07-12-2012 11:40 AM
Users including iammejutty; Steve Kratz; Mark McFarlane; PCTeamAdmin, among others requested the ability to bundle multiple servers in a single job. We are happy to announce that In the next release of Backup Exec, the ability to bundle multiple servers returns.
05-20-2013 04:30 PM
Just look at Mr. Meyer's title and you will understand why you can't get a straight answer. My opinion is that they keep promising a solution is just around the corner so they can keep people paying for their subscription renewals.
This whole situation is ridiculous. This thread started in June of 2012 and we are still waiting for a fix. I participated in the demo for the proposed fix. This fix was supposed to be available by October 2012. We are still waiting. Why? There has to be a reason. Is it incompetence? Is it a lack of concern for your customers? Is it simply a decision driven by marketing? I would like to know. What other major software company has waited to fix a broken product for almost a year? Do you not realize how pathetic and amateurish it sounds for you to recommend that users downgrade to the previous version to regain their functionality? (An option unavailable to me anyway because I need to back up SQL 2012.)
I for one am fed up with excuses and false promises. Symantec just doesn't seem to care about their BE customers. Like many users here, I have been Using BE since version 7.2. I used it because it was the best. I can't say that anymore.
Veeam is offering backup to tape in their next version, which is due this July. I will be taking a serious look at it.
05-21-2013 06:47 AM
It sounds like you are saying there are other priorities that are deemed to be more important.
When you say "Seamless migration (or fixing the multi-server job monitor and other things)" are you referring to the job monitor GUI or are you actually saying that I will be able to run a job that contains more than one server selection?
Obviously we would like a better Job monitor but our concern primarily is the ability to back up more than one server in one single job.
It just seems so odd that we can't get a straight answer on this. I'll give you a chance to elaborate on where this is really going.
I'm really hoping you are wrong about that time table and we don't have to wait until 2014 when we have already been waiting for so long.
I can only imagine the tremendous number of people like me who had to revert back to 2010 and are just waiting for this to be addressed.
Thanks for your response.
05-21-2013 07:07 AM
I know of another software company that is doing the exact same thing. They do not release bug fixes and tell their customers that the bug will be fixed in the next major release. I agree that their motivation is financially based. If they can't get you to pay for maintenance then they are not making the money needed to keep their developers employeed.
Our problem is that this was not a bug so we as customers are at the mercy of product managers. I would like to know whose bright idea it was to remove that feature from the software in the first place. I would suggest having that individual removed from the software because it seems as though their logic is flawed.
As a customer, I would expect that a software company would have users (and not marketing/developers) make recommendations on changes to a software application. But I guess Symantec is above market research. Microsoft did market research collecting information on how its users used Office features and functions changing the software based on that information. What happened to user requirements driving a product line? What happened to a company doing beta testing and getting feedback from users who have a stake in the future development of a product? The decision to change the software gives me the impression that Symantec doesn't really need its customers.
I understand not fixing that component in the current version if you are close to releasing a new version that has the capability. Customers have been patient, loyal and waited for this error in judgement to be resolved. How much longer to do we have to wait. This decision was the main reason that I sold my Symantec stock. How much bad press and customer ailenation can Symantec endure?
05-21-2013 10:00 AM
Yes, we always have to prioritize or nothing gets delivered.
"Seamless Migration" is our catch-all phrase for the list of features that we will put back/modify/improve so that anyone moving from 2010 to 2012 is not suprised. Jobs will move over, the jobs monitor will stay the same, multi-server jobs will move over and remain available. We're thinking about offering a "design check" pre-beta so folks can get a feel for this and be sure we are on the right track - PM me if you'd like to be involved. This is a big deal to us (and this thread just reinforces it).
I hope to be wrong about the timetable, BUT we are not going to make another commitment until we are sure we can deliver. It's not fun on this side of the fence either, but it remains our intention to be straight with you about what is and is not so you can make the plans to run your business.
Feel free to keep asking for information.
05-21-2013 10:07 AM
Well that sounds good then. However, I'm sure you realize that most if not all are not upgrading until these changes are put in place. I don't think we mind new changes but it is all the old functionality that was lost ... thats the issue.
There are many areas where 2012 tries to guess what options you want and then doesn't let you alter them. An example would be exchange logs. In 2012 it will always flush the exchange logs, you can't select to just copy them anymore. It is trying to anticipate the settings you need rather than just allowing you as the user to have access to them all and set them yourself.
I would like to be involved in the beta. I'll PM you.
05-21-2013 10:42 AM
I like what you wrote. "Seamless Migration", "anyone moving from 2010 to 2012 is not surprised", "jobs will move over, the jobs monitor will stay the same, multi-server jobs will move over and remain available". Is this the philosophy moving forward or was this in place when 2012 was designed?
I agree. No more excuses and broken promises about releases/dates. How about getting us information about the 2012 R2 and next product. Showing users what they can expect, (features, functions, tools). Put together a webcast showing users some of the capabilities of a working product so we know what's coming. Soliciting feedback regarding the webcast.
