Bacula Enterprise vs. Cohesity

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Bacula Enterprise
Score 9.2 out of 10
N/A
Bacula Enterprise is a data center backup, restore, and recovery solution from Swiss, Dracula-themed software company Bacula Systems.N/A
Cohesity
Score 9.0 out of 10
Mid-Size Companies (51-1,000 employees)
Cohesity offers AI-powered data security and management. Cohesity protects critical data workloads across on-prem, cloud-native, and SaaS with backup and recovery, threat intelligence, cyber vaulting, files and objects, and recovery orchestration.N/A
Pricing
Bacula EnterpriseCohesity
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Bacula EnterpriseCohesity
Free Trial
NoYes
Free/Freemium Version
NoYes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Bacula EnterpriseCohesity
Considered Both Products
Bacula Enterprise
Chose Bacula Enterprise
Due to its ability to centralize multiple backup tools and restore efficiency
Chose Bacula Enterprise
During the choice, Bacula Enterprise proved to be more versatile and affordable, the diversity of plugins was also important for the decision, it was one of the only solutions that work with tape, the possibility of sizing the server according to the need and freedom of Choice …
Chose Bacula Enterprise
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 …
Chose Bacula Enterprise
Bacula cost-benefit ratio is better than all the others, as in addition to having many more integrations with operating systems and hypervisors, it is not necessary to purchase more licenses for backups such as NAS, File to Tape, Cloud, etc.
Chose Bacula Enterprise
No longer have the impression of enriching shareholders or pension funds. No longer having to update the software every month.
Chose Bacula Enterprise
Bacula Enterprise supports more systems and is free software.has plugin for postgres, oracle, windows and all linuxwhile HYCU only supports NUTANIX and backs up the entire VM, not very good compression software.Hycu has a closed architecture, I can't complain about the graphics …
Chose Bacula Enterprise
The bakcup hycu solution has a licensing limitation that is local only. While Bácula is multicloud, meaning that the bakcup solution can perform recovery for physical, local, virtual, containerized and cloud environments, which makes it a very pleasant differentiator. As a data …
Chose Bacula Enterprise
Bacula Enterprise was selected by us in comparison to other software, due to its high performance, data reliability and mainly cost-benefit, a software of great scalability and performance for a low cost, it represents for the company a greater profit and a security of data …
Chose Bacula Enterprise
Data Protector was a confusing tool for configuration. There wasn't much research source for doubts. The tool was not intuitive. Problems understanding the initial configuration of the tool made maintenance difficult. Bacula Enterprise is totally different, as it has an …
Chose Bacula Enterprise
We are a data recovery company and we use to receive backup media from several backup systems from the market when the original software can't restore them after data storage accidents or for some other different reasons. Bacula Enterprise is the only software that we never had …
Chose Bacula Enterprise
The guarantee of restoration and security of the company's data, and the possibility of data backup with greater capacity at a lower cost, both in the acquisition of the license and in the annual payments for the guarantee of support and updates is why Bacula Enterprise stacks …
Chose Bacula Enterprise
Micro Focus Data Protector has a poor support service and there is no active community, the user interface is not intuitive and the cost-benefit ratio of the solution is much lower than that of the Bacula system backup solution, in my opinion.
Chose Bacula Enterprise
NetBackup had some malfunctions when the operating system where the solution was installed was restarted, often the services did not start automatically, restoring files from within a VM backup was not supported
Chose Bacula Enterprise
The possibility of increasing the amount of data to be saved without having to pay more for the license was one of the things that led us to choose Bacula, but when effectively testing the tool, it became clear that in addition to the financial benefit, we would also have a …
Chose Bacula Enterprise
Lower cost of the tool, no limitation of backup data, and plugins compatible with the type of services we have in our data center.
Chose Bacula Enterprise
Bacula Enterprise has a much more intuitive interface, better performance, and more data backup capacity at a lower price.
