We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"The time navigation 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."
"Just knowing that the data is easily recoverable is our ROI. It definitely lowers risk."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"They are working on the improvement we're looking for. The web GUI is flash-based and in around one or two months, they will put everything on HTML5."
"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."
"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."
"When you do a full backup, all of the memory resources on the server are used, which is something that should be improved."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"Its price is okay. It is reasonable in terms of the way it works."
Earn 20 points
Tina (Atempo Time Navigator) transforms backup by focusing on what matters – data recovery and restoration. Whatever the platform - physical or virtual- whatever the OS, the restoration is always based on three simple concepts:
Atempo Time Navigator is ranked 36th in Backup and Recovery Software with 1 review while Quest Rapid Recovery is ranked 17th in Backup and Recovery Software with 9 reviews. Atempo Time Navigator is rated 9.0, while Quest Rapid Recovery is rated 9.2. The top reviewer of Atempo Time Navigator writes "Offers good time navigation features and we haven't had stability problems in the twelve years we've been using it". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Quest Rapid Recovery writes "Reduced our admin time by approximately 95%, paid for itself over and over, and doesn't require a whole lot of administration". Atempo Time Navigator is most compared with Veritas NetBackup and Veeam Agent for Linux, whereas Quest Rapid Recovery is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Rubrik, Acronis Backup, Zerto and Veritas NetBackup.
See our list of best Backup and Recovery Software vendors.
We monitor all Backup and Recovery Software 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.