I'm spec'ing out a new backup solution at work, and the current frontrunner is Computer Associates' ARCserve product. We needed to get a couple agents for Solaris added to the quote, to back up a few legacy servers that haven't been migrated to Linux yet.
When the VAR sent us the quote, she said "This is the only SKU I could find, it must be what you want". Whereas the other per-client costs were around $200 or so, this was about $2600 per client. I asked her "Are you sure you're quoting me the agent, not the server itself?" She assured me that she is, and that she spoke to Computer Associates as well. Even when I pointed out "But that product description doesn't say 'ARCserve Client Agent for (fill-in-the-blank)' like the others do, it simply says 'ARCserve for Solaris', which makes it seem a whole lot like the server and not the agent." She assured me again that CA had told her which SKU to use, etc., etc.
I was a little dubious, so I contacted CA directly. I asked them "What SKU should I be getting a quote on for this line item, because this pricing seems dorked?" They told me that a product specialist would call me back.
While waiting for the callback, I did some Googling and found that any number of places would happily sell me the exact product I'm looking for, with a SKU of BABWBR1100S19.
A little later, the CA person calls me back, and asks again what I'm looking for. I'm really clear this time, I spell it out exactly, I even say "Can I just give you the SKU that it looks like is exactly what I'm looking for, so you can bring that up in the system?"
He looks it up. He can't find it. There's umpteen-gajillion vendors selling this product, and CA can't find it in their database.
I totally have renewed faith in the VAR, though, because if CA can't find the product I want when I give them the freakin' exact SKU, how could a VAR be expected to find it?
Anyhow, CA is now tracking down what they need to do to confirm that the SKU I gave them is in fact the SKU I need, but I have to admit the whole situation is comical.
If at first you don't succeed, you obviously forgot to Google it :P
I always had better luck with the Veritas line of backup servers/agents. ARCserve never seemed all the reliable to me.
Veritas is ending support for any version of Debian as a backup-client in the next major release of Netbackup Enterprise. Thus, unless I want to convert my data-center to Red Hat (and I don't, because I'm crazy like that, and absolutely hate the dependency-chain-from-hell that usually ends up with XWindows being installed on a server), I've got no choice but to seek other alternatives.
ARCserve supports Debian (or, as they are quick to point out, any distro meeting certain kernel-level requirements) as a client, although it does require Red Hat as a server. I can live with that.
Huh? You don't need XWindows installed with RHEL...
- ask
CA? Ugh.
We've had success with Tivoli Storage Manager on Linux, but don't have it on Debian.
http://www-1.ibm.com/linux/solutions/tivolistormanaglinuxsolution.shtml
(That X dependency chain crap is the font mangler thinking it needs to be installed.)
Well, you have me on the Debian versus Redhat thing. Nothing like apt-get to make your day brighter. :)