Chose Bacula Enterprise
Although it is a well-known and robust solution, it didn't work for us. Bad console, the bad solution to manage, few integrations, very expensive, poor support, that is, it was not difficult to decide on the exchange. In addition to the bad experience to make a DR of the …
Chose Bacula Enterprise
Veeam Backup & Replication is easy to use and powerful, but I really didn't like that it's closed-source (Bacula Enterprise is open source--you pay for support), so I have no way of looking into what it's doing. Veeam only runs on Windows, and is more focused on VMs; our …
Chose Bacula Enterprise
Unlike other backup and restore tool options, Bacula Enterprise offers much more functionality, in addition to a centralized management platform. For large corporations that have more than one virtualization host, it is essential to have a robust tool that has no limitations. …
Chose Bacula Enterprise
Já usávamos o Bacula Community e decidimos contratar o Bacula Enterprise pois os backups já estavam em um padrão aberto sendo de fácil migração.Outros aspectos nos levaram a contratação:Suporte em caso de algum desastre;Possibilidade de contratação de plugins a aplicações como …
Chose Bacula Enterprise
We started using Bacula Community Edition back in 2011 and took advantage of Bacula's selective migration plan in 2014 to move to the Enterprise Edition. This move came about after our technical team decided to conduct a formal review of its backup and recovery requirements, …
Chose Bacula Enterprise
Veritas Backup Exec and Veritas NetBackup
Chose Bacula Enterprise
I have just always used Bacula, it's been great. I have not used much software at this scale since Legatto or Veritas Volume Manager. I'm sure there are other great products out there, but Bacula was easy for me to implement since I'm well versed in Linux.
Cohesity
Chose Cohesity
Veeam Required installation on one of our on prem servers which ideally, we did not want. We are trying to reduce our on-prem footprint and Cohesity provided a solution that was completely cloud based.
Chose Cohesity
We selected Rubrik for two reasons. The first was an already existing relationship with the 3rd party VAR that recommended Cohesity. The second was the low cost of Cohesity to back up our data center in a short amount of time also. I am not sure they are the strongest product …
Chose Cohesity
Veeam is the best. Cohesity takes fast backups and provides good deduplication. Rubrik, it's Rubrik—nothing to write home about.
Chose Cohesity
Easy to manage and faster to implement and we have the total control of our backup deployment, and we can fine tune as per our business needs and Cohesity gives all the option for implementing the same. Cluster based storage and backup solution and option to manage multiple …
Chose Cohesity
First and foremost is that due to Cohesity being able to support different types of backup, Cohesity reduces the need to use different products, and since most of the stuff can be done from the GUI, it is very easy to use as well, unlike, let's say TSM on which we will have to …
Chose Cohesity
Cohesity provided more features out of the box and not all they extra licensing to enable. The performance that Cohesity was able to provide was the main reason for our decision to change our backup solution to a new product instead of increasing our foot print with our …
Chose Cohesity
it went down to 3 top companies and even thou Cohesity was not the cheapest when we compared the recovery time and options Cohesity was really standing out. On top of that, it was the first solution with Teams and Group-based SharePoint backup as an option. OneDrive backups is …
Chose Cohesity
Cost, Ease of management, Ease of implementation, and Global deduplication are why I chose Cohesity DataProtect.
Chose Cohesity
Cohesity DataProtect provides a much more reliable solution. The deduplication that happens is second to none and I've never worked with anything like it. So much time and space is saved by the appliance along with the Cohesity DataProtect magic.
Chose Cohesity
Cohesity simplifies the environment by having data protect along with clustered storage and configurable in a multi-site environment for easy off-site requirements, including cloud integration. The HTML5 interface outshines Veeam and NetBackup, which look like dinosaurs …
Chose Cohesity
Much better user interface, ease of use and administration, easier connectivity to the cloud.
Chose Cohesity
Rubrik. We currently use Rubrik for backups and we use Cohesity for NAS. Cohesity has been good for small NAS workloads if you are already using it for backups as well. It seems to be the jack of many trades and they are constantly adding more features and functionality. …
Chose Cohesity
Cohesity DataProtect is vastly simpler to use. Its interface is much more intuitive. Being that Cohesity DataProtect can be an applicance-based solution, deploying it is much simpler. Also, Cohesity DataProtect can provide the hardware so there is a single vendor for both …
Chose Cohesity
Data footprint and ease of use. Manage the data. Deduplication ratio of the outcome.
