OpenText Data Protector vs Quest Rapid Recovery [EOL] comparison

Why PeerSpot?

OpenText and Quest Software are both solutions in the Backup and Recovery category. Additionally, 80% of OpenText users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 90% of Quest Software users who would recommend it.

OpenText Data Protector

Read 102 OpenText Data Protector reviews

8,800 Views
8,096 Comparison Views

80% willing to recommend

Quest Rapid Recovery [EOL]

Read 20 Quest Rapid Recovery [EOL] reviews

90% willing to recommend

OpenText Data Protector

Quest Rapid Recovery [EOL]

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 26, 2025

OpenText Data Protector and Quest Rapid Recovery are in the backup and recovery solutions category. OpenText Data Protector seems to have the upper hand due to its comprehensive feature set and extensive integration capabilities.

Features: OpenText Data Protector is known for its extensive integration with systems like Oracle, Exchange, and Hyper-V. It features exceptional deduplication with StoreOnce and offers flexibility in disaster recovery. Quest Rapid Recovery stands out for its ease of use, excellent VM recovery, and swift restoration processes, making it effective for recovery tasks.

Room for Improvement: OpenText Data Protector needs enhancements in interface design and support, with improvements required in GUI usability and configuration complexity. Quest Rapid Recovery would benefit from expanding detailed backup options and addressing support limitations, particularly in database support.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OpenText Data Protector provides diverse deployment options like hybrid and cloud environments, although its support receives mixed reviews. Quest Rapid Recovery primarily focuses on on-premises deployment and is praised for higher-rated customer service and technical support due to prompt responses.

Pricing and ROI: OpenText Data Protector is recognized for its higher upfront costs and complex licensing models, offering a good ROI for those needing its advanced features. Quest Rapid Recovery offers more cost-effective solutions for basic setups, appealing to organizations seeking efficient protection with straightforward ROI.

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

Buyer's Guide

Backup and Recovery

October 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 920,929 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

OpenText Data Protector

Average Rating

7.6

Reviews Sentiment

5.8

Number of Reviews

102

Ranking in other categories

Backup and Recovery (47th)

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

Ahmad-Hassan

Project Manager And Technical Consultant at EEMC

Provides effective backup for physical servers and needs improvements for cloud compatibility

We use OpenText Data Protector for Oracle database backup and some applications that run for database security OpenText Data Protector is good for physical backup, specifically for physical servers. It is effective for direct backups to EMC library or storage without using a repository. However,…

Read full review

Ujwal Sawant

Technical Manager at Optimistic Technology Solutions Pvt Ltd

Reliable and efficient for our data backup needs

I would rate the easiness of the initial setup as an eight out of ten. During our initial setup of Quest Rapid Recovery, we encountered some smaller issues, mainly related to version compatibility and system changes. Setting up Quest Rapid Recovery was quick and done within a day. We started by ensuring the required prerequisites were in place. One server was dedicated to Rapid Recovery, and another acted as a proxy for communication. After installing the Rapid Recovery client on both servers and establishing communication, we configured settings and set up a backup schedule, deciding on file-level or full backups as needed. The process was straightforward, making the deployment efficient and completed within a day. One person with the right skills is all it takes for the deployment.

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

"Data Protector allows us to improve our SLA in successful backups and the reporting tools integrated with our management console make possible 99% backup success in our clients."

"The most valuable feature is the capability to back up our SQL server."

"Integration with HP storage is a very strong point for Micro Focus Data Protector. It is the best solution for general operations like backup and restore. Zero downtime backup (ZDB) is one very important feature, which is basically the integration with the storage array. It is a very strong feature. We're using storage with snapshots with this integration."

"Data Protector's granular recovery features make it easy for us to create and restore backups in an understandable and user-friendly manner. With granular recovery, any database or even just a database table can be restored at will."

"The feature that was most valuable was that we could restore one mailbox and we could do different backups for different databases."

"The ability to run multiple jobs to multiple devices and systems is the best part of this system."

"It is our enterprise backup solution centralizing all backup needs."

"The dashboards in Micro Focus Data Protector are very good. They are similar to the dashboards in Veeam Backup & Replication."

More OpenText Data Protector 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."

"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 data protection strategy varies on a case-by-case basis, but overall, it's doing well."

"Built-in encryption helps to secure our data as it travels from our on-site server to our off-site backup server."

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

"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."

"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."

"It is pretty simple to set up and use, the ease of use has reduced the administration time involved in our backup and recovery operations, and I can sleep easily at night knowing that I've got one of the best solutions in place for the school."

More Quest Rapid Recovery [EOL] pros

Cons

"I rate Micro Focus Data Protector six out of 10 overall. I would recommend something besides Data Protector."

"The new backup systems are using new mechanisms for the recovery phases; for example, VM, recovery and testing the backup before recovering it. These features are not available in Data Protector."

"We're not satisfied with the robustness and stability of the software since Micro Focus took it in-house. The GUI is one thing they could improve. It's still a bit archaic. Data Protector needs a more functional, user-friendly GUI."

"Unfortunately, Data Protector is not exactly the tool for that task."

"Technical support is very poor and I would rate it as 1/10. The response from L1 is very slow and there is no handover when the engineer finishes the shift."

"Micro Focus Data Protector must improve its overall evolution record. They need to focus on hardware based instant recovery, client recovery, and cloud ability. Now there is no cloud ability."

