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

"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."
"It has quite a bit of flexibility in configuring backup sets."
"Backup and recovery have been great, but I love having the ability to keep the hybrid type build which they offer."
"It required very little ongoing maintenance once setup."
"Code42 Next-Gen DLP is scalable."
"There are a couple of things. One of them is that they have what they call Incydr. Their detection and response solution to the insider threat area is called Incydr. That gives visibility to the clients that have widely dispersed employee bases due to work from home, or that had a dispersed workforce predating any of the work from home requirements. Even though they might not be inside the organization physically, they're inside the organization. It allows us to get some visibility into what people are doing, what the context is, and how to control what might be the potential for intellectual property theft or file exposure."
"Probably the point-in-time recovery is most valuable. The other piece that is really nice is that you can mount a whole server at any point in time. So, you can mount the server with all the drives to a Z drive or something like that. It will just mount it all up, and your data is accessible right there on one drive, which is nice."
"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 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."
"The data protection strategy varies on a case-by-case basis, but overall, it's doing well."
"The solution's most valuable aspect is its ability to back up a physical server to another physical or virtual server."
"The compression and deduplication features have helped to save on storage costs."
"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."
"Not having to switch tapes is wonderful. It makes it so easy. We have an on-prem deployment that we also replicate to an offsite replication host. So by not having to deal with tapes and moving them off-site every day and every week, that's amazing ease of use for us."
 

Cons

"Java, please get rid of Java."
"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."
"I think one we can improve is the compression."
"You can't always filter out data that you'd like to."
"More security would be nice, I would love to be able to remotely brick a stolen laptop and it's hard disk drive (HDD)."
"Reporting could use an overhaul. It is very limited."
"What I think could be improved is how I get support."
"There doesn't seem to be any feature that is lacking."
"There is room for improvement in customer service and support. I would like to see faster response time."
"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."
"I don't really think that there is a whole lot that needs to be changed. It would be nice if you could deploy the agent without having to reboot. When I upgraded my core to the latest version, I also wanted to update all of my servers, but I had to put that off because I can't just shoot it out there. I have to make sure it is at a time when I can do a reboot right away."
"When you do a full backup, all of the memory resources on the server are used, which is something that should be improved."
"The terminology didn't seem easily available. When I go to the website, it is hard to search for things. You get all the articles, then you finally get the search button. They need the search at the top of the knowledge base. Then, on occasion, if you get an error message in the system, which is very important, it says, "Click here for more information," but I never get more information. The search engine doesn't find it or it is some weird error. It has never worked for me."
"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."
"It's not really Quest's fault, but the only issue that I had during the time when I was doing a lot of our restores is whenever the server reboots, it has to bring all of the repositories back in again, which takes around five to six hours to pull eight terabytes back in again."
"It is quite surprising to me that the configuration cannot be backed up automatically, and I think that Rapid Recovery should have an option for scheduled configuration backup."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"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."
"The pricing is reasonable. It's my understanding that the cost is about $7 for unlimited storage in the cloud per server."
"It is 100% worth the cost to get and keep the support, especially when setting it up."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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."
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.