We just raised a $30M Series A: Read our story
2019-07-01T15:26:00Z

What needs improvement with Dell EMC NetWorker?

0

Please share with the community what you think needs improvement with Dell EMC NetWorker.

What are its weaknesses? What would you like to see changed in a future version?

ITCS user
Guest
2929 Answers

author avatar
Top 20Real User

I believe that the area of support could be improved. They don't appear to have an adequate number of staff members to assist us if we have any problems. It would be extremely beneficial if they could provide local support. I would like to see encryption included in the next release to encrypt the data that we are backing up.

2021-10-28T17:26:49Z
author avatar
Top 10MSP

The solution could improve by having more integration.

2021-10-07T07:59:20Z
author avatar
Real User

The user interface needs some work. It would be beneficial to have a single user interface for all of the features.

2021-09-15T16:08:34Z
author avatar
MSP

In older versions, the graphical user interface isn't so good. There should be more vendors incorporated into the solution.

2021-07-16T12:50:15Z
author avatar
Top 5LeaderboardReal User

Its console UI should be better. It should also have more out-of-the-box reporting functionalities. It should also have easier cloud integration. They have got cloud boost and things like that, but if you want to directly back up to the cloud, I'm not too sure whether you can do it. For example, you can easily send data from Commvault to AWS, Azure, or a container, but it seems to be not so easy in NetWorker.

2021-04-20T11:22:41Z
author avatar
Top 5Reseller

There's a lot of room for improvement. The user interface has to be improved. Sometimes it duplicates jobs. Overall, it's a strong legacy product but there's still a lot of room for improvement. We have to perform the very basic client registration process twice. We have to do it on the client-side and the NetWorker server-side. Sometimes just re-installing a client can be a nightmare. Also, the layout can be a bit scattered. It's difficult to learn for a new newcomer. If you work with Linux clients, if you've got another non-Windows system, it's a little bit tough — a little complex. When it comes to the monitoring of backups, or if you want to grab a certain log, it's not as intuitive as other solutions. For example, if you want to find a backup for a certain client, it's not straightforward. With other solutions, like Avamar, this process is much easier. Scheduling is complicated. If you use the GUI to create a schedule and you auto mark all your backups SQL, it's simply not there. You have to change the view of the schedule from a calendar view to what they call a non-calendar view. Then you have to modify the attributes. You have to operate in a non-conventional way. Typically, when using the GUI, the expectation is to use the GUI for everything. With this solution, you have to go online to check the logs. You have to do some manipulations here and there — it's complex. Recovery is also complex. You have to build what we call 'a proper workflow' for recovery.

2021-04-08T16:54:39Z
author avatar
Top 5Real User

The interface is the same, so when we are trying to troubleshoot the logs, it doesn't display properly. There doesn't seem to be a lot of development with this solution. You don't see any updates with the features, or any development with the features. In general, Dell EMC doesn't seem to be investing much in the R&D of this product. They are selling it off. I would like to see an improvement with the features in terms of troubleshooting and ease of use. The documentation is very poor. It takes quite a bit of experience to understand the documentation. A new person who is going through the documentation will not be able to understand. There is no detailed documentation. The product itself is good, but it takes a lot of time to troubleshoot. I would like to see the user interface improved, more documentation, faster support, and it could be easier to configure.

2021-04-05T07:37:20Z
author avatar
Top 5LeaderboardMSP

It is a little buggy at times, which is the only thing that I dislike about this product. If they could clear up this issue then it would be great because, for the most part, this is a very effective product from my perspective. I would like to see more integration with third-party products, including both tape and disk products. I want to be able to perform backups not only from Dell EMC. Having this wide level of support would be very much appreciated. It could be easier to deploy.

2021-03-23T16:28:17Z
author avatar
Top 5Real User

They need to take off the tape and allow us to use different repositories in order to keep the data for five to 10 years. The data storage capabilities should be improved. The next release will include better integration with Data Domain, which is a really good product.

2021-03-03T02:44:00Z
author avatar
Top 10Real User

The scaling can be difficult when updates are involved. Sometimes the systems come in faster than a producer of the software can react to the new features. The solution should have better access to Linux or virtual systems of files based on Linux. It doesn't matter if it is a hard installation or only a virtual installation. Sometimes the client doesn't need a backup of the whole system and only needs a handful of files. The initial setup is complex. Technical support should be more accessible.

