We performed a comparison between Cohesity DataProtect 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."One of the most valuable features is the restore functionality that they offer."
"It's completely reliable and easy to restore."
"Converged system. It makes much more sense to have the backup server running on the same hardware as the storage for backup and recovery."
"The four independent node cluster architecture is redundant. It maintains data integrity and load balancing."
"The ease of use and the GUI have really been most valuable to us. Configuring the system to do what we need is simple and straight forward and a lot of guesswork has been removed. One of my favorite features with Cohesity is Kroll for Exchange item-level recovery. The software is simple to use and fast."
"Cohesity customer service is the best that I have ever used. They are extremely fast in responding to cases, fixed all issues, and answered every question in a very timely manner."
"Cohesity is a cost-effective storage designed for secondary or archival data. It also integrates well with a number of other systems, like VMware, Pure Storage, or AWS with its large array of APIs available to the user."
"The dashboard is very easy to use."
"The solution's most valuable aspect is its ability to back up a physical server to another physical or virtual server."
"The most valuable feature of Quest Rapid Recovery for our organization is the VM recovery functionality."
"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."
"Just knowing that the data is easily recoverable is our ROI. It definitely lowers risk."
"The most valuable feature is the disaster recovery process from the data center."
"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."
"Built-in encryption helps to secure our data as it travels from our on-site server to our off-site backup server."
"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."
"We would love to see direct compatibility with HPE Simplivity, which we also leverage."
"Better support for legacy platforms would be nice, but we should be moving off those anyway."
"The one area where we would like to see additional improvements is with reporting. There are very granular reports from each grid. There are also some built-in reports within Helios (SAS Management Console) that offers basic reporting. However, for complex, large-enterprise environments, a more robust reporting engine that supports detailed audit reporting and enhanced ad hoc reports would be welcome."
"The platform has certain limitations, mostly stemming from the restrictions imposed by the VMware API and some other factors. One area where there is room for improvement is the tracking of replicated copies, especially in the context of remote archive duplication."
"The rack mounting instructions did not appear to be correct, but we were able to overcome it."
"In terms of what could be improved, it just needs some maturity."
"If someone were to change an admin account password, I would like an alert raised for that, which is not available at the moment."
"The support team could do a better job. Sometimes finding the correct person is cumbersome and time consuming."
"One area where Quest Rapid Recovery has room for improvement is in the handling of snapshots on Hyper-V."
"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."
"When you do a full backup, all of the memory resources on the server are used, which is something that should be improved."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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."
Cohesity DataProtect is ranked 9th in Backup and Recovery with 67 reviews while Quest Rapid Recovery is ranked 24th in Backup and Recovery with 18 reviews. Cohesity DataProtect is rated 9.0, while Quest Rapid Recovery is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Cohesity DataProtect writes "Easy to use, offers good scalability and responsive 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". Cohesity DataProtect is most compared with Rubrik, Veeam Backup & Replication, Commvault Cloud, Dell PowerProtect DD (Data Domain) and Veritas NetBackup, whereas Quest Rapid Recovery is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Quest NetVault, Azure Backup, Dell PowerProtect DD (Data Domain) and Rubrik. See our Cohesity DataProtect 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.