Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Mimecast Incydr vs Quest Rapid Recovery comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 11, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Mimecast Incydr
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
78
Ranking in other categories
Data Loss Prevention (DLP) (25th)
Quest Rapid Recovery
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
5.7
Number of Reviews
20
Ranking in other categories
Backup and Recovery (37th)
 

Mindshare comparison

Mimecast Incydr and Quest Rapid Recovery aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. Mimecast Incydr is designed for Data Loss Prevention (DLP) and holds a mindshare of 1.7%, up 1.5% compared to last year.
Quest Rapid Recovery, on the other hand, focuses on Backup and Recovery, holds 0.6% mindshare, down 0.6% since last year.
Data Loss Prevention (DLP)
Backup and Recovery
 

Featured Reviews

Chuck_Mackey - PeerSpot reviewer
Provides comprehensive visibility and protection, helps in identifying the gaps in security, and comes with excellent onboarding support
In a couple of instances, we had a little bit of trouble in getting it distributed throughout the organization. We ultimately managed to do it, but they talk about it being a pretty simple process, and it became a little laborious. It would just turn away. The agents were not being distributed. It was just churning and churning and churning. When we were looking for specific categories of data, it was getting bogged down, but that was not even so much Code42, although some of it was their issue. It really has to do with the overall infrastructure and what the organization is prepared to do. If the infrastructure or the networking is a little hinky or you don't have a really finely tuned network infrastructure environment and your patches aren't up to date on your servers and your endpoints, it could get a little sticky. Other than that, it was okay. We really didn't have much problem beyond that. It took a couple of days to sort that out, but it was no big deal.
Adam Augustín - PeerSpot reviewer
Granular recovery, replication is good and offers good speed
It is for any kind of company that uses their own servers. From a global perspective, our clients are small-sized companies. All the SMEs, compared to the Slovakian market, are quite small. It's a small market with small companies. They just want to enhance security and follow regulations It's…

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"It had the ability to preseed by sending in a data drive and could restore by sending the user a data drive."
"It has quite a bit of flexibility in configuring backup sets."
"Code42 Next-Gen DLP is scalable."
"Risk factors can be adjusted for all intricate details."
"Security tools: Being able to monitor data going in and coming off our endpoints. Seeing what it is and where it's going is awesome."
"t has a very user friendly status bar with common errors and has logs built in to the console so we can review the issues or status of CrashPlan."
"Low system overhead, setting retention policies, ease of use"
"Works in the background and users are able to perform restores."
"Definitely, the mount and recovery points are the most valuable, because if someone deletes a file or something, or if something gets corrupted, we can always revert back to an old change because our repository goes about a month back. The ability to roll back files and the ability to roll back servers is really important."
"The local mount utility is most valuable. I do restores fairly regularly. Thankfully, I have not ever lost an entire server that I've had to resurrect, but I certainly have people who erroneously saved over a file or have deleted a file. So, we've done that quite a bit. We still have the DL4000 appliance, and we had, kind of, extrapolated that out over a five-year period. Now, we're in year six, so we had to add storage, which we did as a SAN next to DL4000, but prior to adding in that extra storage, we, here and there, would run into situations where for whatever reason, it would want to be pulling a new base image, and then we would run out of storage. So, we would utilize the archive feature and archive the old data that we want to hang on to, but we don't necessarily need it taking up current data storage. Being able to export out really old data is most valuable to us. Then, we just store that on a NAS that we keep in another building."
"The fact that it can take a snapshot of everything on a server and replicate it on another server in real-time is the most valuable feature."
"The most valuable feature of Quest Rapid Recovery for our organization is the VM recovery functionality."
"The compression and deduplication features have helped to save on storage costs."
"The general backup for replication and virtual standby are the most valuable aspects. It does what it says it does. It's a decent tool for not a big budget."
"It is very easy to use and very easy to manage. The fact that I can easily recover data is valuable. I don't use it much. The only way I have been using it is that sometimes, people ask to recover the data, which is a very easy process. It takes only a few minutes to get in and get the data from the server."
"Built-in encryption helps to secure our data as it travels from our on-site server to our off-site backup server."
 