2021-02-15T21:49:02Z
author avatar
Top 5Real User

NetWorker is coming to end-of-life in a couple of years, and even Dell has said that they are not going to continue with it. They no longer develop it. They put their efforts into the new Power Protect products instead. Support for the cloud could be better and with the existing features, it could be a bit more robust. Also, the flexibility could be improved. They need more support for image backups.

2021-01-26T00:23:48Z
author avatar
Top 10Consultant

The integration of the web API should be improved. There has been new functionality added to the API but it should be easier to understand. The Backup module should be improved, especially the functionality for SharePoint and SQL Server. We are having issues when we are trying to backup up Microsoft applications, and it happens when the data is very large. For example, our database is 19 terabytes and this is very large for NetWorker, so it runs slowly. We are not able to tune it and segment it. If it were a file system, then we could split it into smaller pieces. In cases like this, it is very fast. However, because we are not able to divide it, the backup is slow. This is one area that can be improved because often, people don't need to take a full backup. Sometimes, then just want a snapshot of some data. The capability of incremental backups should be included. As it is now, when DD Boost tries to compare the current backup with the previous one, it has trouble with the large versions and it can take three to four days. They cannot perform an incremental backup using VSS technology for SharePoint or MS SQL Server. Definitely, backup for Microsoft applications needs to be improved. They should improve the support for backing up containers. The process of upgrading versions should be improved because as it is now, you have to completely uninstall the old version first, and then install the new version. If we compare this to another product, like Veritas NetBackup, it also has good features but when you upgrade to the latest version, everything is automatic. I would like to see better cloud integration, such as with AWS or Azure.

2021-01-21T19:20:09Z
author avatar
Top 5LeaderboardReal User

They have many different products but they don't integrate all of the features into one product. This is an area of failure with this solution. For example, if we want source-side deduplication then we have to use Avamar because this kind of feature isn't available in NetWorker. Some features in NetWorker are good as well as some features in Avamar are good. If they could combine the features of both products into one single product, it would be better. In the next release, I would like to see better pricing and more integration with the other products in Dell EMC.

2020-12-24T09:02:31Z
author avatar
Top 5LeaderboardReal User

In terms of what can be improved, they need to be compatible with the cloud because EMC NetWorker cannot compete with other products at the moment. The other products like Veeam and Commvault are more flexible and are more compatible with other cloud vendors. EMC cannot do the same thing. EMC focuses only on their own cloud and do not take into consideration other cloud vendors.

2020-12-10T18:14:00Z
author avatar
Top 5Real User

The configuration is too complex. As a backup solution, it's not user-friendly.

2020-10-28T17:45:36Z
author avatar
Top 5LeaderboardReal User

It is not easy to understand and deploy. It is complex in nature. Simplicity is not there. When we deploy it, the customer always needs some training from us. To make it user friendly, there should be one agent that can be used to back up every product. Dell EMC NetWorker uses so many user agents. In PowerProtect Data Manager, you can just install its VM, import that VM into vCenter, and you can start to do backups directly from vCenter. However, in Dell EMC NetWorker, you always need one server, and from that server, you need to initiate all backups. You must know the interface and the CLI. It is not user friendly. It would be a great feature if we can deploy Dell EMC NetWorker on a virtual machine, like Avamar. The additional features that are required in Dell EMC NetWorker are already available in PowerProtect Data Manager and Avamar. Therefore, there is no need to enhance Dell EMC NetWorker. It would be better if they can just rename it to PowerProtect Data Manager or Avamar.

2020-10-24T08:52:01Z
author avatar
Top 5LeaderboardReal User

It is not easy to understand. It's not easy to deploy. It's complex in nature. When it's deployed, the customers always need to have training from us. In order to make it user-friendly, there is an agent that can be used to back up every product. Networker users many agents, and just like Powerprotect Data Manager, you can install its VM to import the VM into vCenter, and from Center, you can start your backups. With NetWorker, you always need to have one server, and from that server, you need to initiate all backups. You will need to know the interface and NetWorker CLI. It's not user-friendly. If NetWorker could be deployed on a virtual machine, similar to Avamar, that would be a great feature. The features that are required in NetWorker are available in PowerProtect and Avamar. There is no need to enhance Networker, they just need to rename it to PPDM or Avamar. That would be better.