Chose Cohesity
At the time of purchase, we had looked at Rubrik and StorageCraft (prior to Arcserve acquisition). Rubrik at the time seemed relatively comparable in terms of backup features but did not have the ability to provide unstructured data shares. Rubrik was also substantially more …
Chose Cohesity
Cohesity won out against all others based on speed, capacity, features, and cost. Being able to demo the unit with a VM was extremely helpful -- we were able to get real-world compression and dedupe values without on-prem hardware during our POC. We appreciated the ease of …
Chose Cohesity
We used to use the NetApp SnapManager suite, I've found Cohesity to be more reliable, easier to configure, and restores to be faster.
Chose Cohesity
We replaced Barracuda with Cohesity. Barracuda was a nightmare to manage and was not very reliable. Rubrik is highly similar to Cohesity from a features perspective, but the sales and support personnel at Rubrik were unpleasant to deal with compared to Cohesity. With Rubrik …
Chose Cohesity
IBM is good but it´s old and really big and not easy to manage. And the License fees and so are worth it. Veeam I have a look on and 4 years ago I selected Cohesity because it was easier to manage, dedup was better and it is one hyperconverged infrastructure. Rubrik is or was …
Chose Cohesity
I was not involved in that project but we had Actifio before.
Chose Cohesity
Cohesity is cheaper as compared to other legacy backup products. It has easy and simple hardware & software installation, easy management, and comes with lots of modern era features. Cohesity comes with built-in features like reports, offers lots of additional apps in their app …
Chose Cohesity
Excellent technically, great support team and excellent value for the price.
Chose Cohesity
The Cohesity appliance is much easier to manage due to the application and storage altogether. There is no need to manage servers and storage separately, like with Veeam and Networker. EMC and Veeam support is excellent, but Cohesity support is on another level.
Features
Bacula EnterpriseCohesity
Data Center Backup
Comparison of Data Center Backup features of Product A and Product B
Bacula Enterprise
9.4
Ratings
10% above category average
Cohesity
8.6
Ratings
3% above category average
Universal recovery9.10 Ratings8.00 Ratings
Instant recovery10.00 Ratings8.10 Ratings
Recovery verification10.00 Ratings8.10 Ratings
Business application protection3.00 Ratings8.10 Ratings
Multiple backup destinations10.00 Ratings8.10 Ratings
Incremental backup identification10.00 Ratings8.10 Ratings
Backup to the cloud10.00 Ratings9.10 Ratings
Deduplication and file compression9.70 Ratings8.10 Ratings
Snapshots10.00 Ratings9.10 Ratings
Flexible deployment10.00 Ratings8.40 Ratings
Management dashboard9.70 Ratings9.70 Ratings
Platform support10.00 Ratings9.10 Ratings
Retention options9.80 Ratings10.00 Ratings
Encryption10.00 Ratings8.10 Ratings
Enterprise Backup
Comparison of Enterprise Backup features of Product A and Product B
Bacula Enterprise
-
Ratings
Cohesity
8.5
Ratings
4% above category average
Continuous data protection00 Ratings8.60 Ratings
Replication00 Ratings8.60 Ratings
Operational reporting and analytics00 Ratings8.20 Ratings
Malware protection00 Ratings8.60 Ratings
Multi-location capabilities00 Ratings8.60 Ratings
Ransomware Recovery00 Ratings8.20 Ratings
Best Alternatives
Bacula EnterpriseCohesity
Small Businesses
Cove Data Protection
Cove Data Protection
Score 9.9 out of 10
Cove Data Protection
Cove Data Protection
Score 9.9 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
Cove Data Protection
Cove Data Protection
Score 9.9 out of 10
Druva Security Cloud
Druva Security Cloud
Score 9.7 out of 10
Enterprises
Veeam Data Platform
Veeam Data Platform
Score 8.6 out of 10
Druva Security Cloud
Druva Security Cloud
Score 9.7 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Bacula EnterpriseCohesity
Likelihood to Recommend
10.0
(0 ratings)
8.3
(0 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
10.0
(0 ratings)
8.7
(0 ratings)
Usability
9.1
(0 ratings)
7.0
(0 ratings)
Availability
9.1
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Performance
8.2
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
10.0
(0 ratings)
7.8
(0 ratings)
In-Person Training
9.1
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Online Training
-
(0 ratings)
9.0
(0 ratings)
Implementation Rating
9.8
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Configurability
9.1
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Ease of integration
