Comprehensive data protection for all workloads
mcz
Veeam Legend
Posts: 835
Liked: 172 times
Joined: Jul 19, 2016 8:39 am
Full Name: Michael
Location: Rheintal, Austria
Contact:

Re: Feature Request : Web Console

Post by mcz »

Just wannted to add my idea to this thread. I will not call a web client a good or bad idea because I think the result matters but it is for sure something that is expected by many people.
The thing with every web client is for sure that you have a extra installation of a webserver (could also be on the veeam-server) and some other dependcies and services which could crash or be unavailable (for whatever reason) and then you won't be able to do your management things (most of the time then when you need it most). Compared to a offline-client (or console) it can be less reliable.

Somewhere in this thread there was the example of the social medias alias facebook, twitter, etc. and they all show what HTML can do and how stable it can be but of course they have a lot of people and ressources to keep it running 24/7/365.

And here comes something that has not been mentioned before (or probably I didn't get it): Why not keeping the web client completely on veeam-side (management, maintenance, availability)? So what do I mean? I'm thinking about a hosted solution where I would log in to the HTML client just like when I do the log in to the veeam customer portal. My backup server has an outbound connection established to the hosted veeam-servers and all the calls from the GUI are being sent to my backup server in my datacenters.

I would not have to think about the availability/maintenance of the web interface and would still be able to use this interface without VPN if I'm out of the office. Of course, you would always need an active internet connection, that's clear.
What do others think about it?
Cragdoo
Veeam Vanguard
Posts: 628
Liked: 251 times
Joined: Sep 27, 2011 12:17 pm
Full Name: Craig Dalrymple
Location: Scotland
Contact:

Re: Feature Request : Web Console

Post by Cragdoo »

I'll add a little more to the discussion. Microsoft recently announced 'Project Honolulu' which is a very lightweight management tool for Windows servers (https://blogs.technet.microsoft.com/ask ... er-part-1/). This app effectively uses Remote powershell and WMI to pull back the data, and supports extensions. So obvious question would be, is this something Veeam are interested in developing, to allow management of VBR servers?
nielsengelen
Product Manager
Posts: 5619
Liked: 1177 times
Joined: Jul 15, 2013 11:09 am
Full Name: Niels Engelen
Contact:

Re: Feature Request : Web Console

Post by nielsengelen »

Quite sure somebody can write something for it ;-)
Personal blog: https://foonet.be
GitHub: https://github.com/nielsengelen
Poweruser
Expert
Posts: 220
Liked: 12 times
Joined: Jul 25, 2018 4:12 pm
Full Name: Poweruser
Contact:

[MERGED] Feature Suggestion: Web Interface (Small VAC)

Post by Poweruser »

A small Availability Console...
just a Web-Interface which allows the same as B&R Console allows.

Then you can manage your backup from everywhere without installing the software console.
also you can check backups over (terrible) mobile devices every kind.

actually you have to use remotedesktop, vnc or install the console executables.
anyway it would be easier to provide a portable console. not much development as you can reuse the actual console but admins can start them just from a share! (like portable apps)
Shestakov
Veteran
Posts: 7328
Liked: 781 times
Joined: May 21, 2014 11:03 am
Full Name: Nikita Shestakov
Location: Prague
Contact:

Re: Feature Suggestion: Web Interface (Small Availability Co

Post by Shestakov »

Hello,
Have you checked Enterprise Manager?
It allows execute basic actions via web UI.
Thanks
Poweruser
Expert
Posts: 220
Liked: 12 times
Joined: Jul 25, 2018 4:12 pm
Full Name: Poweruser
Contact:

Re: Feature Request : Web Console

Post by Poweruser »

ah there is :-)
this looks fine except big iis ;-)
i have to try this.
i hope i can install it onto another host which does not run the backup server. i will have to check.
Gostev
Chief Product Officer
Posts: 31457
Liked: 6648 times
Joined: Jan 01, 2006 1:01 am
Location: Baar, Switzerland
Contact:

Re: Feature Request : Web Console

Post by Gostev »

Yes, you certainly can do this.
Amistar
Novice
Posts: 6
Liked: never
Joined: May 17, 2021 3:27 pm
Full Name: Mathias Schultz
Contact:

[MERGED] Feature Request - Veeam WebGui

Post by Amistar »

Hey Forum,

i would like to have a WebGUI for Veeam other than Veeam Enterprise Manager (Job Creation is a Pain in the ***)
The Console of Veeam is great and it Works, but i don't want to install Software on every Computer/Server which needs to look into the Backup.
I just want to type https://MyBackupServer.Domain.local and have a login with MFA.

