NetApp SnapCenter vs Quest Rapid Recovery [EOL] comparison

NetApp and Quest Software are both solutions in the Backup and Recovery category. Additionally, 100% of NetApp users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 90% of Quest Software users who would recommend it.

NetApp SnapCenter

Read 28 NetApp SnapCenter reviews

1,622 Views
1,557 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Quest Rapid Recovery [EOL]

Read 20 Quest Rapid Recovery [EOL] reviews

90% willing to recommend

NetApp SnapCenter

Quest Rapid Recovery [EOL]

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 26, 2025

Quest Rapid Recovery and NetApp SnapCenter compete in the data backup and recovery category. Quest Rapid Recovery seems to have the upper hand due to its speed, reliability, and user-friendly interface, although NetApp SnapCenter offers robust integration and centralized management.

Features: Quest Rapid Recovery provides ease of use with its speed and reliability and excels in point-in-time recovery and push installs without needing agent software for VMs. NetApp SnapCenter offers centralized management, quick cloning for development testing, and robust integration with VMware and NetApp storage systems.

Room for Improvement: Quest Rapid Recovery needs to address GUI lag, limited support for older systems, and improve technical support response time, which often requires manual intervention for configuration backups. NetApp SnapCenter could enhance replication features, resource management, and integration with other backup solutions like Veeam. Granularity in resource grouping and better alerting functionality are also areas for improvement.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Quest Rapid Recovery is offered exclusively on-premises, known for helpful customer support but faces criticism over slow tech support responses due to time zone differences. NetApp SnapCenter is available on-premises and hybrid cloud with mixed reviews on customer service and technical support, pointing to efficiency and issue resolution as areas requiring enhancement.

Pricing and ROI: Quest Rapid Recovery is considered expensive, especially for physical backups, but users value it for its features like deduplication minimizing storage costs. NetApp SnapCenter is generally seen as cost-effective, often bundled with NetApp hardware, eliminating extra licensing fees. Both solutions offer strong ROI by ensuring data recoverability, thus reducing risk and additional storage expenses.

To learn more, read our detailed Backup and Recovery Report (Updated: January 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Backup and Recovery

January 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 881,227 peers since 2012

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

NetApp SnapCenter

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.5

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Backup and Recovery (44th)

Quest Rapid Recovery [EOL]

Average Rating

8.8

Reviews Sentiment

5.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Featured Reviews

SaneeshC

Sr. engineer at Sify Technologies

Has reduced backup time for large workloads and supports smooth workload migration

Role-based access control and multi-factor authentication are security features available in NetApp SnapCenter. The one-time password comes to our multi-factor authentication tool; we work with Cisco Duo, and that OTP is generated through that tool, which we use to access the device. There are different options through which we can migrate workloads without downtime. The user interface is very easy to handle and not complicated. There are multiple features that make NetApp SnapCenter valuable. In case of any job failure, we get an alert over email. For jobs replicating from site A to site B, we know how long it will take to complete that replication. All that information is available in the console, and there aren't any difficulties or objections that need to be improved.

Read full review

Adam Augustín

Country Manager at Prianto Ltd

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…

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I like the instant backups and recovery feature that SnapCenter provides within NetApp storage systems."

"You can quickly deploy new virtual environments. It provides efficient and easy-to-use data protection. If a file goes missing or corruption occurs, you can restore it swiftly using the snap restore feature, allowing you to return to work almost immediately."

"The simplicity of backup and restore directly with VMware is an advantage and the time to backup and restore is reduced."

"The backup features are the most valuable because they allow the DBAs to replace SnapManager for Oracle (SMO), which is going away, and to do cloning as well. We can also clone to different servers and have the actual backup clone mounted on different servers. And we can split easily too."

"It allows us to easily take a Snapshot and use it with any backup tools. We can also take Snapshots on the application side. We can also take Snapshots on the application side. If we want to restore an SAP or an Oracle machine, a normal Snapshot won't do it, but we can do so with SnapCenter."

"The support from NetApp is very good, and I would rate it as ten points."

"The Exchange plugin is the most valuable because we have a lot of customers that use SnapManager Exchange and have to migrate to SnapCenter."

"Most banks and financial institutions use the solution."

More NetApp SnapCenter pros

"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 solution's most valuable aspect is its ability to back up a physical server to another physical or virtual server."

"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 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 compression and deduplication features have helped to save on storage costs."

"It is more fully integrated with the hypervisor, particularly with VMware solution, and it is simple to create replica sets to our VR site."

"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."

More Quest Rapid Recovery [EOL] pros

Cons

"We have experience some difficulties with our current support. We are engaging in engineering level support because some of our problems are more technical."

"The Dashboard view needs to be more compressed with better ease of access and drill-down features. They should also reinstate Linux filesystem backups of storage volumes (which existed in the prior version)."

"The UI, the User Interface, needs to be improved. It's not as clean or modern as it could be."

"The DBAs are comparing it to SMO but it doesn't have a lot of the functionalities that SMO has."

"Groups might be helpful for each site or data center so that we know a given data center has these resources while another data center has those resources. It's not always easy to group hosts by type."

"I'm waiting for SnapCenter for hybrid solutions. Right now, we only have SnapManager for hybrid. I need agents for that. People are looking to install SnapCenter in a SQL environment, but where they're running SQL on Hyper-V and using virtual files. Currently, we don't have support for hybrid."

"I feel a little bit that during the whole process of putting this software into production we were like a beta program. It was full of bugs... For example, we had a problem with truncating our Exchange log files... It has improved over time."

"If it was possible to create backups on non-NetApp storage, that would be helpful."

