LiveVault vs. Microsoft System Center

Our company was originally with VaultLogix which was taken over by LiveVault. The transition to the new product was not as smooth as expected and presented us with issues especially with a restore. Restore and what files needed to be included in the backup policy were not communicated to us correctly and it was not until a customer's server failed that we found out we couldn't do a restore because we were missing files that were needed for a complete restore.

I don't believe it works very well for backups of virtual servers. Installation of the product is user-friendly.

Incentivized

For companies with more than 10 Windows devices and needing to standardize the OS, AV, access, share resources, and install software. SCCM is the way to go. This software is unnecessary if the business is all remote users and not in an office-type setting. There are cloud offerings or none to accomplish what a business needs.

Incentivized

• Easy to install the client piece.
• Easy to setup the backup policies.
• Data encryption and security.

Incentivized

• Allows the grouping of devices by user.
• Allows controlling updates being deployed to user devices.
• Allows for the repurposing of machines by being able to load new or updated software on machines that already are in the system.
• Allows us the ability to wipe a machine clean and restore it back to the configuration that was assigned the machine.

Incentivized

• It does not play very well with virtual servers.
• Support is not always responsive.
• Issues with failed backups have cost our company time and money.

Incentivized

• Needs web based storefront for requesting new software
• Needs ability to manage the packaging work flow better
• Sometimes is slow to download and there is no indication the entire catalog is being loaded, resulting in confused users not being able to find common software in the available list.

Incentivized

It is not user-friendly for the most part. With IT infrastructure, sometimes it cannot handle excess requests. Every few months, you will need an upgrade in terms of server resources to keep up with incoming alerts and requests. This does not happen all of the time, but it does happen when there are too many requests.

Incentivized

If I had to dislike something about the system it would be how much it changes once you upgrade. This could be more of a problem of mine since I get used to one way and don't like it when it changes so much. I am enjoying the newest update, but it is a mess when you are actually going through the upgrades.

Incentivized

LiveVault is the only product we have used. The reason is that we chose it initially was the fact you can restore individual files. Also that the data is transferred offsite to a secure data center and data is backed up again, providing a second offsite copy.

Incentivized

We previously used a mix of FOG and Clonezilla to image machines. The biggest issues with these products is that changing one piece of the image required you to rebuild the entire image itself. These pieces of software also did not allow you to manage applications and Windows Updates, causing IT to have to constantly touch machines after they were imaged and update or manage them with a much more hands on approach.

Incentivized

• LiveVault has initially cost us more labor time than we anticipated for our IT staff.
• Installing cloud backup has given us a piece of mind that our data and our customer's data is safe.

Incentivized

• We have been able to automate our patch management, firmware and other security concerns.
• We have a standardized "image" ensuring our setup is consistent across the enterprise. This alone has saved us in time to support and time to understand how to use our desktops.

Incentivized