We just raised a $30M Series A: Read our story

Quorum OnQ OverviewUNIXBusinessApplication

Quorum OnQ is #5 ranked solution in top Cloud Backup tools, #5 ranked solution in top Disaster Recovery Software, and #7 ranked solution in best Backup and Recovery Software. IT Central Station users give Quorum OnQ an average rating of 10 out of 10. Quorum OnQ is most commonly compared to Veeam Backup & Replication:Quorum OnQ vs Veeam Backup & Replication. The top industry researching this solution are professionals from a computer software company, accounting for 31% of all views.
What is Quorum OnQ?

Quorum onQ is the global leader in 1-click instant recovery, providing full immediate recovery of your critical systems after any storage, system or site failure. It does this by automatically maintaining up-to-date, ready-to-run virtual machine clones of your physical and virtual servers stored on a dedicated appliance – clones that will transparently take over for failed servers within minutes.

Quorum OnQ is also known as OnQ.

Quorum OnQ Buyer's Guide

Download the Quorum OnQ Buyer's Guide including reviews and more. Updated: November 2021

Quorum OnQ Customers
LCL Bulk Transport
Quorum OnQ Video

Pricing Advice

What users are saying about Quorum OnQ pricing:
  • "The initial expenditure for us was a little under $40,000 for the recent renewal. For the first three years after that, other than electricity, there's no cost. After that, their support contract has to be renewed annually. We spent close to $6,000, between the two offices, for support."
  • "The pricing is about $1,400 a month. It's a little bit on the higher side. But it's one of those situations where time is valuable for me. So if it costs a little bit more money for me to have a solution that just works and requires less of my day-to-day management, I'm willing to pay a little bit more."

Quorum OnQ Reviews

Filter by:
Filter Reviews
Industry
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Company Size
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Job Level
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Rating
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Considered
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Order by:
Loading...
  • Date
  • Highest Rating
  • Lowest Rating
  • Review Length
Search:
Showingreviews based on the current filters. Reset all filters
KK
Director of IT at City of Gainesville Texas
Real User
Automatically spins up every one of the hosts after every backup and confirms the backup

Pros and Cons

  • "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 would really like it if they followed comparable products from other vendors and had an option where you could offload to tape. I know it sounds incredibly antiquated, but the benefit I see is that there would be a better air gap than you have with backing up to an online source."

What is our primary use case?

The main purpose is as a faster disaster recovery solution. The secondary use case is for quick, daily backups.

How has it helped my organization?

About two years ago, I had a Windows 2008 Server for the fire department on which two hard drives dies almost simultaneously. HPE was nice enough to send me a couple of new drives overnight, but it didn't help the situation because the server was dead. So I spun up that entire fire department server, which had SQL running on it and a couple of databases that are necessary for dispatching fire calls and getting the information out of our dispatch system for tracking, timing, etc. I was able to bring the server up in about five minutes. I left it up and running for about two weeks.

I didn't do the bare metal restore because it was a Windows 2008 Server that was scheduled to be replaced that year anyway. I just let it run for a while and when I got new hardware I built it up as a Windows 2012 Server, at the time. I was able to do it on my timeline, rather than being in a panic situation and having to get the server back up. The entire time, while it was running in this virtual host, it was also backing up at the same time. If necessary, I could have gone to any of my backups, which sounds weird — it's a backup of a machine that's running on a machine — but I could have gone to any of those backups. That was the only instance that I've had to rely on any of its features, above and beyond just restoring files when people mess up and delete something.

The case of somebody overwriting or deleting something by accident, where I have had to recover a file or data, happens more often than I would like to admit. I find myself having to restore a one-off file about once a month. It happens more around budget time. People take the stuff from last year that they think they made copies of and make them into blank documents for this year. Inadvertently, they're working on the wrong ones and I get to restore those. That seems to happen at least once or twice every budget year. 

