We performed a comparison between N-able Cove Data Protection and Quorum OnQ 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."It's their cloud, it's their storage. I don't have to buy a space on Amazon or Google's cloud and then use their software to push it. That works well for me. This way, I don't have to worry about another option or the opportunity that there might be a credential leak."
"The initial setup of N-able Cove Data Protection was very easy."
"For starters, this is one of few databases that allow us to backup MySQL databases, most others only support Microsoft SQL. This solution also has a very user-friendly interface accessed through a web browser. Additionally, backups can be easily configured through N-able Backup."
"Because the package includes cloud storage, we don't need to worry about hosting it inside. That was very important to us. And because the vendor has data centers worldwide, our reps in Europe and other places can get to what they need quickly and easily."
"The most valuable feature is that it's hands-off. I log in every morning and there are pre-canned filters that I've created to make my life easier. I have something called server status color bars, and that gives me all the servers and, in a nutshell, I can see: if any errors are being reported; when the last backup was; if one is not working, should there be one, and it literally jumps off the page."
"The most valuables feature is the alerts and monitoring that catches the failed backups."
"The monitoring makes it very easy to check whether a backup has gone bad."
"We use a neat feature called VDR status, Virtual Disaster Recovery status. It only works on servers... It's automated. Once or twice a month it will virtually mount the backup and provide a screenshot and advise whether or not there have been any errors."
"The most valuable feature is spinning up a ready-to-go VM in a test or production environment that is based on a backup stored on the Quorum device."
"One of the biggest features is that, even on the absolutely run-of-the-mill box, if I lose any one of my servers I can automatically bring it up virtually on the physical onQ Quorum device."
"I have used the BMR (Bare Metal Restore) in several emergencies and it has absolutely saved my bacon."
"The solution offers good documentation."
"Quorum OnQ has a good ransomware protection feature, and customer service and support were very good."
"One of the most valuable features was the usability, since many of the features were very straightforward. The backup and restoration process was also very fast. Although we weren't able to fully test the scenarios, one of the features was that we could have it restored on a remote site. However, since we were on-prem, we weren't able to test the remote site restoration."
"I like this product because it is easy to use."
"Quorum OnQ has taken the guesswork out of backup/recovery and disaster recovery."
"We don't use the solution’s automated recovery testing because SolarWinds made me cross. When they released it, I went, "Oh, well, that's quite good." Because if you use the system, then it supposedly spins up, and on the portal, it gives you a screenshot of the booted device. So, I phoned up, and I said, "Oh, that's really quite cool. How much is that?" They said, "No, no, no. It's all included in your license." I went, "Okay then," and went and deployed it on about half the fleet. One of the options that our customers have is they can pay us a small amount every month for us to test the recovery just to prove that it's viable, and I thought, "Well, this will do that for us. Nice." Then, in the next invoice, we got a charge for it. While It was not a huge amount, I took offense at the fact that we were told that it would be a no extra cost option that was part of our license, but it turns out that it's chargeable. Therefore, we haven't used it since."
"A feature I'd like to see would be a more customizable admin console."
"The only area that needs improvement is that it is a little bit difficult when you get into virtual machines. The initial deployment of Cove is a little tedious, not for standard machines, but when you get into specialty stuff, like Hyper-V."
"For the MSP side, they could have more of a "security user" that can go in and only see certain clients. If you give somebody access as a technician, they can see all the clients."
"The recovery side, the restore side, could be a little more optimized."
"A better default view on my dashboard would be great. There is a lot of useless information there that it pulls up. They could present the dashboard slightly better, in terms of the extra information after the first five columns. The first five columns are awesome. After that, I don't care about the rest, and there are another seven things after that."
"N-able Cove Data Protection for Microsoft 365 is an area with shortcomings that need improvement."
"The reporting feature and functionality need improvement. We would like to see a little bit more detailed reporting that offers more CEO or C-level focused reporting options."
"There seems to be a lack of technicians. Sometimes they are very busy and I don't hear back for a day or two. The technicians they have are great. They are fantastic, but it seems difficult, at times, to get in contact with anyone."
"The user interface needs to be improved."
"The one thing they could do is some tweaking on the web solution that's supposed to monitor everything from one page, rather than having to bring each server up on its own webpage. It doesn't always accurately show what the system's state is at the time, and we have to restart that process now and then."
"They need integration with other platforms."
"The price is high and could be more competitive."
"It feels to me like it's going to be a little bit more work than I originally anticipated when upgrading the appliance. I haven't done that yet so I can't speak from true experience, but I went through the project plan and it feels to me like there's quite a number of pieces and components and things that have to be done. Quorum is going to manage the rollout, but in starting the initial conversation there were a lot of unanswered questions"
"Better integration with cloud-based solutions like Azure and Office 365 is needed."
"The price of Quorum OnQ could be improved. We were exploring the product in terms of having a partnership with the distributor so that we could operate as a service, but for our own use, within the company, we couldn't justify the price unless the servers would become an option later on. The upfront cost of purchasing a license for the hardware is quite steep."
N-able Cove Data Protection is ranked 7th in Backup and Recovery with 20 reviews while Quorum OnQ is ranked 40th in Backup and Recovery with 21 reviews. N-able Cove Data Protection is rated 9.2, while Quorum OnQ is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of N-able Cove Data Protection writes "Provides feature flexibility and modularity for our customers". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Quorum OnQ writes "Took us just hours to do a complete server restore, with minimal downtime". N-able Cove Data Protection is most compared with Acronis Cyber Protect, Veeam Backup & Replication, Veeam Backup for Microsoft 365, Azure Backup and MSP360 Backup, whereas Quorum OnQ is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Cohesity DataProtect and Acronis Cyber Protect. See our N-able Cove Data Protection vs. Quorum OnQ report.
See our list of best Backup and Recovery vendors and best Cloud Backup 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.
