We performed a comparison between Carbonite Server and Quorum OnQ based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Cloud Backup solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The Granular Restore of SQL feature has been a lifesaver more times than I can count. One of the main reasons for looking at Carbonite was their support for platforms like AIX and AS/400 Series."
"The efficiency and convenience are excellent."
"The solution is a free engine to help work with the container."
"I find the BMR/image and the recovery pieces are valuable."
"The solution is very stable."
"Technical support handled all our issues quickly and effectively."
"Easy verification of things is the most valuable feature."
"It seems reliable and easy to use."
"The most valuable feature is spinning up a ready-to-go VM in a test or production environment that is based on a backup stored on the Quorum device."
"When it comes to recovering what you need from a backup, it's really easy. You just drill through the directory, find the file and the date that you want, and click to recover. You then pick the directory you want to save it in. Usually, it takes a minute or two and it's done. It's quick and easy."
"The solution offers good documentation."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its ease of use."
"It is a stable solution."
"Quorum OnQ has taken the guesswork out of backup/recovery and disaster recovery."
"I like this product because it is easy to use."
"The most valuable feature of Quorum OnQ is quick recovery."
"They do not yet have USB recovery but they are adding it in coming releases."
"The stability has room for improvement."
"It could be a little bit easier or faster to be able to access data files without having to download anything."
"The only thing that I would like to see improved is related to marketing. Currently, it is very difficult to find the right paper and stuff for me. Their marketing department should provide better information because currently, it is very difficult to find information on the internet. It was bought over by OpenText, and you won't be able to find a lot of information about this solution on their site. They should also provide training facilities for commercial purposes. Some of my colleagues recently went for pilot training, and they were technical. If I want to get trained, the training has to be more commercial. Currently, there is no such training for users like me."
"The support for object storage isn't quite there yet. Its public cloud support can be improved. I would love to see the public cloud support for object storage, and it would be great, but what I always hear from the folks at Carbonite is that in a lot of cases, it directly competes with their cloud offering. So, I don't know when or where that will go or if that will go anywhere, but we are hopeful to see something. The dashboard is a little outdated. If they gave it a facelift and put some better design around their dashboard, that would be tremendous. I generally care less about the visual aesthetics of an application as long as it does what it needed to do, which is true in the case of this solution. We also have the Microsoft 365 platform. Because they're two separate platforms, I have to log in to my Microsoft platform to manage it, and I have to log into my Carbonite server backup platform to manage it. Having these two coexist together in one management console is really what we're looking for, but we went for it knowing this. We also knew that there would be some integration coming down the road. So, we're again hoping to see some of that coming in 2021."
"In the next release I would like to see an improvement in the auto failover option."
"The Hyper-V backup has room for improvement."
"There was a situation I faced in the past when I contacted the tool's support team, and it took them a while to respond."
"Better integration with cloud-based solutions like Azure and Office 365 is needed."
"The price of Quorum OnQ could be improved. We were exploring the product in terms of having a partnership with the distributor so that we could operate as a service, but for our own use, within the company, we couldn't justify the price unless the servers would become an option later on. The upfront cost of purchasing a license for the hardware is quite steep."
"They need integration with other platforms."
"The user interface needs to be improved."
"It would be beneficial if file culling could be more granular."
"One thing that could be done to improve it would be a single pane of glass for doing disaster recovery testing, where I could have remote consoles in one place... I still have to go to each location in a browser and then bring up the console. I'd like to see them integrate that into a single pane of glass so I don't have to go to each server."
"Lacks compatibility in terms of supporting other OS."
Carbonite Server is ranked 22nd in Cloud Backup with 7 reviews while Quorum OnQ is ranked 30th in Cloud Backup with 21 reviews. Carbonite Server is rated 8.2, while Quorum OnQ is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of Carbonite Server writes "A simple, efficient, reliable product". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Quorum OnQ writes "Took us just hours to do a complete server restore, with minimal downtime". Carbonite Server is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Zerto, Oracle Data Guard, Azure Backup and Veeam Backup for Microsoft 365, whereas Quorum OnQ is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Cohesity DataProtect, Acronis Cyber Protect and N-able Cove Data Protection. See our Carbonite Server vs. Quorum OnQ report.
See our list of best Cloud Backup vendors and best Backup and Recovery vendors.
We monitor all Cloud Backup reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