"It works with virtual machines, but it's way too complex right now."

"Technical support has not been good recently and in several cases, I have found the solution myself."

More OpenText Data Protector cons

"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."

"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."

"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."

"GUI response time has a LOT of lag, although in all fairness it might be due to us running more clients than we should on the server."

"It is expensive. If you do not need physical backups, it is expensive for basic virtual backups."

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

"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."

More Quest Rapid Recovery [EOL] cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Data Protector's pricing is very competitive and we have no issues in this regard. I would give it an eight out of ten in terms of pricing."

"The pricing is acceptable for enterprise level companies, but it's not acceptable for small- and medium-sized businesses. Micro Focus Data Protector is not an enterprise level solution, and it should cover small- and medium-sized businesses with acceptable prices."

"The license for the solution is very expensive compared to the other products in the market."

"It is more affordable compared to other vendors."

"Pricing for Micro Focus Data Protector is reasonable."

"It is fast, reliable, and its licensing policy is great."

"Our licensing is on a capacity basis."

"The product is cheaper than Commvault."

More OpenText Data Protector pricing and cost advice

"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 don't think the licensing for the product is very expensive."

"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."

"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."

"The pricing is on the higher end."

"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."

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

920,929 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

18%

Outsourcing Company

13%

Construction Company

Manufacturing Company

Outsourcing Company

16%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Comms Service Provider

Performing Arts

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	28
Midsize Enterprise	22
Large Enterprise	61

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 Micro Focus Data Protector?

The solution is expensive as it requires purchasing all features without the option to negotiate based on client numbers, unlike Veeam which offers flexibility in pricing.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Micro Focus Data Protector?

OpenText Data Protector is not user-friendly, especially for cloud backup. It lacks functions and facilities compared to Veeam, which offers more user-friendliness for virtual machine backups. Ther...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Micro Focus Data Protector?

We use OpenText Data Protector ( /products/opentext-data-protector-reviews ) for Oracle database backup and some applications that run for database security.

See all answers

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

Veritas NetBackup vs OpenText Data Protector

Compared 7% of the time

Microsoft DPM vs OpenText Data Protector

Compared 7% of the time

Veritas Backup Exec vs OpenText Data Protector

Compared 6% of the time

Veeam Data Platform vs OpenText Data Protector

Compared 6% of the time

Commvault Cloud vs OpenText Data Protector

Compared 4% of the time

More OpenText Data Protector Competitors

NAKIVO Backup & Replication vs Quest Rapid Recovery [EOL]

Compared 6% of the time

NetVault Plus vs Quest Rapid Recovery [EOL]

Compared 5% of the time

Rubrik vs Quest Rapid Recovery [EOL]

Compared 5% of the time

Veeam Data Platform vs Quest Rapid Recovery [EOL]

Compared 5% of the time

Iron Mountain Connect vs Quest Rapid Recovery [EOL]

Compared 4% of the time

More Quest Rapid Recovery [EOL] Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Data Protector

October 2026

Download OpenText Data Protector product report

Buyer's Guide

Quest Rapid Recovery [EOL]

October 2026

Download Quest Rapid Recovery [EOL] product report

Also Known As

Micro Focus Data Protector, Data Protector, OmniBack, HPE Data Protector

Dell AppAssure

Overview

OpenText Data Protector offers robust integration with systems like SQL, Oracle, VMware, and Exchange, boasting strong backup and recovery solutions across multiple environments, despite some areas needing improvement such as user-friendliness and GUI design.

OpenText Data Protector provides comprehensive data protection for servers, Linux systems, and applications including Oracle and Microsoft, alongside centralized storage management. It supports virtual, cloud, and on-premises environments, focusing on Oracle database security, HANA, and NAS appliances via NDMP. Despite its benefits, users encounter frequent errors with virtual environment backups, especially with VMware, and find the GUI outdated. Documentation needs improvement for troubleshooting, and support services face criticism for delayed responses. The licensing structure lacks flexibility, and while it supports efficient deduplication and scheduling, reporting capabilities often lead users to rely on external tools.

What are the key features of OpenText Data Protector?

Seamless Integration: Supports SQL, Oracle, VMware, and Exchange for smooth data management.
Centralized Management: Single interface for managing complex environments with ease.
Disaster Recovery: Offers robust recovery capabilities with automated scheduling.
Diverse OS Support: Accommodates numerous operating systems, enhancing flexibility.
Detailed Reporting: Generates reports for informed decision-making and strategy improvements.

What benefits should users look for in reviews?

Reliable Backup: Ensures data integrity and availability across platforms.
Flexibility: Adapts to changing environments and diverse IT landscapes.
Cost Efficiency: Streamlines processes to maximize ROI despite licensing costs.
Integration Quality: Works well with existing systems, reducing transition challenges.

OpenText Data Protector finds application in sectors requiring robust data protection, such as finance and healthcare, securing data in compliance-sensitive environments. Industries rely on it for protecting Oracle databases and ensuring data retention and recovery in both short- and long-term scenarios.

OpenText

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

GSK Vaccines, Repsol, Vodafone Group, Siemens AG, Medium Enterprise Transportation Services Company

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, Dell Technologies and others in Backup and Recovery. Updated: October 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

920,929 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.