Another scenario is that somebody comes to me and says, "This file was supposed to be in this directory. I either accidentally overwrote it or I accidentally deleted it a few weeks ago and I need it back." If they're really good about it, they'll tell me the name of a file or a directory, which gives me something to work with. Hopefully, they'll give me a rough time that they know it existed. I'll just start working through snapshots. I'll open up AD servers that have all of my file shares on them and I'll pick a date. I'll start with January first. If the file is not there I'll move to January second. I'll continue going through all of my snapshots so that I get them the absolute latest and greatest one that there is and which is still functional.

Another instance where I'm having to restore on a somewhat regular basis is when people leave, depending on the situation and why they left. They may not be doing it maliciously or they may be trying to either cover their own tracks or trying to make it difficult for the next person. They'll delete everything that they've got. I'll go into their Outlook and they've got three emails, but they've been here for four years. So I'll have to restore all of their mailbox from a few weeks prior to their putting in their request to leave, and start restoring files as well. That happens about twice a year where I have to go to that extreme.

There isn't a cut and dry process in that situation. When I get notification that somebody is leaving, I back up their email, for records retention. If I realize all their mail is gone, or it seems like there's stuff missing, I'll start restoring old stuff from the past and see what they got rid of. It makes the life of the person who will be following them in that job position about a million times easier if they've got some idea of the communications the previous person had or any notes or documents they had for that job.

I also benefit from the solution's deduplication, especially with their new software release, and how they're arranging the storage for the disaster of virtual machines. It is handled differently. It doubled the amount of space that's available for my backups. The deduplication helps, obviously, because I'm not having to back up the same caches over and over again.

What is most valuable?

By far, 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.

Another feature I really like about it is the fact that, after every backup, it automatically spins up every one of the hosts and confirms that it is actually a good backup and running. I know that if I ever have to rely on them, they are available for me. That is another of the biggest features. I've got 30 or so servers here and the vast majority are pretty critical for police, fire, water distribution, etc. I can't just pick and choose and say "Okay, I know I lost everything but let me just concentrate on this one," because, in reality, a lot of them are awfully important and really cannot be down for any length of time. That's why I really like the checking aspect of every backup, and I know that Windows will start up every time for me.

When it comes to recovering what you need from a backup, they've got a handful of different approaches for gaining access to the files. I can spin up the entire VM and go find the files, or I can go off a specific application at any one of my snapshot points in time. Or I can open them up as a Windows share, and drill out from there for everything, using Windows Explorer. Or, I could just say, "I just want you to list entire directories." There are many options, depending on what your needs are for recovering the files. It's on a needs basis. If somebody comes to me and says "Hey, I just need this one file," I'll go grab just the one file. If I'm restoring a handful of directories, it's natural for me to check the user and hit "restore," refer them back to the original location, and I'm good to go. There are multiple options available, which is nice.

I use the solution's automated testing functionality. It happens every time the backup runs. In my instance, I run backups twice a day, at noon and midnight. It tests automatically after every backup. I get an email notification every morning and I scroll through it and I look for how many good backups I had and, at the very bottom, how many successful tests it was able to do with the automated features. It's an incredibly important aspect of the solution. There are a lot of people out there who will run backups all day, blindly trusting that everything is working and that, if they have to restore they can do so or can spin it up in the cloud. If they never had it perform the task, or they do it so incredibly rarely that they only then realize "Oh crap, Windows won't even start," or "some applications within it don't start," they're now scrambling. Luckily, since I know that it's spinning them up automatically for me, I know at the very least that Windows is going to be coming up and give me a good starting spot. I find it to be an incredibly important feature. It definitely sets my mind at ease knowing that it's doing that after every backup.

What needs improvement?

I would really like it if they followed comparable products from other vendors and had an option where you could offload to tape. I know it sounds incredibly antiquated, but the benefit I see is that there would be a better air gap than you have with backing up to an online source.

