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.
Veeam is our top-tier solution for backing up a handful of old-school physical Windows servers, and it is very good at this. It is also top notch in user-friendly granular file restores and application specific object restores (AD, SQL, etc).
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.
I have used several backup programs, I selected 2 just to be brief. The best thing I see with HYCU over Veeam is that it is much more difficult for an attacker if inside the network to gain access to the backups and objects saved in the backup storage. The best part about HYCU over Bacula is that it is much easier to use and more stable. The interface alone will save you from time and energy using other products
Veeam is vastly superior. It was the product we vetted and switched to from Cloudberry. CB can perform adequate backups but restores can be challenging and there are a lot of missing features compared to Veeam.