Greetings
Mathias
HannesK
Product Manager
Posts: 14287
Liked: 2877 times
Joined: Sep 01, 2014 11:46 am
Full Name: Hannes Kasparick
Location: Austria
Contact:

Re: Feature Request : Web Console

Post by HannesK »

Hello,
I added your request to one of the existing threads that ask for the same and count your feature request +1 đź‘Ť

Best regards,
Hannes
tyler.jurgens
Veeam Legend
Posts: 283
Liked: 126 times
Joined: Apr 11, 2023 1:18 pm
Full Name: Tyler Jurgens
Contact:

Re: Feature Request : Web Console

Post by tyler.jurgens »

As painful as a transition from the Veeam B&R console to an HTML console would be, I would applaud that change. Take Veeam from being Windows only install and move it to a linux based environment, either through containers or a linux (VM) appliance.

I say this full well knowing I'll probably curse any HTML client when they first come out (anyone who lived through the vSphere 5 -> 7 transition knows full well what I mean). It would be really great to have more flexibility installing Veeam without needing to worry about Windows licensing.
Tyler Jurgens
Veeam Legend x2 | vExpert ** | VMCE | VCP 2020 | Tanzu Vanguard | VUG Canada Leader | VMUG Calgary Leader
Blog: https://explosive.cloud
Twitter: @Tyler_Jurgens BlueSky: @tylerjurgens.bsky.social
Thomas_
Novice
Posts: 4
Liked: never
Joined: Sep 17, 2021 9:05 am
Contact:

Re: Feature Request : Web Console

Post by Thomas_ »

+1 from my side!
BackupBytesTim
Service Provider
Posts: 389
Liked: 57 times
Joined: Apr 29, 2022 2:41 pm
Full Name: Tim
Contact:

Re: Feature Request : Web Console

Post by BackupBytesTim »

I'll +1 this, mostly because working with multiple different apps to manage Veeam environments is a pain and leads to confusion trying to explain to new users how to manage everything. I'd like to see a single interface for all functionality. Right now it seems a lot like there's different teams at Veeam making their own different products with very little effort to make one universal Veeam platform.

I'd also be good with actually being able to manage VBR jobs from the VSPC server. That's definitely the main thing I'd like to be able to do.

Though some extra monitoring capabilities would also be nice as right now we use some custom dashboards with Grafana, but admittedly most of that is monitoring the infrastructure at a system level, memory usage, cpu usage, drive usage, things that aren't necessarily part of Veeam. So I won't be too picky about Veeam providing all that information.

And I am totally for an HTML and Javascript based interface. I know most of the complaints about web interfaces are a bit old in the thread, but from my perspective it really doesn't matter what the app is made in. Could be a .NET app for all I care. Just so long as it works well and provides all the functionality in one place. I don't think that there's any reason to assume that something would be low quality solely because it runs in a web browser. From my perspective a web app is just simpler from a development perspective because, provided the dev team only utilizes capabilities available across major browsers, there's really only one version of the interface, plus a small-screen-optimized version for phones and tablets. That said I will say the biggest mistake you could make is to have the "mobile" version not have all the same functionality as the "desktop" version. I would rather have clunky access to the "desktop" version on the go, than have easy access to a "mobile" version that doesn't actually do what I need.
RubinCompServ
Service Provider
Posts: 259
Liked: 65 times
Joined: Mar 16, 2015 4:00 pm
Full Name: David Rubin
Contact:

