We back up about 500GB of databases and 3TB of data (mostly 50K document
images) using a StorageTek library with 9840 drives.  The main reasons we
went with NetBackup were shared storage and SAN support.  In our
environment, these are both vital for decent backups of approximately 50
million image files.  My understanding is that neither of these features are
in Backup Exec, but I didn't compare the products since NBU was purchased
before I came to this company.

Having used Backup Exec for several years before using NBU, I agree that it
has a better GUI.  However, it can have a better GUI because it's a much
more basic product.  In addition, I can automate aspects of my disaster
recovery with NetBackup since it has such a great command line interface.
If you've only worked with Windows, this will take some getting used to, but
you'll find you can do a *lot* with it that you can't do with GUI-driven
products.

NBU is *very* expensive compared to BE.  I think it's the perfect solution
for our environment and needs, and it was completely worth the bucketfuls of
money that we poured into our disaster recovery architecture.

<completely personal opinion>
Whatever you do, don't pay for Veritas professional services to install NBU
if you end up buying it.  We had such a terrible experience that we received
a complete refund of the $17K installation charge, and I ended up setting up
the entire environment myself.
</completely personal opinion>

Matt

-----Original Message-----
From: Labonte, L R (Leo), SOLIT [mailto:llabonte AT att DOT com] 
Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2002 11:07 AM
To: Alvarez, Martin BGI SDC; Ballowe, Charles; Jeffrey Dykzeul;
veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] BackupExec query


Backup Exec is compatible with the native Microsoft tape format,
while NetBackup uses tar.  Believe Backup Exec is still cheaper.
We back up an enterprise of 50+ NT 4/Windows 2000 servers to a
STK library with 4 DLT tape drives.  Local Microsoft administrators
prefer the Backup Exec GUI.  I vote to continue with Backup Exec.

Leo R. Labonte
AT&T
(732) 420-6080
llabonte AT att DOT com


-----Original Message-----
From: Alvarez, Martin BGI SDC [mailto:Martin.Alvarez AT barclaysglobal DOT com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 5:44 PM
To: 'Ballowe, Charles'; 'Jeffrey Dykzeul';
veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] BackupExec query


My input is that BE is NOT an enterprise level product like NBU.  It is
meant for small workgroup type office settings that focus more on
workstations, e-mail and small MS data servers.  I have heard that BE does
backup the UNIX platform, but I have never heard anyone actually say they
are doing it.

Our Windows server team also uses BE for all Exchange and most other app and
data servers, but this is exclusive to their environment and we would not
even consider using them to back up our UNIX environment.  The funny thing
is that NBU 4.5 is so close to BE, and uses most of the same technologies,
that I have been trying to convince them move to the one product.  However,
The cost argument (licensing, deployment etc..) always wins even though they
know it would be much easier to manage and use.

JMO

~Martin
Barclays Global Investors



-----Original Message-----
From: Ballowe, Charles [mailto:CBallowe AT usg DOT com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 8:50 AM
To: 'Jeffrey Dykzeul'; veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
Subject: RE: [Veritas-bu] BackupExec query


BackupExec is what the windows guys here use and have been using for
years. I believe we're transitioning to NBU for a new server environment
that is being built. Our first use of NBU was for a Unix based Oracle
Applications setup.

>From what I can tell of BackupExec, it's more GUI driven, and has less
(read: no) power from the command line. Everything is handled from the
server - I don't think client directed restores are possible. It works 
fine for them, but I'm not sure I'd want it in a large multi-platform
environment. (We do have a couple of directories on a Linux and a Solaris
machine backed up by it, I have yet to see an attempted restore of that
data though.)

-charlie

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jeffrey Dykzeul [mailto:Jeffrey_Dykzeul AT Raytheon DOT com]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2002 12:43 PM
> To: veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
> Subject: [Veritas-bu] BackupExec query
> 
> 
> Some of my Windows colleagues are testing BackupExec with various tape
> drives and libraries to see if it meets their needs. Has 
> anyone on this
> list performed a similar study and might be willing to share their
> findings? Anybody have any from-the-hip comments about using 
> BackupExec?
> 
> 
> Jeff Dykzeul
> Raytheon
> El Segundo CA USA
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
> http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
> 
_______________________________________________
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu
_______________________________________________
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu

_______________________________________________
Veritas-bu maillist  -  Veritas-bu AT mailman.eng.auburn DOT edu
http://mailman.eng.auburn.edu/mailman/listinfo/veritas-bu