We help IT Professionals succeed at work.

Acronis vs BackupExec System Recovery

odog314
odog314 asked
on
Hello,

I am looking for feedback regarding the use either of these products for bare metal restore in a small Windows 2003/ XP environment.

Are there any significant pitfalls or cavets in using either particularly if the targeted restore machine is not configured similarly.

The backup software currently in use in this environment is BackupExec 2010

Thanks,
Comment
Watch Question

Consultant
Commented:
I have not used BackupExec for a while but it required more maintenance and patches that other software that I have used such as Computer Associates' ARCserve, or NTBackup for that matter.
Since Symantec purchased BackupExec from Veritas, it got worse and we scrapped it for all our clients, moving on to other products and methods, including scripted backups with web based logs. In each case our experiences have been better ease of use and much more reliable.
I and a few clients of mine have been using Acronis for drive imaging for a couple years now with a PERFECT track record.  Once again, we were moving from another Symantec product/acquisition, Ghost.  It had been tollerable but was having more failures before we switched. Not only has Acronis been more reliable, but it is MUCH more flexible and easier to use as a result.
Easier translates into a lower cost of ownership. Better reliability speaks for itself.
Not a perfectly direct answer to your question, but I thought it might shed some light regarding product and vendor none the less.
 - Tom
Tom ScottConsultant

Commented:
When I said that we have not used BackupExec for a while, I was referring to around two (2) years.
 - Tom

Author

Commented:
As the poster indicates this is not a direct answer but I believe ther is some merit in what is said.