Cohesity vs. OpenText Data Protector

Cohesity has been awesome. The performance (speed) that it has been able to provide has actually given me back time every month. I have to test my backups monthly, and the Cloning process that Cohesity has available from it's backup has given me days back each month. It just a few minutes I can have VMs restored for testing and documentation. This took a couple days with the previous vendor.

Incentivized

Well suited: scenarios with very specific backups schedules; backups saved in tape libraries. Less appropriate: environments with older Operational Systems and older hardware, such as tape libraries.

Incentivized

• Easy to use and setup new backup and restore jobs.
• Extremely fast recovery time, can spin a VMware backup VM up in well under a minute.
• Granular recovery search options, easy to find specific files or systems to recover (or SQL DB).

• It is very reliable on the server side to provide a trustworthy back end.
• The install was simple and provided an easy way to install and backup Unix servers.
• The support was always helpful and responded quickly.

Incentivized

• Reporting could always be better- executive-style reports have to be generated from data at multiple points.
• Some tasks that could be brought to the UI that today we have to call support on (for example when an NFS mount is still active but we cannot see it from the UI)

• Increase the range of support for new platforms.
• Improve the attention of support cases in terms of speed of attention.
• Keep me better informed of the latest solution updates.

Incentivized

We have been very pleased with this backup solution. It is fast and reliable, and supports our VMware infrastructure. The company's support has been great, including proactively replacing our nodes when the flash memory was reporting high wear. Support is offered on-shore as well. We plan on continuing to use this product for the foreseeable future.

It was just not a good fit for our organization. We have an EMC SAN, Data Domain backup storage, and VMWare. Without any other HP software or hardware in our environment I do not see the need to continue using a product that is not well integrated with our other brands

Incentivized

Cohesity Helios is very easy to use and the web up is simple to navigate and the main dashboard presents a very good and clear overview summary of protection status, capacity and other vital metrics. If you have multiple clusters you can get a single pane view of overall status which is awesome.

Very easy to use. What needs to improve is to make it easier to configure some integrations and features, such as office 365 integration, acropolis integration, block change-based backup, etc. Despite we have documentation, even following all the steps, the integration is hard to implement or doesn't work in the end.

Incentivized

The Reporting-Server and the Reports depend on the settings.

Incentivized

Support is quick to respond but lacks that ongoing responsiveness if the issue is not simple. There will be large gaps in replies if they need to resort to escalation and when there are timezone differences between yourself and the person who picked up the ticket.

It is the weak point of this software, although it is improving little by a little. The first level of support does not solve almost anything until you move on to a higher level that is more involved.

Incentivized

Pick one person to help you through the process.

Incentivized

We looked at Veeam and although it's a great product when we priced out the licensing of both primary and disaster datacenters it became much too expensive. Rubrik is a great product and very similar to Cohesity. In the end, Cohesity had a secondary storage play as well as a better UI and better compatibility with lower tier cloud storage. We also like the way Cohesity did protection jobs vs Rubrik's virtual machine centric backup. CommVault is a product we still use today due to its massive features and the ability for bare metal backups. Cohesity does a much better job in the area of UI simplicity, virtual backup ease, and ease of management.

Incentivized

When selecting a backup solution for our virtual environment we chose HP Data Protector for its cost savings in licensing, our familiarity with the software and the ability to backup to disk, tape or both with the standard installation.

Incentivized

Here the license model from the Micro Focus Data Protector and DP4CW should merge. It causes argumentation problems if you license two products here.

Incentivized

We use the tool in different installations and combinations of functions and hardware.

Incentivized

Overall Cohesity professional services like the rest of Cohesity are brilliant. We had some poor advice around how to carve up our Netapp protection jobs which has set us back but it has been acknowledged that a mistake was made by Cohesity and they promise for future engagements with new customers the lessons learnt with us will be integrated into their planning workshop for NAS onboarding.

The professional services had some details of low promptness in the attention of cases.

Incentivized

• Several hours a week of admin time no longer needed to deal with tapes.
• Many hours a year saved in that the admin no longer has to deal with LTO drives, LTO drive firmware, tape libraries, tape library firmware, a physical server connected to tape library, etc. Retired old legacy NAS devices that in some instances no longer had firmware updates. One system to administer and maintain.
• Piece of mind. We replicate from our onsite cluster to an offsite cluster in the event of a DR event at HQ.

• Positive impact. I have not worked with HP Data Protector enough to provide the ROI. It simply worked when we needed it to.

Incentivized