Cons

"More security would be nice, I would love to be able to remotely brick a stolen laptop and it's hard disk drive (HDD)."
"You can't always filter out data that you'd like to."
"​Due to recent changes that effectively abandoned an entire segment of their user base, I no longer trust nor can recommend Code42 products."
"Reporting could use an overhaul. It is very limited."
"The application, written in Java, required far more system resources on a Client than other solutions."
"In a couple of instances, we had a little bit of trouble in getting it distributed throughout the organization. We ultimately managed to do it, but they talk about it being a pretty simple process, and it became a little laborious. It would just turn away. The agents were not being distributed. It was just churning and churning and churning. When we were looking for specific categories of data, it was getting bogged down, but that was not even so much Code42, although some of it was their issue."
"I think one we can improve is the compression."
"I would like to see more flexibility on privileges, perhaps create another kind of admin for regions. Also, I would like the ability to access logs without having to be on the actual device or a super-admin."
"You can only take a snapshot from a virtual environment. It should have the ability to take snapshots from both a virtual and physical environment."
"One area where Quest Rapid Recovery has room for improvement is in the handling of snapshots on Hyper-V."
"The on-premises deployment model shouldn't have a maintenance fee. If there's going to be technical support, they need it to be free or it should be paid on upon adopting the solution."
"There could be better space management for incremental data. When you use incremental data, the space in the appliance keeps on going up. There should be a better way to manage the space. You have to manage the incremental data to reduce the time."
"It's buggy. That's a big problem. We're arranging to get rid of it. We're going to switch to Veeam."
"When you do a full backup, all of the memory resources on the server are used, which is something that should be improved."
"The initial setup can be tricky, and if not done right, the whole solution needs to be reinstalled."
"I think the self-paced learning and knowledge base can always be improved so that users can self-service without having to contact either a reseller or Quest. I know there are things that I would have been looking for to try and solve. And the only way I could get there was to actually open a ticket rather than go through self-service through the portal."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It was expensive. It was more expensive than Eureka, and it was more expensive than Barracuda Backup, but what we got was a full team. They didn't come in and nickel and dime us. They provided the assistance we needed. They didn't say that they need to charge us for something or it is going to take another statement of work. It was all bundled into it... We pay for the software maintenance. It is probably 18% or 20% of the license fee for rev releases."
"It is 100% worth the cost to get and keep the support, especially when setting it up."
"The pricing is reasonable. It's my understanding that the cost is about $7 for unlimited storage in the cloud per server."
"It used to be a good solution for SOHO in particular as it had unlimited storage for a reasonable price. However, their pricing model has changed and they are now primarily targeting enterprise users."
"They were the best solution and surprisingly enough, the cheapest."
"Licensing fees are based on the amount of data that you want to store, which is related to how many customers you want to cover."
"I don't think the licensing for the product is very expensive."
"Its price is okay. It is reasonable in terms of the way it works."
"I'm not aware of the exact cost of Quest Rapid Recovery because I'm from the technical team, but in general, the solution is quite competitive cost-wise."
"It is a little expensive. However, I haven't compared it to other solutions. Being a nonprofit, it is always good to have nonprofit discounts on products."
"It's very expensive which is why I want to drop it. They charge us per core and we have a six-core server. It's expensive to pay for maintenance charges. I want to switch to something cheaper."
"I believe the basic license comes with six terabytes, whereas a lot of the other ones are four terabytes. From the price point, it seemed a lot better than the comparative models, such as Datto, Barracuda, and some of the others. I believe Barracuda was about $15,000 for four terabytes, and Quest was around $12,000 for six terabytes. Pricing is based on the period. There is just the maintenance fee that you have to pay annually, or you can pay for a three-year or four-year contract. This includes Premier Support."
"When I purchased the change to the license, it was $1,600. I think that was for changing the license. I don't believe that I had to purchase technical support in a while, so I must've bought maybe for five years, but I don't feel there was a huge cost involved in technical support. Its cost was definitely worth it because we've had a fantastic experience with them."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Data Loss Prevention (DLP) solutions are best for your needs.
858,038 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
7%
University
6%
Computer Software Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Real Estate/Law Firm
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What is your primary use case for Code42 Incydr?
Data Leakage Protection on large scale environments. This can be to protect against leakage on endpoints and servers that consist of highly classified or propriety information. It can be added on a...
What do you like most about Quest Rapid Recovery?
The most valuable feature of Quest Rapid Recovery for our organization is the VM recovery functionality.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Quest Rapid Recovery?
Dell solutions are approximately 30% to 35% more expensive than Veeam.
 

Also Known As

Code42 Next-Gen DLP, Code42 Next-Gen Data Loss Protection, Code42 Forensic File Search, Code42 Backup + Restore
Dell AppAssure
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Adobe, Okta, Samsung, Taylormade, Boston University, Lending Club, North Highland, Stanford University, Ping Identity, Qualcomm, Pandora.
PRIME aerostructures GmbH, Tamworth Regional Council, Rhondda Housing Association, Stadtwerke Pforzheim GmbH & Co., Guangdong Aiyingdao Childrens Department Store, Nspyre, Tarrant Technology Partners, CloudRunner
Find out what your peers are saying about Mimecast Incydr vs. Quest Rapid Recovery and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
858,038 professionals have used our research since 2012.