For instance, if somebody were to get onto your network, whether it's this device or any other device, they could destroy your primary backup. And they could tell it to delete all those hosts off of the cloud, and it does so because, in the normal lifecycle of servers, you take servers on and offline all the time, so that functionality has to exist. That could leave you with a network with nothing, and no backups.

But if you were taking your Quorum, or your other disaster recovery device, and dropping it to tape every week or every month for long-term retention, while the malicious actor could still do the exact same process, it would be pretty tough for them to destroy the tapes that are in a safe that have been in there every week for the entire year. That is one feature that I think would add a layer of security. It's a feature that other vendors have, and one which would help set an IT person's mind at ease knowing that, while it is an old technology, the benefit is there and the availability is there.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using Quorum for about five years. The physical appliance is a 260 and the version of the software is their 5.0 platform.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

Quorum's physical appliance is pretty rock-solid. I've had no problems with it. 

I'm not sure if I could say how stable the company is because I don't know how large a company it is and what its market saturation is and how long it will be in the market. It's obviously not the market leader for this segment. I'm okay with that because I've already bought two of their appliances. But, as far as their appliance is concerned, even if they were to disappear today, I would have no problem continuing to run this solution for another few years, because of my comfort with it and how solid the physical product is.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

I'm not sure what the scalability is like. If I decided I need more drive space I don't know if there are any options for actually physically expanding that out.

For some reason, my city council thinks that I should be able to predict five years into the future. They asked me to try to predict what I'm going to need in five years. It's impossible to predict that far in advance. But I'm going to say at this point that I've got five more years of usage out of this solution. I built it up so that I could handle about a 30 percent increase over what I've got now.

I messed up the first time I did this. I chose that number but I didn't look at my own roadmap. I then realized that in three years I would be putting in a full-fledged document imaging solution. I ended up over-utilizing my space really quickly because of that one, unexpected, server. That resulted in my purchasing an updated appliance one year before I was planning on to, because I didn't plan appropriately.

How are customer service and technical support?

When I called in at the beginning, right when I was getting acclimated to the system, I'd always get the same guy, over and over again. The guy was brilliant. Then, about four years ago, it seems they decided to send it offsite. Nobody would pick up my call, and I had to go through my account manager to get anybody. The last couple of years, however, have been great. I'll call and, within a couple of hours, they're calling me back, as long as it's not an emergency situation. So, support has been good so far.

There was even one instance where we had a problem with something called Qfilter. They were calling me a couple of times a day to see how my backups were running, to see if we had improvements. I was working with the engineers to try to figure out why this thing wasn't working. They had no problem ramping me up the support chain pretty quickly, all the way up to the people who were basically in the back end and doing writing.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

Where I work right now, before this solution there was an old Symantec Backup Exec tape system. I came from the consulting industry prior to this, about five or six years ago, and I had set up numerous Barracuda backups, along with about three Unitrends appliances as well.

How was the initial setup?

I found the initial setup to be incredibly easy, compared to other backup solutions. It's as simple as giving it an IP address. It gives you the option to download the agent and you put the agent onto that server. You double click, you hit about three buttons, and instantly, the next thing it's saying is, "What's your retention time, and how often do you want to back up?" That was about it.

It's incredibly intuitive and straightforward. You're not running through hundreds of screens to get what you're after. There aren't hundreds of options out there that the typical user would ever even need to touch. That is by far one of the big reasons I've stuck with this solution, because it's so incredibly easy to use.

To get all 30 servers done it took me about two hours. It took me longer to get it out of the box and into the rack. I had already given them the IP information beforehand, so they had it pre-programmed. They said, "Plug these network cables into this specific VLAN, power it up, go to this website, and we'll call you at 2 o'clock on this day."

The training, from knowing absolutely nothing to being up and running, took about an hour-and-a-half. Then it took me, maybe, half an hour to an hour to get all the servers on.

