We performed a comparison between Dell ProtectPoint [EOL] and Quest Rapid Recovery based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Veeam Software, Zerto, Commvault and others in Backup and Recovery."The speed and the ease of the initial setup are both good. It is not complex."
"One of the features I find most valuable, is the good technical support."
"Built-in encryption helps to secure our data as it travels from our on-site server to our off-site backup server."
"It is very easy to use and very easy to manage. The fact that I can easily recover data is valuable. I don't use it much. The only way I have been using it is that sometimes, people ask to recover the data, which is a very easy process. It takes only a few minutes to get in and get the data from the server."
"The solution's most valuable aspect is its ability to back up a physical server to another physical or virtual server."
"The fact that it can take a snapshot of everything on a server and replicate it on another server in real-time is the most valuable feature."
"The solution offers a 100% guarantee that if it's backed up you will be able to restore it onto any platform you want."
"The most valuable feature of Quest Rapid Recovery for our organization is the VM recovery functionality."
"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."
"The product has to be more mature, like to be another six to eight months on the market. A lot of maturity needs to be incorporated."
"The interface and documentation need to improve."
"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."
"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."
"When you do a full backup, all of the memory resources on the server are used, which is something that should be improved."
"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."
"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."
"Sometimes, when we have certain batches for Windows, it needs to be restarted. When it's restarted, the service is configured as a delayed start. Sometimes, you need to wait too long until it rights itself, or you have to do it manually."
"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."
Earn 20 points
Dell ProtectPoint [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Backup and Recovery while Quest Rapid Recovery is ranked 24th in Backup and Recovery with 18 reviews. Dell ProtectPoint [EOL] is rated 7.6, while Quest Rapid Recovery is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Dell ProtectPoint [EOL] writes "Speedy and easy setup but it needs to mature ". 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". Dell ProtectPoint [EOL] is most compared with , whereas Quest Rapid Recovery is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Quest NetVault, Azure Backup, Dell PowerProtect DD (Data Domain) and Rubrik.
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.