More NetApp SnapCenter cons

"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."

"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."

"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."

"In case, if there is anything, it would be the speed of the operation to be finished. Even then, I can easily work on the storing function before the operation is finished."

"It's buggy. That's a big problem. We're arranging to get rid of it. We're going to switch to Veeam."

"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."

"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."

More Quest Rapid Recovery [EOL] cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We have a site license, so it comes with the product."

"It comes free with the amount of equipment we purchase from NetApp. In terms of pricing, zero is my favorite number."

"The product is inexpensive."

"The licensing is well-designed because it's already included in some packages with NetApp storage. Therefore, for most customers, it's okay as the SnapCenter license is already included in some NetApp bundles."

"It's free. The license is included with other NetApp products."

"The license for SnapCenter was included with the storage array."

"We see a financial value with SnapCenter because we don't have to license Commvault, which is pretty expensive."

"Pricing is very good because if you already have NepApp controllers, then it's included."

"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."

"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."

"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."

"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."

"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 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."

"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."

More Quest Rapid Recovery [EOL] pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Backup and Recovery solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

881,227 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Manufacturing Company

14%

Computer Software Company

10%

Financial Services Firm

Educational Organization

Manufacturing Company

12%

Performing Arts

11%

Non Profit

Computer Software Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	8
Midsize Enterprise	9
Large Enterprise	12

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	16
Midsize Enterprise	5
Large Enterprise	2

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for NetApp SnapCenter?

The product team handles the commercial aspects of pricing.

See all answers

What needs improvement with NetApp SnapCenter?

We have not started much with the automation capability in NetApp SnapCenter. Regarding the integration aspect, I am not certain about its complexity, as this was built by the OEM NetApp team.

See all answers

What is your primary use case for NetApp SnapCenter?

The major use case for NetApp SnapCenter is that our customer previously used Commvault. For huge VMs with sizes of five TB or 10 TB, taking the file level backup in Commvault took a long time, oft...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Quest Rapid Recovery?

Dell solutions are approximately 30% to 35% more expensive than Veeam.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Quest Rapid Recovery?

The product is expensive.

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Quest Rapid Recovery?

We have sold some of the products to our customers, mainly to remove competitors like Veeam and also other appliances that do not have the whole package integrated into just one appliance.

See all answers

Comparisons

Synology DSM vs NetApp SnapCenter

Compared 13% of the time

Veeam Data Platform vs NetApp SnapCenter

Compared 10% of the time

Commvault Cloud vs NetApp SnapCenter

Compared 8% of the time

Rubrik vs NetApp SnapCenter

Compared 8% of the time

Cohesity DataProtect vs NetApp SnapCenter

Compared 6% of the time

More NetApp SnapCenter Competitors

Veeam Data Platform vs Quest Rapid Recovery [EOL]

Compared 16% of the time

NetVault Plus vs Quest Rapid Recovery [EOL]

Compared 14% of the time

Acronis Cyber Protect vs Quest Rapid Recovery [EOL]

Compared 12% of the time

Commvault Cloud vs Quest Rapid Recovery [EOL]

Compared 12% of the time

Iron Mountain Connect vs Quest Rapid Recovery [EOL]

Compared 11% of the time

More Quest Rapid Recovery [EOL] Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

NetApp SnapCenter

January 2026

Download NetApp SnapCenter product report

Buyer's Guide

Quest Rapid Recovery [EOL]

January 2026

Download Quest Rapid Recovery [EOL] product report

Also Known As

SnapCenter

Dell AppAssure

Overview

Unified, scalable platform for application-consistent data protection and clone management. This software simplifies backup, restore, and clone lifecycle management with application-integrated workflows.

NetApp

Quest Rapid Recovery [EOL] provides easy-to-use backup and recovery capabilities, emphasizing granular recovery and point-in-time restoration with simple installation, data replication, and user-friendly navigation.

Quest Rapid Recovery [EOL] helps manage infrastructure environments with features supporting disk backup, archiving, VM standby, and replication. Despite limitations like sluggish GUI, lack of support for tape and Mac, and high memory use, users appreciate its real-time data replication and strong reliability. The tool is employed in on-prem deployments and aids in disaster recovery, protecting data across cloud and on-premise servers, securing databases, and facilitating quick recovery during failures.

What are Quest Rapid Recovery [EOL]'s key features?

Ease of Use: Simplifies operations with a user-friendly interface.
Granular Recovery: Allows detailed data retrieval.
Point-in-Time Restoration: Enables specific time data recovery.
Real-time Replication: Ensures up-to-date data replication.
Compression and Deduplication: Streamlines data management.

What benefits can users expect from Quest Rapid Recovery [EOL]?

Improved Storage Efficiency: Enhanced by archiving and disk backup support.
Flexibility: Utilizing VM standby and replication features.
Reliability: Offers fast emergency recovery with minimal admin burden.

Quest Rapid Recovery [EOL] is integral for industries requiring robust data protection, encompassing crucial server and database backups in compliance-focused environments with SQL databases and Hyper-V hosts, ensuring swift and dependable recovery solutions.

Quest Software

Sample Customers

All for One Steeb AG, Accenture

PRIME aerostructures GmbH, Tamworth Regional Council, Rhondda Housing Association, Stadtwerke Pforzheim GmbH & Co., Guangdong Aiyingdao Childrens Department Store, Nspyre, Tarrant Technology Partners, CloudRunner

Find out what your peers are saying about Veeam Software, Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Commvault and others in Backup and Recovery. Updated: January 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,227 professionals have used our research since 2012.

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.