10.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Product Scalability
9.1
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Bacula EnterpriseCohesity
Likelihood to Recommend
Well suited: - I use it for on premise and cloud backup and recovery and it is excellent for this job. - I also experiment with different hypervisors and till now Bacula seems to work with all of them - Security is really important for me as I had many bad experiences in the past and Bacula solution makes me totally confident. Less appropriate - You need to be experienced Linux user, I had to learn few more things in system to make the best use of it. - It's definitely designed for scalability and bigger companies than mine
Read full review
Cohesity is very well suited to protecting virtualised workloads and is a significant improvement over IBM Spectrum Protect which we’ve replaced by Cohesity. We also protect a Netapp workload and whilst the on-prem side works really well careful planning of protection jobs is needed if you’ll be archiving these to Cloud.
Read full review
Pros
  • The support services provided by Bacula Systems are superb. They usually respond extremely quickly and have clear and useful answers upfront, which is a welcome change. Their support enabled us to get Bacula Enterprise up and running quickly and well configured, in a relatively short period of time. In addition, they also offer proactive support on a yearly basis. This involves sending an automatically generated report on your system configuration and status from which they provide advice on any issues or configuration problems that they find. I haven't seen this level of proactive support from another company.
  • The configuration is extremely powerful and flexible. If you're used to dealing with text-based configuration files then you'll find this system familiar. It also fits well with configuration management tools - in our case, Puppet - allowing the configuration across the whole system to be managed centrally. The flexibility of the system allowed us to have backups running exactly when and how we wanted, performing staging to tape via disk, and with various admin, tasks to automate the handling of tapes within our tape library.
  • The command-line console tool allows all operations to be done from the command line. In an emergency situation, or stuck in a datacentre with only a dumb console, being able to do everything via the command line is an important feature to have.
  • Bweb is an optional extra that provides a web-based interface for both management and configuration. If you don't want to edit text files and use the command line console tool then Bweb is the best interface to use. We don't use it for configuration (favoring external tools for managing the text-based configuration), but we do use it to monitor backups and perform restores. It provides an excellent overview of what's happening with the system.
  • The manuals, whitepapers, and additional documentation cover everything in detail. The whitepapers give a good overview of the installation, concepts, and specific scenarios, whilst the manuals cover in more depth how specific areas work and how the configuration is handled. It's very easy to find out what a particular option means and does.
  • The software can run on and is supported on, a wide variety of operating systems, including Ubuntu which is what we use. This is a level of flexibility that was important to us after being tied to RHEL for our previous backup system.
Read full review
  • The simplicity of the solution and the support behind implementation, training, and continued support.
  • The implementation and training are all done through the sales engineer, which provides for a seamless and great experience when it comes to starting with a new vendor.
  • How fast the solution works. When it comes to implementation (which is done in an hour or so) to backups, to actual recoveries, everything is just quick.
Read full review
Cons
  • Takes a while to get used to the software. It's not something that you can just install and work away with. You need to figure it out first. We did get a free training course when we purchased the Bacula Enterprise version which we found very useful.
  • Support Documentation is very in depth but it's a tough read sometimes. Takes a while to understand the concepts from this documentation. Could do with making the documentation a small bit easier to understand.
Read full review
  • Reporting could always be better- executive-style reports have to be generated from data at multiple points.
