Overall Satisfaction with Bacula Enterprise
The Bacula Enterprise was a significant evolution for our environment, given that we were already using the Community version. However, we lacked some essential functionalities needed for our use case, such as deduplication and backup of XCP-NG virtual machines, as well as the web interface we were using was not as efficient as the current one provided. The BWEB interface greatly facilitates the configuration of clients, testing, and settings that were previously mostly done on the command line.
- Backup and Restore VMs XCP-NG
- Inteface Web
- Deduplication
- Compatibility with different systems.
- Detailing the configuration of the deduplication system
- Mobile application
- Ease of updating for clients running older operating systems
- The acquisition cost compared to what the tool delivers.
- Utilizing existing hardware.
- Institutional requirements
- Vinchin Backup & Recovery and Veeam Agent for Microsoft Windows
The determining factor was the migration of old backup data from the Community version to a new backup platform. We didn't have the initial resources to restore all the backup data, install the new solution on existing hardware, and then back up again. This would directly impact the environment, and the timeframe for completing this process would be extremely lengthy. Considering the necessary improvement characteristics, there was no reason to opt for a new platform.
Do you think Bacula Enterprise delivers good value for the price?
Yes
Are you happy with Bacula Enterprise's feature set?
Yes
Did Bacula Enterprise live up to sales and marketing promises?
Yes
Did implementation of Bacula Enterprise go as expected?
No
Would you buy Bacula Enterprise again?
Yes