Re: Feature Request : Web Console

Post by RubinCompServ » 1 person likes this post

Although I am not against a web portal replacing the existing VBR console, I have to say that I have never seen an HTML5 portal that has truly replicated the functionality and performance of a "fat" console (and I include the vSphere HTML5 portal in that). I would rather see a web portal that includes the major functionalities of all the Veeam products (rather than separate portals for BEM, VSPC, O365, etc) and leave the full clients intact for the people doing the actual administration
provided the dev team only utilizes capabilities available across major browsers
To be perfectly honest, I already have concerns about this becoming an issue as, apparently, the only way to download a license from the VCSP portal is by using Chrome; per Veeam Support, using Firefox or Edge is not supported for the VCSP portal and there are no plans to fix the portal.
BackupBytesTim
Service Provider
Posts: 389
Liked: 57 times
Joined: Apr 29, 2022 2:41 pm
Full Name: Tim
Contact:

Re: Feature Request : Web Console

Post by BackupBytesTim » 1 person likes this post

While that sort of limitation does bother me to see, modern Edge is literally based on Chromium, just like Chrome is. I've literally never seen anywhere that Chrome works and Edge doesn't. I don't really use Firefox so I can't speak much to that. So typically I've always used Edge everywhere with no issues.

That said, regarding your first point there about truly replicating all the functionality. I'd say that comes down to Veeam's dev team, or whatever company makes the interface for whatever product. It's not so much that the web app can't have all the functionality as the .NET app and is a bad idea as a result. If that were the case I'd agree with you on that point. In my experience though it's more like, whatever company's dev team just didn't bother to replicate all the functionality in the web app version, which may in some cases simply be that the .NET app and the web app are developed by two separate teams with two separate amounts of experience and two separate development plans and timelines. So in my opinion it really does all come back to making sure that if there is such a web app, which I think would be beneficial, the web app needs to be developed with all the same functionality. Needs to. Not "people want this so we'll look at doing it eventually if the web app seems popular" but "needs to be done early on, if not in the first general release, else we might as well not do it at all".

That said, no opposition to keeping the .NET app around, but since in either case the Console is basically a remote management tool, and doesn't really do much processing or any resource intensive tasks locally where it runs, I would think there's no technical limitation that would prevent the web app from being a thing. Though there may be some limitations around local file system access if it's running in a web browser.
Gostev
Chief Product Officer
Posts: 31457
Liked: 6648 times
Joined: Jan 01, 2006 1:01 am
Location: Baar, Switzerland
Contact:

Re: Feature Request : Web Console

Post by Gostev »

RubinCompServ wrote: ↑Jun 22, 2023 6:23 pmTo be perfectly honest, I already have concerns about this becoming an issue as, apparently, the only way to download a license from the VCSP portal is by using Chrome; per Veeam Support, using Firefox or Edge is not supported for the VCSP portal and there are no plans to fix the portal.
While this is an off-topic for this thread, please PM me the case ID where Veeam Support stated this, because devs disagree with their statement entirely. As mentioned already by Tim, both Chrome and Edge are built on the same Chromium engine, so based on this alone this statement doesn't make much sense. Further, QA has just smoke-tested VCSP with the latest Edge and did NOT observe any issues. And finally, all three browsers are explicitly listed as supported in the official System Requirements.
RubinCompServ
Service Provider
Posts: 259
Liked: 65 times
Joined: Mar 16, 2015 4:00 pm
Full Name: David Rubin
Contact:

Re: Feature Request : Web Console

Post by RubinCompServ »

BackupBytesTim wrote: ↑Jun 23, 2023 2:11 pm ...the web app needs to be developed with all the same functionality. Needs to. Not "people want this so we'll look at doing it eventually if the web app seems popular" but "needs to be done early on, if not in the first general release, else we might as well not do it at all".
On this, we agree. You often only get one chance at convincing someone to move to a new UI, and the moment you say, "You need to use the old interface to perform [x task], they're going to go back to the old interface and stay there.
mortalfoil
Novice
Posts: 6
Liked: 2 times
Joined: Mar 17, 2023 6:00 pm
Contact:

Re: Feature Request : Web Console

Post by mortalfoil » 1 person likes this post

I'll just say that, looking to the future, a unified HTML client (as in, managing all the various products in one pane) has to be the way forward, painful as it will likely be. So I support working towards this.
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Ivan239, RValensise, tyler.jurgens, ybarrap2003 and 179 guests