We performed a comparison between Carbonite Server 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."The Granular Restore of SQL feature has been a lifesaver more times than I can count. One of the main reasons for looking at Carbonite was their support for platforms like AIX and AS/400 Series."
"It seems reliable and easy to use."
"The solution is a free engine to help work with the container."
"I find the BMR/image and the recovery pieces are valuable."
"The efficiency and convenience are excellent."
"It does not slow down your computer or use a lot of resources as it works."
"The solution is very stable."
"Easy verification of things is the most valuable feature."
"The best feature of the solution is the user interface."
"The general backup for replication and virtual standby are the most valuable aspects. It does what it says it does. It's a decent tool for not a big budget."
"The compression and deduplication features have helped to save on storage costs."
"The most valuable feature is the disaster recovery process from the data center."
"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."
"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."
"Built-in encryption helps to secure our data as it travels from our on-site server to our off-site backup server."
"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."
"It could be a little bit easier or faster to be able to access data files without having to download anything."
"The Hyper-V backup has room for improvement."
"They do not yet have USB recovery but they are adding it in coming releases."
"The stability has room for improvement."
"The support for object storage isn't quite there yet. Its public cloud support can be improved. I would love to see the public cloud support for object storage, and it would be great, but what I always hear from the folks at Carbonite is that in a lot of cases, it directly competes with their cloud offering. So, I don't know when or where that will go or if that will go anywhere, but we are hopeful to see something. The dashboard is a little outdated. If they gave it a facelift and put some better design around their dashboard, that would be tremendous. I generally care less about the visual aesthetics of an application as long as it does what it needed to do, which is true in the case of this solution. We also have the Microsoft 365 platform. Because they're two separate platforms, I have to log in to my Microsoft platform to manage it, and I have to log into my Carbonite server backup platform to manage it. Having these two coexist together in one management console is really what we're looking for, but we went for it knowing this. We also knew that there would be some integration coming down the road. So, we're again hoping to see some of that coming in 2021."
"In the next release I would like to see an improvement in the auto failover option."
"The only thing that I would like to see improved is related to marketing. Currently, it is very difficult to find the right paper and stuff for me. Their marketing department should provide better information because currently, it is very difficult to find information on the internet. It was bought over by OpenText, and you won't be able to find a lot of information about this solution on their site. They should also provide training facilities for commercial purposes. Some of my colleagues recently went for pilot training, and they were technical. If I want to get trained, the training has to be more commercial. Currently, there is no such training for users like me."
"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."
"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."
"It's buggy. That's a big problem. We're arranging to get rid of it. We're going to switch to Veeam."
"One area where Quest Rapid Recovery has room for improvement is in the handling of snapshots on Hyper-V."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"There could be better space management for incremental data. When you use incremental data, the space in the appliance keeps on going up. There should be a better way to manage the space. You have to manage the incremental data to reduce the time."
Carbonite Server is ranked 35th in Backup and Recovery with 7 reviews while Quest Rapid Recovery is ranked 24th in Backup and Recovery with 18 reviews. Carbonite Server is rated 8.2, while Quest Rapid Recovery is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Carbonite Server writes "A simple, efficient, reliable product". 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". Carbonite Server is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Zerto, Oracle Data Guard, Azure Backup and Veeam Backup for Microsoft 365, whereas Quest Rapid Recovery is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Quest NetVault, Azure Backup, Dell PowerProtect DD (Data Domain) and Rubrik. See our Carbonite Server 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.
