CrashPlan® provides secure, scalable, and straightforward endpoint data backup, to help organizations recover from any worst-case scenario, whether it is a disaster, simple human error, a stolen laptop, ransomware, or an as-of-yet-undiscovered calamity.
N/A
Cove Data Protection
Score 8.8 out of 10
N/A
Cove Data Protection (formerly N-Able Backup) is designed to cover servers, datacenters, applications, and workstations, and is provided to ensure business continuity and at-a-glance assessment and fast issue resolution via customizable dashboard.
N/A
Pricing
CrashPlan
Cove Data Protection
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
CrashPlan
Cove Data Protection
Free Trial
Yes
No
Free/Freemium Version
No
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
Discount available for annual billing.
Cove offers one flat rate per server or workstation and one flat per-user price for Microsoft 365, with cloud storage included. Each license carries a defined amount of included storage that is pooled across an MSPs customers, so smaller devices that use less can offset larger ones.
Both of the entries I put need a dedicated VM or physical server to be utilized. VEEAM can be installed as a VM or on a physical server, but Unitrends has a dedicated server needed as a purchased product in order to get the backups running. CrashPlan is a simple install on any …
CrashPlan (in my specific case the CrashPlan Pro or CrashPlan for Small Business (there seems to be somewhat of an ongoing identity crisis with the products) is significantly lower overhead, in terms of cost and complexity, when compared to the other two products I have …
Mostly the price is what drew me to CrashPlan -others I have used are expensive per GB storage and difficult to manage. Carbonite was costing $1000.00 a year for 1 server with 2 TB of data. CrashPlan helps keep down the cost and the client spends much less time paying me to …
Unitrends is our primary backup solution here at my place of employment, and I have no complaints. It does on-prem backups to a storage pool and with that, we chose not to also use Unitrends could storage as the cost was pretty high. Crashplan has a low cost and we were …
Both AppAssure and Acronis Disaster Recovery Service was used in the IT business management firm in which I worked. AppAssure required off sight storage. It was challenging in that the size of offsite storage was an additional cost and rolling up could take hours. Restoring …
I have used SOS online backup. SOS might have had some advantages and was fairly easy to use, especially when searching for files. This is not to say that Code42 is difficult. But I did not feel that using SOS was justified given the exorbitant pricing scheme used by SOS.
We've been using Nakivo and Code42 together. It works great as we are able to have the peace of mind of having data backed up offsite (Code42) and locally (Nakivo) I found this combo worked better than the costly and complicated setup of both Unitrends and Zerto. My biggest …
Have used Veritas, Symantec, Mozy, and Carbonite. Veritas and Symantec Backup Exec from my tape days, and Mozy and Carbonite when I wanted to move to a modern backup service. Code42's interface, cost, simplicity of use, versioning, security, and low-impact sold me. No contest …
I formerly used SOS Online Backup. It was a very similar system, originally offering unlimited backups at a price similar to Code42. After more than a year of backups, SOS informed me that they'd be reducing my storage from unlimited to 2tb, and, increasing my monthly rate by …
The main advantage that CrashPlan has on competing services is it's ability to back up network drives and keep your backup archives indefinitely. While Backblaze costs significantly less ($50/year/computer vs. $10/year/computer - or $120/year/computer), it does not have the …
OneDrive is not a good backup solution for endpoints. It is for storing a few files and sharing those files but not for business backup. Druva is a very good product that we never had any problems with and I'm not exactly sure why we switched from it. Code42 has some extra …
For our business model, Carbonite was not as economical. CrashPlan offered unlimited backup and unlimited deleted file retention for similar cost. Additionally, we had better results with support during evaluation with CrashPlan.
I have used several tape drives over the years with Symantec Backup Exec. Tapes have so many negatives associated with them, I would never recommend them as a backup system. I have also tried a couple of other disk based backup systems. Compared to all other backup solutions …
CrashPlan just makes backups simple. It's LDAP integration isn't locked in to only AD (i.e., Commvault) and the product is much more solid and reliable than the end user portion of Tivoli's CDP offering that was replaced in our environment by CrashPlan. I can't stress enough …
We compared CrashPlan with other choices and they were either too expensive or didn't have the backup capacity we required at the time. For lack of a better solution, we were very close to signing with Mozy, and this was years ago when CrashPlan was still a new player in the …
I like Crashplan's centralized nature and flexibility with support for all platforms. Their support has been the best of all other competitors' solutions.
