Azure Backup vs. NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP

By using Azure Backup, you can back up your NAS device you use locally as a file server, virtual machines you use in [a] production environment, critical databases, and everything you can think of. I do not know if there are scenarios that are not suitable, it meets all my needs.

Incentivized

It is well suited to store lower-tier data in the cloud to free up space on primary storage. For our use, it is really only currently viable for things like snapshots and backups. Other organizations may find it useful for secondary-tier archival storage as well. At this point, I don't really trust any cloud solution as primary storage for anything. This may change in the future, but for backups and such, it is a nice option.

Incentivized

• Azure Backup is fast! Coupled with the fact that Microsoft created Azure and Windows - these two operate phenomenally together!
• Administering the backups inside of Azure is a breeze. The ability to mount, restore entire backups, or recover files, has been made very easy. You do not have to download any media to recover something, you do this all in the cloud and it gets mounted in Microsoft's systems. Making this process less than a quarter of the time you would have spent with your 'other' backup solutions.

Incentivized

• Integrates into major Cloud vendors.
• Integrates with NetApp infrastructure.

Incentivized

• backup schedule calendar would be cool
• Backup vaults should ask if you want to send notifications when you first set it up, there have been a couple of times when I noticed a month later that, backup job failures were not configured to send email notifications.

Incentivized

• Tighter integration with third-party (non-storage) monitoring tools
• CMDB classifications break down when integrating with ServiceNow
• Migrating storage workloads from one cloud service provider to another

Incentivized

Azure backup is easy to implement, accessible by using the web portal GUI, and has the ability to restore at the file level or the complete VM. We have experienced zero issues with the backup process or performing file-level restorations. We have not restored an entire VM to date.

Incentivized

One of the differentials of the solution is the high level of guarantee and support of the Azure Backup solution. Microsoft is a reference in a technology company with a highly trained support team and helps us with any questions or technical problems with the tool. Service is fast and efficient with trained engineers.

Incentivized

Haven't had to use it.

Incentivized

The cost, not only in the short term, but in our long-term calculations.

Even in need of improvements, the pre-sale and post-sale support is very good.

The ease, like many Microsoft products about scheduling backups, the friendly interface, the fact that there is no need for an expensive resource dedicated to this backup and some other details, made us choose Azure Backup.

Incentivized

ScienceLogic SL1 and SolarWinds Storage Resource Monitor (SRM) were the closest competitors to meeting our business objectives. Tivoli Storage Manager was not able to meet the initial requirements. There was a significant overlap of capabilities between ScienceLogic SL1, SolarWinds SRM, and NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP. The latter provided a more positive and cohesive experience for our administrators and executives.

Incentivized

• It allowed us to have our VMs protected very quickly and with simple implementation.
• It saved us from taking backups from Azure workloads from the on-prem environment, or even deploying a Backup environment on the cloud.
• It has a low/'controlled' cost as you "pay-as-you-go."

Incentivized

• Increased costs at lower data volumes but better pricing by 20% over 10Tb
• Easier to manage storage volumes with NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP
• Better performance with NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP

Incentivized