We performed a comparison between MSP360 Backup 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."MSP360 Backup's most valuable feature is its backup interface."
"Technical support is very good."
"The solution is simple to use and easy to configure."
"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."
"Block level transfers have significantly reduced the amount of time for transfers over some other solutions"
"The best feature is that it's very user-friendly to do scheduled backups and version maintenance."
"The solution is easy to access and handles things efficiently."
"General ease of use and performance of the Windows version is the most valuable feature."
"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."
"The best feature of the solution is the user interface."
"Just knowing that the data is easily recoverable is our ROI. It definitely lowers risk."
"The most valuable feature of Quest Rapid Recovery for our organization is the VM recovery functionality."
"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."
"The most valuable feature is the disaster recovery process from the data center."
"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."
"Built-in encryption helps to secure our data as it travels from our on-site server to our off-site backup server."
"The restore time could improve. When we had an issue the restore time was lengthy."
"We could basically use just a more concise visual dashboard reporting on the status of the various machines."
"There are some things that we don't like about it. That is why I was exploring alternatives in a hyper-scale environment. That is why I was checking IT Central Station."
"The solution's pricing is very high."
"The graphics are looking a bit old and should be updated."
"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."
"Maybe implement an easier interface for basic users. For example, a set-up wizard with all the commonly used features as default."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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 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."
"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."
"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."
"Rapid Recovery can only backup the machine or disc, but it can't back up from folders, and files, and things like that."
MSP360 Backup is ranked 43rd in Backup and Recovery with 15 reviews while Quest Rapid Recovery is ranked 24th in Backup and Recovery with 18 reviews. MSP360 Backup is rated 8.0, while Quest Rapid Recovery is rated 8.8. 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 Rapid Recovery writes "Allows us to do point-in-time recovery and mount the whole server and saves quite a bit of time". MSP360 Backup is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, N-able Cove Data Protection, Acronis Cyber Protect, NinjaOne and Comet Backup, whereas Quest Rapid Recovery is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Quest NetVault, Dell PowerProtect DD (Data Domain), Azure Backup and Rubrik. See our MSP360 Backup 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.