I have not used the product, but it appears to be in the same league as the Crashplan product. I tend to think Crashplan is better only because of naivete of the other product and the fact that the entire experience with Crashplan has been fantastic from setup to updating to …
We use Windows Server to backup our in-house associates as they are connecting to the domain and it is easy to keep track of. Our remote associates do not connect to the domain as often so we had to find a solution to enable us to get a secure, accurate backup of their data. …
CrashPlan demonstrated a more advanced development than other products we were evaluating. A number of them didn't compress and dedupe, which affected performance on the machine as well as the network. The controls and reporting of crashplan were way more intuitive and …
We looked at file sync solutions that require an end user to move data independently, and two major things stuck out:
1. The human error factor was high. You cannot trust people to move files, even if they are important or they've agreed to move them on a certain schedule, and …
Cove Data Protection compares well against Veeam, as it provides a cloud-first option to save data, reducing worries of ransomware locking out the backup target. Additionally, whereas Veeam is an image-based backup, Cove provides file-based backup which can make restoration of …
Cove is able to cover all aspects of backup in a single package. From the same dashboard I can check servers, workstations, and even Office 365. Cove is a much better solution in terms of overall management for a company such as ours. It also provides integration options with …
We had a huge partner that let us discover this great service provider.
The target is the same as the other vendors, but SolarWinds wins with the dashboard. with the dashboard n-able you can monitor everything starting from the state of the backups of an important server.. …
Works well. Easy to use. If you use Ncentral, it's already tied in and even easier to deploy. Cloud storage is more expensive than competitors. There is no easy option to offload your backups to AWS, etc. It can create a local speed vault to have local backups as well. …
So the live recovery of VEEAM is awfully nice, and it's GUI is laid out and easy to use. Windows Server Backup is about a bare-bones as it gets. It's been my experience that Solarwinds Backup just wins at every turn. It's fast, easy to deploy (well, if using N-central), and …
We started with Vision Works many years ago then went to IASO/GFI. After working with them for a couple of years we got tired of un-kept promises and poor service so we moved to Solarwinds and have been very happy with them in all scenarios. The product goes in as it is …
Solarwinds Backup provides the most comprehensive backup system. After testing all other systems the weaknesses of Solarwinds Backup are much less severe or risky compared to others. As well the overall cost of Solarwinds Backup's value is the main reason for choosing …
Technically, Datto is a better option for business continuity and local backups. However, we considered using Solarwinds Backup for redundancy because it's a simple cloud backup solution that has good deduplication. Personally, I believe that the Datto offsite transfer process …
I have used in the past EVault, Datto, Veeam, Veritas etc. The lower cost compares to Veeam and EVault. Easier to manage than Datto. More reliable than Veritas.
This is a great Cloud backup solution. The cost is low, the bandwidth is managed well within the application, and the footprint for the client on a machine is very small and provides a notification menu icon with info about what is happening now or very recently. This does not backup to anything locally, so if that is a requirement, it will not meet that need. It used to be able to backup from one machine to another remote machine at one time, but now it is only cloud-based.
Solarwinds Backup is ideal for individuals looking to keep a consistent backup of devices in their environment. We used it primarily for networking equipment. It is easy to set up, as it is one of the steps available when adding a new device to solarwinds. It is probably not an ideal product to use for long-term (1 month+) backups.
Code42 is the most affordable backup system offering unlimited storage that I could find. I came from SOS Online Backup, which I ultimately decided to drop after my monthly rate for their unlimited plan increased by 20x.
With Code42's unlimited storage option, I don't have to worry about the fact that my backups are significant in space. As a photographer with thousands of images at stake, I need to run large backups often.
Code42 runs continuously and silently in the background of my desktop computer. It is truly "set and go", so I don't have to think about it when I'm away. It runs until the designated drive has been fully backed up to my cloud storage. It will then automatically email me once the backup is complete (or, it will email me if it encounters any errors).
