Veeam-first infrastructure, what am I missing?

Hi ​@BackupBytesTim,

there are many IT systems outside of the STANDARDs VMware vSphere, Microsoft Hyper-V, Nutanix, ProxMox environments that Veeam cannot work for, but they are niche systems, maybe less than 20%.

In my small experience I have never needed to ‘build an environment around Veeam’ but dropped Veeam into the customer's environment. 

I work well with Veeam because it works, it does its job, backup & restore, and it does it well, simply.
 

Hi, 

i am working with other 4 most used backup softwares. 

What Veeam is extra here and you will appreciate is cloud connect. Me as behalf of service provider is very good feature, because you can create same conditions as are for public clouds.

You can install VBR and with license switch to Cloud Connect (new tab in VBR console), where you can assign repositories and make it immutable and even that you can share across multiple customers. So you can copy backups to your central repository over https protocol, where customers will see cloud as repository. And with service provider console you can provide multitenant environment, which can integrate veeam one, but other vendors like grafana …..

This is one of pros of Veeam...

I’m seeing what you’re both listing as features of Veeam, but without listing what you’re comparing to my first thought is just “Acronis has the same functionality” so I assume you’re not comparing to Acronis when suggesting these are ways in which you prefer Veeam. 

My experience between Veeam and Acronis is that Acronis is much less quirky, never needed to tweak settings to make something work, it “just works” with the most basic of settings in place. I like that Acronis has a centralized management interface with one web console for everything, no separate VSPC and VBR console and Agent interface. Acronis also has features that are important in situations backing up over the internet, like resuming interrupted backups, where Veeam will just delete whatever was transferred and start over with a new increment (or new full if that’s what it was doing).

Veeam does seem better in some environments, backing up certain hypervisors that Acronis might not support (though Acronis also supports some that Veeam does not), and Veeam does have that feature to back up Hyper-V over the network, in my experience that’s not always been a very practical implementation for most of my customers, but it is something Acronis won’t do (Acronis only backs up Hyper-V from the Hyper-V host, which I can understand some admins not being fond of). 

They both offer multi-tenancy support, numerous backup storage locations, verification options, reporting features, and disaster-recovery (failover to VM in remote location). So from my perspective, none of those features make Veeam better, they’re good to have, but not unique to Veeam. 

My overall view of Veeam in my years of using it is that it does have some functionality that other things may not have, but it really doesn’t seem to have that one outstanding feature that would make it definitively better. I want to like Veeam, mainly because of things like the responsiveness from the dev team, so I’m always on the lookout for ways in which the actual Veeam software is better than the competition.

Hi BackupBytesTim,

i think your direction is wrong. It should cover all your needs instead to look, which product all feature have. I was not working with Acronis, so i cannot compare ...

For example: Veeam does not have resume of corrupted backup, but it has wan accelerators, which i use if backup is running due geo-redundancy.

You need to to count as well on support, kb, support page (known solvd issues), community, ... 

I was working  11 years with one product and as software was fine, but if something was wrong, support was terrible, DR it took always few days, if something happened with master server, ...