2020-10-21T21:42:10Z
author avatar
Top 10Real User

Things could be improved in several areas beginning with support. If you compare it to Commvault or Veritas solutions, their support is better than Networker. In terms of features that are lacking, I think the restore feature is important and it's not available on NetWorker. The other solutions have more programs. For additional features, I'd like to see integration with any storage place. NetWorker finance also doesn't enable deduplication, there is no source deduplication while using NetWorker, it's only accessible if it's on a different domain. I hope to see that in the next release. I also think the data protection adviser should be embedded in the NetWorker software so there is no need to install another server to collect logs. Finally, the PMR is no longer supported in Linux.

2020-10-06T06:57:46Z
author avatar
Top 5Real User

The components for container support such as Docker and Kubernetes need improvement. They are lacking. Stability needs improvement. Also, scalability could be better. I would like to see better support for the container systems, and we would like to see more support for image backups instead of pure file backups. Image backups are faster.

2020-09-21T06:33:14Z
author avatar
Top 10Real User

Technical support could be improved. They shouldn't just serve those who speak English. The technical support should be in the national language of the country they are servicing and not only in English due to the fact that it's sometimes difficult for us to explain all the things that are going wrong in an unfamiliar language. It creates a communication barrier and makes getting problems solved harder. The solution is not easy to administer unless you are very familiar with the product. The licensing rules are difficult to navigate and understand. The administrator's interface should be much easier to navigate.

2020-08-05T06:59:25Z
author avatar
Top 5MSP

I believe that the reporting could be improved and the report templates should be easier to understand and more comprehensive. I believe they are already working to replace the Java console with the HTML web browser-based administration console which is the other issue. I hope they are able to do this quickly. In terms of my expertise, I can't think of any other issues.

2020-06-25T10:49:10Z
author avatar
Real User

I feel that it is a good product. However, if its setup is configured correctly, it will work well but if it's not, it's a total disaster. I think that goes for any backup product. Coming into architectural design thinking, for example, we introduced a backup network. This has helped speed up our backup time and the time it took Windows to backup. That has made a huge difference without impacting reduction systems elsewhere that connects into the same systems. So the main thing would be to optimize scheduling and do the setup correctly, then it will improve the backup features.

2019-09-29T07:27:00Z
author avatar
Real User

The system needs better integration with other toolsets. Support could be improved. EMC also needs to offer more information for users online. The solution needs more automation and more reporting, so we don't need to check everything manually.

2019-08-04T07:38:00Z
author avatar
Real User

The deduplication needs improvement and it could use better integration.

2019-08-01T05:43:00Z
author avatar
Consultant

The operating system could be improved. The interface could also be much easier.

2019-08-01T05:43:00Z
author avatar
Consultant

The main problem that we are having had to do with stability. We are looking forward to better stability in future versions. Our customers often ask for better integration with Microsoft Exchange.

2019-07-31T05:52:00Z
author avatar
Real User

Configuration for Hyper-V needs to be improved. Our original configuration did not work because of an issue that differed between versions. We are able to do direct backups, but analyzing the logs is not straightforward. There are a lot of things that have to be done from the client-side in order to locate and identify errors. This should be made easier. This solution should support part-loaded data. I would like to see support for the enactment of errors, where the error should be very clear-mannered, on board, with NMC control only. When some backups fail, we investigate all of the possibilities and sometimes have to enter the admin from the client-side. We then have to render the log and investigate that. If it is a Microsoft issue, for example, then we will contact Microsoft. This entire process needs to be enhanced.

2019-07-31T05:52:00Z
author avatar
Real User

They need to improve their level of support. The software also isn't user-friendly like Commvault or Rubrik. The solution errors and management aren't so good in comparison.

2019-07-29T10:12:00Z
author avatar
Real User

We would like support for tape space reclaim, using either the same or another pool. NetWorker uses only a stage directed to a clone pool, which is not enough to recover space on the tape.

2019-07-01T15:26:00Z
Learn what your peers think about Dell EMC NetWorker. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: November 2021.
553,954 professionals have used our research since 2012.