  • Some tasks that could be brought to the UI that today we have to call support on (for example when an NFS mount is still active but we cannot see it from the UI)
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
Easy to use, proactive and effective customer support, and simple deployment method. The high configurability is what makes this tool so effective for my organization - at no point do I have any issues of trust as to the restorability of a fileset. The GUI provided gives clear actionable reports as to the effectivity of the jobs performed.
Read full review
We have been very pleased with this backup solution. It is fast and reliable, and supports our VMware infrastructure. The company's support has been great, including proactively replacing our nodes when the flash memory was reporting high wear. Support is offered on-shore as well. We plan on continuing to use this product for the foreseeable future.
Read full review
Usability
It still has a lot of flaws to overcome, especially in the area of user friendliness. Searching and filtering is quite cumbersome. Once you find the job you from which you want to restore, be sure to write that job number down because you won't be able to quickly find the job again without it during a recovery.
Read full review
The Cohesity platform with its user interface is easy to implement, rack space-saving, and easy to use on a daily business basis. Backup jobs and policies are easy to define, multiple machines and objects can be grouped for the same tasks. In general, Cohesity makes backup admins' lives much easier.
Read full review
Reliability and Availability
Bacula Enterprise is always available when we need it, both the backup solution and system support
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Performance
Operation in the Bacula system has a light and fast interface and reports are generated almost instantly. Perhaps if Bacula is integrated with other solutions it may lose some performance
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Support Rating
We have always been very well served by Bacula Enterprise support. The response time is excellent, and any doubts or problems are resolved quickly and easily, avoiding complications and the evolution of problems that could arise. Only praise for Bacula Enterprise's service and support. The monitoring of the entire process from acquisition to implementation was very well done.
Read full review
Support is quick to respond but lacks that ongoing responsiveness if the issue is not simple. There will be large gaps in replies if they need to resort to escalation and when there are timezone differences between yourself and the person who picked up the ticket.
Read full review
In-Person Training
The professor understood the tool very well, it was a fact that he had mastery over the system and knew what he was talking about, clearing up all doubts and passing on all the necessary knowledge so that we could handle Bacula Enterprise in our organization.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Online Training
No answers on this topic
content was good and hands on lab to get the live feel of the application
Read full review
Implementation Rating
Bacula Systems and especially Bacula Brazil were extremely attentive and served us very well, making all implementations or changes work perfectly
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Alternatives Considered
The possibility of increasing the amount of data to be saved without having to pay more for the license was one of the things that led us to choose Bacula, but when effectively testing the tool, it became clear that in addition to the financial benefit, we would also have a backup reliable and robust.
Read full review
We looked at Veeam and although it's a great product when we priced out the licensing of both primary and disaster datacenters it became much too expensive. Rubrik is a great product and very similar to Cohesity. In the end, Cohesity had a secondary storage play as well as a better UI and better compatibility with lower tier cloud storage. We also like the way Cohesity did protection jobs vs Rubrik's virtual machine centric backup. CommVault is a product we still use today due to its massive features and the ability for bare metal backups. Cohesity does a much better job in the area of UI simplicity, virtual backup ease, and ease of management.
Read full review
Scalability
Bacula provides intelligent scalability by expanding backups across multiple environments, data backup, Oracle, virtual machines, Office365, cloud...
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Return on Investment
  • What price can you put on recovery? The very first time we had to restore from backup, having Bacula Enterprise support paid for itself.
  • The extremely good visibility into Bacula Enterprise's operations--as opposed to some competitors where you don't really know what it's doing--makes me trust it more.
Read full review
  • Cost savings from having to purchase and manage physical tapes, as well as the man-hours to swap them in and out and store them off site.
  • Extremely fast recovery times, can bring up a restored VM back in our environment in under a minute. Get back up and running much quicker.
  • Simplifies our disaster recovery strategy.
  • Initial cost can be pricey depending on your storage needs.
Read full review
ScreenShots

Cohesity Screenshots

Screenshot of Screenshot of Screenshot of Screenshot of Screenshot of Screenshot of