We performed a comparison between MSP360 Backup and Quest Rapid Recovery based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Backup and Recovery solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The feature that I have found most valuable is its online backup capacity because you don't have to do an entire backup again and again, it just does whatever you type in, you type a, it goes a, you type b, it goes b. It doesn't take an entire site up again and again. So that incremental and bit by bit backup is important, it is a nice feature here."
"The UI is pretty good. It's very simple. That is one thing that we like about this. It's very user-friendly."
"The best feature is that it's very user-friendly to do scheduled backups and version maintenance."
"One massive advantage of this solution, as compared to more enterprise products, is that no firewall changes are needed on the client's premises. For the product to back up from the client's premise to the cloud, it just needs port 8 and port 443, which are anyway always open. This was one of the things that made us decide to go with the product. It is very difficult to justify a firewall change for a small client who doesn't even know what a firewall is and how to maintain a firewall, or doesn't have anybody maintaining their firewall. You then have to maintain the firewall. MSP360 Backup takes away firewall change requirements, VPNs, or channels that are needed for the backup."
"The initial setup is very easy. It's not overly complex."
"The solution is simple to use and easy to configure."
"I was mainly concerned with cloud backups, OneDrive backups, consumer OneDrive, business OneDrive, Google backups, and SharePoint backups. The solution did a good job of the backup."
"Block level transfers have significantly reduced the amount of time for transfers over some other solutions"
"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."
"The most valuable feature is the disaster recovery process from the data center."
"The most valuable feature of Quest Rapid Recovery for our organization is the VM recovery functionality."
"The best feature of the solution is the user interface."
"The compression and deduplication features have helped to save on storage costs."
"Just knowing that the data is easily recoverable is our ROI. It definitely lowers risk."
"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."
"Using the solution incurs additional charges for the device storage and backup which are not included in the service."
"There are some things that we don't like about it. That is why I was exploring alternatives in a hyper-scale environment. That is why I was checking IT Central Station."
"The interface feels like it is targeted for end users who typically are looking for an all-in-one integrated push button solution. It would be better if the interface had a beginner mode and an expert mode."
"The restore time could improve. When we had an issue the restore time was lengthy."
"As for what can be improved, some reports could be simplified so that you know how much backup you have done and what your backup details are. That report is available but it is very tough to get. I would like to know "today I have just uploaded 35 MB, tomorrow I have loaded 10 MB so my trend of backup is increasing.""
"We could basically use just a more concise visual dashboard reporting on the status of the various machines."
"The solution needs a better graphical user interface. It's a graphical user interface that is very old-school right now. They could give it a little more modern feel."
"The Linux GUI leaves a lot to be desired. It lacks many of the features of the Windows version and is buggy, but it is still usable."
"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."
"One area where Quest Rapid Recovery has room for improvement is in the handling of snapshots on Hyper-V."
"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."
"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 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."
"Rapid Recovery can only backup the machine or disc, but it can't back up from folders, and files, and things like that."
"For the most part, it is really good in terms of flexibility and choice of recovery methods. What we found lacking was being able to back up virtual volumes that are clustered. We ran out of luck there. There should be an option for backing up clustered virtual volumes."
"In terms of what needs improvement in Quest Rapid Recovery, though the solution is seamless, right now, they are just giving the software which means we'll need to arrange the hardware. If they can combine the appliance and software, that would be a great approach. In the next release of Quest Rapid Recovery, it would be great if they'd add a folder backup feature because only a snapshot backup feature is available at the moment."
MSP360 Backup is ranked 44th in Backup and Recovery with 15 reviews while Quest Rapid Recovery is ranked 24th in Backup and Recovery with 18 reviews. MSP360 Backup is rated 8.0, while Quest Rapid Recovery is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of MSP360 Backup writes "The solution provides the ability to backup all types of cloud drives, is inexpensive, and has decent support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Quest Rapid Recovery writes "Allows us to do point-in-time recovery and mount the whole server and saves quite a bit of time". MSP360 Backup is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, N-able Cove Data Protection, Acronis Cyber Protect, NinjaOne and Comet Backup, whereas Quest Rapid Recovery is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Quest NetVault, Azure Backup, Dell PowerProtect DD (Data Domain) and Rubrik. See our MSP360 Backup vs. Quest Rapid Recovery report.
See our list of best Backup and Recovery vendors.
We monitor all Backup and Recovery 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.