Every business depends on data, so data loss is never an option. It may not be fun on your side of the fence but you won't get fired if your critical business data is not backed up properly. Stop thinking about a design check and make it happen.
05-21-2013 10:49 AM
I believe you can still copy the Exchange logs in BE2012 via the "one-time backup' method. However, you canot set a reoccurring schedule, which is something that was in BE2010 and it not in BE2012.
05-21-2013 11:30 AM
In 2010 I run a daily backup of my Exchange server. I also run a backup once a month that backs up all of my virtual machines (Exchange being one of those servers). That once monthly backup is set to copy the exchange logs. The daily backlup is set to flush the logs. This is very important because you need to ensure that you know where those logs are if you need them.
In 2012 in many areas it uses an "it knows best" philosophy and just arbitrarily makes decisions about options to be set and doen't allow for you to change them. For instance it will always commit the logs. The option is there but you can't change it. That is unacceptable when I am doing many different kinds of backups. Some are daily primary backups and some are offsite backups. The offsite backups should not have logs.
That seems to be a bit of a theme in many areas where the system tries to interpret your needs.
05-21-2013 11:47 AM
Robert Blanchette and JC777-
1. We are being as transparent as we know how. Ask me anything, or visit one of our Reddit AMAs, Google+ Hangouts or Spiceworks Livestreams if you want to speak with someone else. And for support, hit up Twitter with hashtag #BEsupport.
3. Yes, this is a colossal mess and I too wish it were faster, but quality is not free. We are now focused on bridging the gap between a release that supports modern backup with legacy features (BE2010) and maintaining the most recent platform that has new features but loses old (BE2012). Check our beta for proof that we are progressing. Our product managers would love to speak with you directly; PM me for an introduction or tweet @butlercp
3. The people responsible have all been replaced. In fact, the new CEO has acknowledged the focus on this product line and our intention to keep listening to employees, customers and shareholders until we get it right. The stock price seems to reflect this plan is on track and welcome.
05-21-2013 12:48 PM
Glad to see somebody from Symantec is finally keeping up with this thread...
I'm not following twitter or facebook pages for Symantec but I would be interested in knowing if you are getting the same wonderful comments as in this thread.
Hey Drew you mentioned in your previous post:
We're also working on a way to address maintenance renewals and expirations until we can get seamless migration in place. Stay tuned.
How long do I need to stay tuned for this??
My renewal is up at the end of this month and I have already stated in a previouse post that it would be in Symantecs best interest to extend the renewal periods for users that are experiencing the 2012 debacle.
I have expressed this same sentiment to our Symantec account rep and all I got was a: "sorry to hear that" attitude. Told her to fly it up the flag pole and a week has gone by and no call from any manager.
Again this is typical customer NON service from Symantec.
05-21-2013 04:29 PM
Are you kidding? We totally failed to deliver seamless migration in BE2012, which is why it is now the focus.
Watch the beta blog and the main BE blog for detailed list of the fixes and new features in the Service Packs. Once we have firmer date ranges for the next release we will also communicate them.
Absolutely agree that data loss is unacceptable. As soon as we have a design check date we'll post it for all to participate, and what you described above ius exactly what we have in mind. Wouldn't it be nice to have a chance to give feedback prior to release, for a change?
05-21-2013 04:34 PM
slappeee - we get comments in a zillion places across the web. Sometimes we miss threads, so apologies if it felt like we were not keeping up.
I doubt we'll have the promotional plan in place on maintenance in the next month. PM me so we can follow up with you, and please do let me know who your rep is.
05-22-2013 06:10 AM
Appreciate the reply Drew. I PM'd you the info.
06-07-2013 09:28 AM
I just came across this thread. Unfortunately for me, I upgraded from BE2010 to BE2012. Our BE2010 would no longer run utility jobs such as unlock and cleaning the tape drives. I thought about upgrading to BE2010 r3 because I read it was fixed in that but I figured that I might as well as upgrade to 2012. wow. that's all I can say. A colleague and me spend 2 days on the phone with tech support because the database migration failed. If it didn't work to begin with, why did tech support waste my time? They could have told me that it didn't work and went from there. The multple servers in 1 job is a big issue. The great thing about 2010 is that I setup 2 jobs. A daily incremental job that ran 5 days and a full job that ran on the weekend. Done. didn't have to worry about it. Is this going to be fixed soon? I may have to downgrade (upgrade) to BE2010 r3 but am willing to stick with Symantec if there is a fix that is coming soon. If not, then I will advise my supervisor to start shopping to a new backup method.
06-07-2013 12:43 PM
Are you available for a phone call in the next couple of days? I will grab an engineer to speak with you about your environment. We’ll help you roll back to BE 2010 R3. We would also like to speak with you about your database migration issues. Do you have the incident number(s) for your conversation(s) with Tech Support? That will help us learn more about your environment and save time on the phone.
Please let me know a couple of times when you are available next week and we will arrange a call.
I look forward to speaking with you.
