CloudFrame vs. HYCU

The SQL database structure and application-consistent snapshots to local storage and recovery are very well done. The interface is nicely made and it is an intuitive design that needs very little training to use. The Restore from the Cloud function is cumbersome and slow, that could be improved by downloading and finding parts needed, instead of the entire backup media.

Incentivized

• Tiered backup policies
• On-Prem backups
• Cloud storage target backups

Incentivized

• I'd like to see lower annual costs.
• The setup for Azure backups required a lot of assistance from Support.

Incentivized

In a Nutanix AHV environment, it’s probably the best solution out there. It checks the most important boxes for us - immutable backups, on-Prem and off site backup storage targets, Azure DR. Policy based backups make administration a breeze. Pricing is cost effective. For the most part, support is able to take care of our needs, but better guidance around creating an effective and robust DR solution is needed

Incentivized

I have had several requests, and issues with the rollout and deployment of HYCU in our production environment. The HYCU team of support and developers have met each issue with importance and some kind of resolution or explanation of help. They have been so supportive even in the not so easy ones. That says something for their product and team behind it.

Incentivized

This fits Nutanix better than anything I have found. HYCU clearly focuses on personalized service. You can email, call or open a web ticketed, depending on your urgency.

Incentivized

• We have saved a few SQL issues and recovered data that could have been corrupted.
• Applications and files have a place in the cloud in case the need is there for other depts.
• Restoring across datacenters is possible with HYCU saving us time and money to do so.

Incentivized