Integrating the solution within our network was really easy. I gave them an idea of what the VLANs were for my servers, even before they shipped the appliance to me. They did the vast majority of the work before me. It came with a sheet of paper that said, "The first three interfaces need to be on VLAN one, the last interface needs to be on VLANs one and nine." I went into my network switch gear and I set tag ports for both of those specific devices, and I plugged it in. After that, I just made sure that I could see traffic on my network interfaces. It was a breeze.

What was our ROI?

Backups are kind of like insurance. It's tough for me to say whether I've seen any kind of return. Every time I've had to restore something, whether it's missing files or an Exchange mailbox, it has performed exactly how I hoped it would. When I lost the entire fire server, it performed exactly as I expected it to. In that sense, as far as the appliance is concerned, its sole purpose is to be your backup appliance and hold onto a retention. It has done exactly as I expected it to.

Like insurance, it's one of those things that you're bent out of shape that you're paying for it. Then all of sudden when you need it, it's the greatest thing on the planet.

I wouldn't say the solution lowered my capital expenditure by requiring less hardware. My solution prior to this was a tape drive. A tape drive typically attaches to a server. At the time it was attached to another server that I was already utilizing for Active Directory. So my expenditure for the tape solution was an auto changer and a whole pile of tapes. It wasn't a too terribly costly backup solution.

What I gained and by going to another appliance that was more full-featured, whether it be, say, a Quorum or a Unitrends or any other full boxes with the additional functionality, was peace of mind. I know I can bring these servers up quickly, and that they're being tested, and I'm getting backups multiple times a day. That offsets the change in cost because this is a full-featured box. You're buying a whole other server that has the software built into it. Overall, it is more expensive than a single tape drive, but it's no more expensive than any other appliance, like a Unitrends.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

It's been a while since I've purchased it and I only do maintenance now. Licensing is based on of the number of nodes you have, the number of end devices you're backing up. It's based on the cloud service, if you're going to have that. And, if you're going to have multiple devices that are backups of each other, they will have their own. But most of these are pretty straightforward. The only one that I don't have experience with is the bare metal restore. I don't know how that's licensed.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

A reason I chose them over Unitrends on my most recent purchase, is that the one thing I was seriously lacking was memory and CPU cores. When I got on with both Unitrends and Quorum I said, "Hey, I need this much memory and this many cores." Unitrends' solution was to move me up in physical boxes. So they moved me up a few tiers, which also resulted in significantly more drive space, which was the one thing I did not need. Quorum, on the other hand, took one of their lower-end boxes, one which had sufficient drive space for me but which was just lacking in memory and CPUs, and they threw a bunch more CPU cores into it and a bunch more memory, which fulfilled all of my requirements.

Among Quorum, Barracuda, and Unitrends, the Quorum is by far the easiest one to use in terms of sizing. Multiple times, I would put Barracuda solutions in and I don't know if it was their deduplication that kept messing me up, but I'd size it, and determine, "Okay, we should be able to get 90 days of backups out of this thing." But right-out-of-the box I was getting about 30 days. Clients weren't too terribly happy with me as a result. The bare metal restore was pretty rough on the Barracuda as well. I would probably not even suggest Barracuda to people now, unless they are interested in a cheap solution. One thing Barracuda does offer is a solution that is considerably cheaper than either of the other two.

The Unitrends appliance wasn't bad. It was easy to set up. I found that restoring and bringing up virtual machines was more difficult and it did not scale quite as well. I could not have nearly as many virtual machines running on the Unitrends appliance as I could have on the Quorum appliance, even though it was sized by the vendor. The maintenance was also more expensive on the Unitrends appliance than on the Quorum.

What other advice do I have?

Figure out what your business needs are and determine if you need one appliance or two appliances for a disaster recovery physical site. Or are you're going to need to bring up these virtual machines in a cloud instance and, if so, how are you going to get access to those servers through a public cloud like the internet, through either VPNs or other software-defined networks?

