We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"Bacula is pretty stable."
"It works great and it provides you with several standard tools to restore your backup, even after a big failure."
"The most valuable features are the special plugins such as SAP HANA databases, Microsoft SQL, and various types of virtualization."
"Support of the IBM X platform and the backup data replication to DR are the most valuable features."
"The solution offers very good flexibility."
"Its incremental forever approach is valuable, so we don't have to load tapes to do a restore."
"Nothing beats this solution for file backup."
"The most valuable features are the stability and also how it's seamlessly integrated with other IBM offerings."
"SPIR is Instant Recovery for Spectrum Protect. It sends snapshots using space efficiently and blocking backups to the Spectrum Protect server. It provisions the snapshot from the backup server to the same or new server near instantly."
"The feature that I have found the most valuable is that IBM Spectrum Protect is highly integrated with IBM ESS. In addition, it allows us to back up our virtual servers directly to take VM snapshots. It runs on Linux as well."
"The MN backup for a cluster is most valuable because it has made backing up the GSF as a zero-file system easier. I like its stability a lot. Over the years, I very rarely had a problem with it."
"Bacula needs a graphical user interface because, for administrators, the command-line interface is okay, but for the average user it is not very easy."
"Easier setup and configuration, perhaps including a GUI, would be an improvement."
"We are looking for a unique interface that can rule both enterprise and open source editions. Such a thing does not yet exist."
"This product comes up against other products available that are marketed better but the other products that it's in competition with are a single product and this is one of IBM products. If it could be marketed as more for competitors I think that's where it comes short."
"Its price can be better. It is very expensive. Its interface is very old and not user friendly. They can improve its interface. Their support can also be better. My clients are not very satisfied with the support because they are not really quick."
"It can be improved for large file systems with many files. Spectrum Protect can restore large files very well, but if you're restoring millions of little files, it is not as great. At one point, we tried to implement the VMware module with it, and it was awful and terrible. I don't know if that has improved. If it hasn't, this would be one big improvement."
"They should introduce more features for virtualization platforms and backing up IBMs. Backup speeds should also be improved."
"I think Spectrum Protect's interface is not so user-friendly, but the interface is not so friendly. Some of the functions are too complicated. I prefer a simpler solution."
"The main admin console from the UI cannot do anything in the product. It just allows us to maintain, maybe, 30% to 40%. For the rest, we have to use the command line."
"The interface could be more user-friendly."
"It does what we need it to do, but it could be better with VM backups. It could be better integrated with virtual machines or VM backups, but that's why they have their Plus out now. Plus version is more geared toward VM backups. The regular version is more for endpoint clients."
"We have a perpetual license."
"This is an open-source solution."
"We are paying for support and maintenance on a monthly basis."
"It is really expensive. Its price is not good for Latin America. Its price is good for the United States or Europe."
"The solution is expensive."
"We have capacity licensing. We use the front end. The capacity licensing is pretty okay on the licensing price. I used to use the old PVU-based licensing in the early environment, but now we use capacity-based licensing."
"That's a hard estimate. It depends on the licensing, the hardware, and other stuff, but it is fairly expensive. It is generally more expensive than other solutions."
"It is fairly reasonable as compared to other solutions in the market."
"It is expensive."
"The pricing model of this solution is another difficult area, it's very sophisticated in the way they charge. It's based on PBU, which is a type of processor, how, many processors, and you need to put everything into an equation. However, they have different ways of charging or licensing. One way is a back-end volume or front-end volume, which is quite complicated."
Bacula Enterprise is ranked 43rd in Backup and Recovery Software with 3 reviews while IBM Spectrum Protect is ranked 11th in Backup and Recovery Software with 37 reviews. Bacula Enterprise is rated 8.4, while IBM Spectrum Protect is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Bacula Enterprise writes "Easy to use, stable, and offers many tools and features ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM Spectrum Protect writes "Great stability, reliability, and scalability, but very difficult to manage and get support". Bacula Enterprise is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Commvault, HPE StoreOnce, Acronis Backup and Microsoft DPM, whereas IBM Spectrum Protect is most compared with IBM Spectrum Protect Plus, Veeam Backup & Replication, Commvault, Azure Backup and Cohesity DataProtect. See our Bacula Enterprise vs. IBM Spectrum Protect report.
See our list of best Backup and Recovery Software vendors.
We monitor all Backup and Recovery Software reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.