We performed a comparison between MSP360 Backup and Quest NetVault 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."Provides connectivity to a lot of different cloud storage solutions."
"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."
"General ease of use and performance of the Windows version is the most valuable feature."
"It has allowed me to implement a cost effective, highly configurable solution."
"Technical support is very good."
"Block level transfers have significantly reduced the amount of time for transfers over some other solutions"
"The most valuable feature for me is that I can see what has has been successfully backed up and what not. I do not mean the file or folder view, because that's problematic with GDPR, but I mean which machines have successfully backed up. It's very valuable because you don't have to check the machines. The second feature is that you can change backup settings in the portal."
"The best feature is that it's very user-friendly to do scheduled backups and version maintenance."
"The solution allows us to block off our network and only give access to whatever we want."
"The user interface is good."
"The platform helps us with efficient QoreStor deduplication (DD) capabilities and configuration."
"If a job is pending, the solution communicates it to us through emails."
"Its dashboard is quite well done. When you log into the GUI, you can basically see everything you need to know. There is also the possibility to edit the view as you like, which is great."
"It has File and SQL backup, which is the main benefit for us."
"The initial setup is straightforward. It's not that complicated. Deployment took maybe about 15 minutes."
"Having the web-based interface is important to us because we can access it from any computer in the network, rather than having it installed and available for use only on a specific one."
"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."
"We could basically use just a more concise visual dashboard reporting on the status of the various machines."
"Using the solution incurs additional charges for the device storage and backup which are not included in the service."
"The initial setup is a little complex as it has to be done in the office and requires someone to come in and install the solution on your server, then configure the scheduling, backup pushing, and so on."
"The main improvement is that it should have GDPR compliance. That's the problematic point. They say they are GDPR compliant, but they are not."
"They can add some production backup capabilities and the ability to do single instance back up. At the moment, it doesn't do deduplication on the standard backup. So, the issue is backing up PSG files for customers who have limited bandwidth. The other issue is that I don't like the implementation of the SQL backup. We do use SQL ourselves using a PowerShell script with the VDA tools as a module. That's how we back up. The rotation feature would be nice to have, but I know that they've got it on their dashboard or on their list to look at. They can also do a few tweaks to the dashboard. I would like the reporting capabilities on the portal to be much more granular. Normally, I export it to a text file, and then I run it through a pivot table in order to look at it from a cost-recovery point of view and to see when the backup last ran and if it was successful when it ran two or three days ago. Such a feature would work really well for my market. They can also add a cost-effective backup for Android and Apple cellphones. I've had one or two customers who were looking for this feature. I haven't found this functionality at the moment. I've been looking for a product that does that."
"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 graphics are looking a bit old and should be updated."
"The stability of the solution is poor."
"The initial setup is a little complex."
"The storage capacity is very low."
"I would like to see the option of cloud-based management."
"There are certain issues with the product that we report to Quest, and we get offered a workaround instead of a fix. There could be better interaction with the development teams, perhaps in terms of transparency."
"In the next version, I would like to see support for the MongoDB database. As it is now, there is no component that works with it and we cannot back the data up using NetVault."
"The product’s SQL backup plugin needs improvement."
"The interface can be improved. It should be more clear what features are available and make them easy to find."
MSP360 Backup is ranked 44th in Backup and Recovery with 15 reviews while Quest NetVault is ranked 45th in Backup and Recovery with 10 reviews. MSP360 Backup is rated 8.0, while Quest NetVault is rated 7.2. 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 NetVault writes "Easy to use, stable, affordable pricing model, and good technical support". MSP360 Backup is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, N-able Cove Data Protection, Acronis Cyber Protect, NinjaOne and Axcient x360Cloud, whereas Quest NetVault is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Quest Rapid Recovery, Veritas NetBackup, Commvault Cloud and INFINIDAT InfiniGuard. See our MSP360 Backup vs. Quest NetVault 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.