If somebody were to ask me what they need to do to implement this, I would definitely say know what your requirements and expectations are, and make sure you get those included beforehand. Get the thing properly spec'ed out so that it will survive the length of time you're after. Or, be prepared to take a long-term retention kick if you add resources faster than you anticipated.

I sleep better knowing that Quorum is there. My full tape backup was using seven tapes, and tapes can be a little finicky. Sometimes, they just don't want to work. I don't have that problem anymore. I know that I've got a good backup. It backs up, I get a notification, and it brings up all of those servers automatically for me.

It's one of those things where, regardless of the appliance you go with, you still need to bring up all those virtual machines and make sure all the applications work in them, in a virtual environment. I did run into a solution where that didn't work. I had one sever that runs an old IBM Db2 application, and it did not like coming up in a virtual environment because the virtual environment was bringing up both IPv4 and IPv6 and Db2 was trying to attach to the wrong one. So the server came up great but the database did not come up at all. I ended up having to call Quorum and say, "Okay, how do I get this thing not to use IPv6, only IPv4?" It took them 15 minutes. I ran a test again and it worked like a champ.

Also, there are some applications that do licensing via hardware tokens, where they do licensing via the MAC address of the network card. For instance, my phone system is that way. While I can spin it up on the Quorum box, I can only do it for a very limited time, because it only gives me a temporary license for, say, 30 days, before I will lose my phone system. So, there are other things to take into consideration, but you're going to run into that regardless of where you spin up a virtual machine, whether it's the cloud or on a physical appliance.

In terms of storage efficiency, I'm not entirely sure it's considered a storage appliance. I would think of something like a NAS as being a storage appliance, where people are actively working on files on and off of it. Quorum is really not a storage appliance, it's a backup. It definitely has storage because it's disk-based, but it beats the crap out of tape, if I have to compare it to a storage device. I would much rather use it over having a bunch of drives and some other solution. I would rather use the simplicity of the Quorum appliance over other backup solutions, even if they are disk-based.

I'm an IT department of one, so nobody else has their hands in it except for me. We do have a couple of hundred employees, but none of them even know about it. That's really how it should be. They should just know that everything is backed up and, if they need something restored, they just need to give me a call and I've got them covered.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: IT Central Station contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
SteveThornton
Director of Computer Services at a healthcare company with 51-200 employees
Real User
Top 5
Took us just hours to do a complete server restore, with minimal downtime

Pros and Cons

  • "When it comes to recovering what you need from a backup, it's really easy. You just drill through the directory, find the file and the date that you want, and click to recover. You then pick the directory you want to save it in. Usually, it takes a minute or two and it's done. It's quick and easy."
  • "It does automated tests to the systems to make sure that you could spin them up if you needed to. And if something doesn't come back up in those tests, we get a notification saying the system didn't come back up."
  • "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."

What is our primary use case?

We're still old-school. We have a tape backup system that we use for the majority of our servers. onQ is kind of like doubling our protection. We like the fact that it's a complete disaster recovery solution, so if we ever lost a server, we could spin it up virtually and get our server repaired and nobody would miss any work or have even noticed a difference, other than possibly a little speed, and we're not even certain they would notice that. 

We also use it for general file recovery every once in a while when somebody deletes something they shouldn't have. We use that scenario as our test, every now and then, to go in and make sure we can still recover stuff. 

We use it for "insurance." We're in central Florida and in the Panhandle and it's a hurricane-prone area. We want to have things covered as much as possible, which is why we back up to the opposite office.

We have one in-house server in each of our two offices. The box in each office cross-replicates to the other. We try to put as little in the cloud as possible. We are slowly moving some things to the cloud, but as far as company data goes, we really want to manage that in-house as long as possible.

How has it helped my organization?