Customer service is above par. Anytime I need help, a chat agent is available (chat is my communication preference), they are always friendly, and go above and beyond to resolve my needs.
The CrashPlan program installed on your computer is Java-based vs. a native application. While this makes development for CrashPlan easier, there are a lot of drawbacks to Java programs including more resources usage, less stability, and overall more clunky interface.
While this was also in the Pros category - CrashPlan is an extremely powerful and flexible program, which adds a great deal of complexity. Setting up CrashPlan isn't always a simple procedure, and depending on the complexity of your backup set, can take a while to tinker around with the settings to get everything to work properly.
The CrashPlan desktop program consists of a Java program front end, as well as a backend service - there are times when the backend service will crash, and the front end Java program will refuse to load. Typically, restarting the service or restarting the computer will resolve the issue, but sometimes more in-depth troubleshooting is required.
Perhaps one of the biggest downsides to CrashPlan is its price - at $10/month/computer CrashPlan is more than double the price of some existing backup services such as Backblaze (priced at $50/year/computer). To add salt to the wound, about a year and a half ago, CrashPlan discontinued their consumer options - which were very reasonably priced at $60/year for a single computer or a family plan priced at $150/year for up to 10 computers. When these options were discontinued, the cost of backing up with CrashPlan was effectively doubled for the same feature set.
Along with the previous example, CrashPlan had the option to back up to a remote machine on a different network with a free Crashplan account. This option was eliminated when the consumer line of services were discontinued.
While the backup service provided by CrashPlan are still first in class, the above two controversial changes have broken some trust between CrashPlan and its clients.
To perform restores on a different location, there's a need to install a standalone application call the Recovery Console, which makes it too much trouble. Instead, this should have been performed over the same backup management portal, where you should have been able to select in which location you want to restore.
The business continuity features, available for the system state backups, like restoring a backup as a virtual machine or performing a bare-metal restore, also require to install different standalone applications for each. And in disaster scenarios, both tasks take too much time to get everything running.
The retention of the backups (the archiving feature) needs to be set up individually for each server at a time, when this is something that should be more easily managed by the service provider (not expecting to be set up by the customer in each device) as a general setting within the Backups Profiles or Product Management.
There should be a better reporting tool, that would allow to export backup and restore events, as well as user activities.
The configurations for Backup Profiles and Product Management could be redundant and confusing.
Cove Data Protection is very usable as it's easy to tell that it is made to not only do backup very well, but it's also easy to deploy. The agent-based deployment allows for flexible deployment options while ensuring a minimal amount of manual work is needed on the dashboard end. Recovery is also very easy, especially as it relates to one-off file recovery
Friendly and knowledgeable support team available to assist with this product. Code 42 (formerly CrashPlan) offers unlimited storage options for reasonable costs, so you really can't go wrong with this product. They have been a reliable resource for our company, and I would recommend to others looking for an easy setup with unlimited storage.
CrashPlan (in my specific case the CrashPlan Pro or CrashPlan for Small Business (there seems to be somewhat of an ongoing identity crisis with the products) is significantly lower overhead, in terms of cost and complexity, when compared to the other two products I have evaluated/used. The downsides are that it is also significantly less functional than the other products. CrashPlan is, as I have said a good value simple point solution.
Solarwinds Backup provides the most comprehensive backup system. After testing all other systems the weaknesses of Solarwinds Backup are much less severe or risky compared to others. As well the overall cost of Solarwinds Backup's value is the main reason for choosing Solarwinds Backup as the primary backup/DR provider.
Tremendous cost savings as the amount of data you backup doesn't impact cost. One flat rate!
Implementation time was minimal and requires little to no maintenance. Since installation, I've not had to correct or fix any issues. It just works.
We opted to supplement Code42 with another solution that allowed us to backup data to a local repository due to the amount for data that changes in our firm.
I can't speak to every dollar and cent involved, but I can tell you that the daily task of checking backup status has changed from at least an hour just to check VEEAM and Windows Backup statuses for multiple clients, to checking two pages and then digging into any problems. So as far as productivity goes, it's been wonderful!