06-07-2013 01:18 PM
I will PM you my information. Thanks for looking into this.
06-10-2013 12:33 PM
Updated blog post on the beta program went live today.
slappeee, we recently launched a promotion with 20% off of the 3 year maintenance SKU. I think we can do better but I also think the main point is to get a date for the seamless migraiton published. Once I have that we can make plans on the promotional side.
I think we can deliver that date range in the next 30 days. Will keep you posted on the BE blog.
06-21-2013 08:12 AM
I have worked in IT for 15 years and as long as I can remember Backupexec has been the standard in the enterprise space for those with large data rooms with complex tape libaries. Symantec's development changes to Backupexec 2012 in regards only allowing a single server to be backed up in a single job were some of the most bizarre and idiotic I have ever come across. As 100's of people in these forums have attested to, this approach results is a huge blow out in both individual jobs and media requirements. We stopped recommending Backupexec to our enterprise clients and moved over to Veeam mid last year, I am checking back here today to see if this issue has been rectified, it beggers belief that it appears it still has not been addressed. It appears to be a fate more and more software companies are falling for these days, overhaul the user interface and at the same time obliterate the functionality and the reputation of the product at the same time. RIP Backupexec.
06-28-2013 08:25 AM
Alex234234, I feel your pain. I have waited, complained, whinned, and even begged for some hope, some way to justify hanging on. NO ONE wants to change a backup program they've learned to trust for over a decade. I complained so loudly they asked me to stop. Today I stop. (at least on backup exec). Today I had no choice but to purchase a competing product. It was the last day I could hold out for, and hold I did.
One final insult dished up from the symantec home world (obviously not on earth!), they dropped there maintenance pricing 20% IF you order 3 more years :( I never received a single phone call trying to save my buisness, and IF this now somehow gets to the right people, it's too late and don't bother calling. As a matter of fact, take me off any symantec mailing lists. For any of your products.
Funny, I had trouble pronouncing the name symantec in the beginning, now I feal as though I've lost my oldest, best friend. Does this make me a total tecno geek?
Kay Sera Sera
06-28-2013 09:05 AM
I have been following a few different discussions on this site in order to try and find answers to the long list of questions I have had since "upgrading" to BE 2012. I do not have the time to write a specific response for each of these separate discussions, so I will be writing this and posting in a few locations. I do apologize if anyone considers this to be spam, but the comments are relevant to all of the locations they have been posted.
BEGIN RANT I can confidently say that this is the biggest step backwards I have seen in a software product. I have not been using BE since the start, as some of the users in these forums have posted, but I have been using it for close to 10 years now, since the Veritas days. Without fail, I have found problems or annoyances in each version of the software, and it has been resolved by the time the next version of the software was released. This is the first time that I have found multiple incredibly useful features completely gutted out of the software, and the new version has exponentially more problems than the previous version. No ability to backup multiple servers within the same job? Seriously? No more job monitor? Media Set assignments are ignored, because "the design is that if a backup job starts most companies would want it to have the best chance of finishing and not fail just because of no available tape"??? Says who exactly? I have spoken to 7 or 8 of my colleagues, and there is universal agreement: as an IT administrator, we would much rather have the software conform to the "backup design" that we have put in place, rather than to just do everything it feels necessary to complete a job. If that job fails because it runs out of storage, or no tape is available? That's my fault, and I need to correct it before the next day's job is run. That is literally what I am paid to do - be responsible for ensuring that, among other things, the backups run successfully, and making corrections if they do not. I would much rather find that one night's backups did not complete because I had done something wrong, than find out that every single night my media sets that I had carefully planned are being ignored because BE thinks it has the right to grab tapes from any media set it feels like. We need to take tapes offsite, this is main reason we are using tape storage. If we didn't care where the data resided, and didn't need to take it offsite, we would do all of our backups to disk. As it works now, I cannot rely on the backups being written to the correct weekly tape so that I can confidently take it offsite knowing it contains all of the data needed. The fact that I cannot create one single weekly job that has all of the servers writing, in order, to one set of tapes, and instead have to rely on a complicated set of protection and scheduling settings to be able to backup multiple servers is just the icing on this horrible tasting cake. I also have yet to see an answer from Symantec for why all of this was changed. Actual IT admins are posting to say that the software is no longer functional for their uses, and the response from Symantec has essentially been "all of the problems you are complaining about are features of the new software." I appreciate all of the attempts that Symantec employees have been making in these forums to answer these questions, and to try and assist their user base. However, for the most part this is just an example of very dedicated "front line" workers bending over backwards to try and be helpful, while there is really nothing they can do to fix what in the end is bad software. You had a great product, you constantly improved it so that administration time was reduced and reliability was increased....and now most of that progress has been wiped out by a redesigned product that chose to place the needs of people who want everything to be done in a wizard over the needs of people who actually need to reliably backup huge amounts of data on a daily basis. All of these forum discussions have been open for about a year, and despite numerous posts and promises from Symantec none of these issues have actually been resolved. END RANT