> They purchase 3rd party tools in lieu of bespoke tooling.

Besides the fact that I explicitly also talked about third-party tooling, which definitively is available, even if not yet as broadly (cue chicken and egg), lots of such extra third-party tooling makes one's infrastructure dependent by many more projects than required, each adding complexity and reducing reliability. But as said, this is a complaint for the third-party tooling provider.

> they have forgotten how traditional IT shops work. We are still out here, and we are most likely the primarly customers impacted by this change. The DevOps shops are in the cloud...

Yeah, we certainly did not forget that and cater that group extensively already.
But currently the ones that use PVE or PBS are the ones favoring independence, i.e., FOSS and projects that only have to answer to their user, but no profit optimization machine, either by being bitten way to often by such changes already or understood early enough that having core infra on a proprietary platform including any 3rd party tooling is rather reckless for the long term (cue at this thread).

> Veeam Provides (that ProxMox does not)

s/ProxMox/Proxmox VE/

There's no upper case m, and Proxmox is the company, the actual products are Proxmox Virtual Environment (PVE), Proxmox Backup Server (PBS), Proxmox Mail Gateway (PMG), etc.

But, let's actually comment your points:

> * Hypervisor agnostic backups (Restore from any supported Hypervisor to Any hypervisor or supported Cloud. i.e I can restore a vmWare VM to AWS Directly)

AWS wasn't in our scope, but we can add any target that has an actual open specification, i.e., not requiring a deal with the devil that would force us to do a low quality hidden proprietary implementation.

> * Application Aware processing for common applications like SQL, Sharepoint, etc I think this is different than what you call "Application Level", as an Application Aware Backup will use technology to flush cache, finish tranactions, prune logs, etc to put the application in "saved" or "backup ready" state, PBS creates "Crash Consistent" backups only, basically as if you just pulled the power from the VM, some applications this will corrupt data, Application Aware backups work to prevent that corruption

We sure have that since decades, we use the QEMU Guest Agent to bring the guest, and applications like DBs into a safe state by issuing a freeze/thaw command when creating the dirty-bitmap.

> * Continuous Replication

Can be done by Proxmox VE's Ceph and ZFS.

> * Isolated / Automated Restore testing with reports

Wasn't done with PBS <-> PVE di

> * Awesome Compression and Duplication rates in the backup files

Yes, PBS has a content addressable storage with great deduplication and compression.

> * Builtin Support for S3 Storage with out having to do OS Level hacks (PBS depends on something like rclone to do this)

This is indeed lacking, but we're working on it, I'd think we have something read until mid of 2024.

> * Builtin Support for Block Replication with having to do OS Level Hacks

Not sure what you mean here exactly..

> * Help Desk portal for File Level Restores that allow for RBAC Security

We have a role based access control system for all our products, this can be already done...

> * Integrated Agent based backups for physical systems that provides a Single Plane of Glass for Backups

You can use the CLI client already, but yeah it should get some UX improvements for making that nicer OOTB.

> * Change Block Tracking (CBT) support

This is supported since years by Proxmox Backup Server.
Sorry, but at this point I have to ask, did you even test Proxmox Backup Server or is your list just guessed, or partially AI generated?

> * Immutable backups repository

The PBS allows that too, we have explicit permission rights that can only add backups, never remove, plus on sync to off-site one can also disable any pruning, those features and our tape support makes it easy to have ransomware protected backups.

> Comparing PBS to Veeam, is like Comparing pfsense to Palo Alto Pan-OS firewall, sure they both block traffic, but 1 in 100x more advanced

As most your points above are already supported I'd take 1.5x at best, but thanks for your feedback, some of it was quite valuable.