We performed a comparison between NAKIVO Backup & Replication 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 features that I have found most valuable are that it is a cheaper price and user-friendly."
"This enables us to do quick granular file recovery as and when required but also to do whole-site relocation in the case of a total loss scenario."
"This product has a very clean and intuitive GUI."
"The product license and support delivery have been great!"
"The implementation of Nakivo made it possible to implement the information security policies currently in force in the company and to meet the statutory requirements in the field of IT security."
"It is easy to set up using the included virtual appliance and also includes agents for most NAS systems."
"Perfect for someone who doesn't want to waste time."
"Nakivo gives users confidence in knowing that if something happens with their application server, exchange server, or other applications, they can recover it easily and quickly."
"The most valuable feature is the disaster recovery process from the data center."
"The compression and deduplication features have helped to save on storage costs."
"The solution offers a 100% guarantee that if it's backed up you will be able to restore it onto any platform you want."
"The solution's most valuable aspect is its ability to back up a physical server to another physical or virtual server."
"The best feature of the solution is the user interface."
"One feature I found that's the most valuable in Quest Rapid Recovery is the VM standby feature which is very useful for my current customer. The solution also has a great replication feature. The third most valuable feature in Quest Rapid Recovery is the five-minute RPO and the fifteen-minute RTO. The solution is also very user-friendly."
"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."
"Built-in encryption helps to secure our data as it travels from our on-site server to our off-site backup server."
"An improvement would be to include a general data backup solution that is not only for virtual machines."
"I would like to have a built-in SNMP client, which is important if we want to monitor it using Zabbix, Nagios, or another monitoring solution."
"It would be great if they had a Let's Encrypt integration."
"Sometimes, for some VMs and some Windows Server versions, specifically old versions (aka server 12 or older) fail due to the VSS writer error or locking file system."
"While the solution provides mostly what we need, it would be ideal if there were some additional feature capabilities for the API."
"Log and report creation can be improved."
"I would love to see compatibility with KVM Backup."
"I would like to see some additional models in the next release to make backups more functional."
"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."
"One area where Quest Rapid Recovery has room for improvement is in the handling of snapshots on Hyper-V."
"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."
"It's buggy. That's a big problem. We're arranging to get rid of it. We're going to switch to Veeam."
"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 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."
"Sometimes, when we have certain batches for Windows, it needs to be restarted. When it's restarted, the service is configured as a delayed start. Sometimes, you need to wait too long until it rights itself, or you have to do it manually."
"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."
NAKIVO Backup & Replication is ranked 6th in Backup and Recovery with 84 reviews while Quest Rapid Recovery is ranked 26th in Backup and Recovery with 18 reviews. NAKIVO Backup & Replication is rated 9.4, while Quest Rapid Recovery is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of NAKIVO Backup & Replication writes "Good deduplication, easy to configure, and offers a free version". 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". NAKIVO Backup & Replication is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Hornetsecurity Altaro VM Backup, Acronis Cyber Protect, Rubrik and Zerto, whereas Quest Rapid Recovery is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Quest NetVault, Azure Backup, Dell PowerProtect DD (Data Domain) and Rubrik. See our NAKIVO Backup & Replication 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.
