced.

The setup was straightforward but Veritas assisted us with the implementation, which in turn ensured that the best practices were adhered to.

Engage with as many Veritas partners as possible, to try and get the best pricing based on the partner status.

We looked at NetBackup and IBM TSM.

Consider all the backup requirements and budgets. Look at your IT department's long-term strategy.

It is very useful to be able to backup files and folders, for both Windows and Linux (physical and virtual servers), and put them into whatever kind of storage that you desire.

It supports most of our storage systems and backs up most of them.

It's still hard to use. A more user-friendly version would be great.

I had compatibility error with Symantec in 30% of cases, and I think Symantec needs to change the whole user interface and menu.

I was using image base/file and folder backup system from HP.