We had an instance a few years ago where we lost one of the cards for the RAID controller on one of our servers. When they put the replacement parts back in it didn't recognize our RAID at all. We had to redo the RAID and then we did a complete restore off of the onQ's and it took about three hours. Our server was back exactly where it was the day before and there was very minimal downtime as far as that kind of endeavor is concerned. It worked flawlessly. We've never actually had to do it off of the tape system, but I would think it would be exceptionally tedious because it would take at least the better part of the day to set the server up. And then you would have to worry about copying the directories and making sure you got everything. To recover all the user accounts and system accounts, it would get complicated fairly quickly.

At that time, with Backup Exec, which is made for the tape backup systems by a competitor, I don't even know if you could completely back up the entire volume. You could do the files, but I'm not sure it would do the operating system. The newer versions of software claim they can, but it's still a little bit of a crapshoot as to whether it really recovers the whole system. If it doesn't, then you have to set the server up, re-install the software, and then try and copy your files back. It would be pretty ugly.

Mostly, onQ gives us confidence, knowing that we're really covered if we really have to bring the systems up. It's a complete solution, whereas tape backups, in some of those situations, are not designed to actually spin the system up. They're designed to, at best, copy it to another machine and hope it works. It's comparing apples and oranges. onQ really is a complete system that you can bring up in an emergency. Instead of being down for a couple of hours, you're down for a matter of minutes in a lot of cases.

What is most valuable?

In terms of recovering a file or data that somebody has overwritten or deleted, we usually get an email or somebody comes by and says, "Oops, I accidentally deleted something from my user folder or out of a directory. Can you get it back?" Generally, we prefer to use the Quorums if we can because they're a lot quicker than the tape backup system. We can drill through a directory pretty quickly and select the location. Backup Exec does very similar things but it's a little bit slower. And we have two different sets of tape. So if it's on another set of tapes, then we might have to physically switch the tapes out, which takes even longer. We don't have that issue with the onQ's, because we keep roughly 40 days of backups for our entire company on there.

When it comes to recovering what you need from a backup, it's really easy. You just drill through the directory, find the file and the date that you want, and click to recover. You then pick the directory you want to save it in. Usually, it takes a minute or two and it's done. It's quick and easy.

One of the other capabilities of these systems, which is really a huge thing to us, is that it does bare-metal restores if you need to. If you had to completely recover a system from tape, if it did work — which I'd be somewhat skeptical about — it would take a long time.

onQ is also pretty good at notifications. We get a report every day, and weekly, regarding the backups and the status of the backups.

It does automated tests to the systems to make sure that you can spin them up if you need to. And if something doesn't come back up in those tests, we get a notification saying the system didn't come back up. You can go in and find out why it didn't. In most cases, it's a timeout issue where the system just didn't give it long enough to actually come up. If we go in ourselves and test it and watch it for a little while, it will do it. Sometimes there's a driver issue because the onQ's may not have every hardware driver on the onQ system itself, to spin the box up. So it will spin up and say it's got a driver issue. You can go online, it'll download the driver, and then you can reboot it.

We've worked with Quorum a couple of times to go in and look at why a system didn't pass the test successfully and they've had to go in and modify a couple of the settings for some of the drivers that it copies. It's happened maybe twice and they're very responsive to doing that kind of stuff.

It does everything automatically by itself. We just sit back and watch the emails for the most part.

What needs improvement?

There's not much room for improvement in onQ. The systems are pretty stable. Their support is top-notch. I like the fact that their support seems to be in North America solely, so there aren't any language issues. I really don't have any complaints.

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. But it's not really affecting productivity. It just would make our monitoring slightly easier.

For how long have I used the solution?

We've been using onQ since 2012. We're on our second set of disaster recovery boxes. We just replaced them earlier this year.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

Our onQ's are very stable. We very rarely have to reboot them. We don't have any real configuration issues or issues communicating with them. Any of the issues we've had have usually been a result of something on our end, such as network problems or something dropping between the two offices, which had nothing to do with their systems.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The scalability is very good. We bought ours big enough so that we could add another server if we needed to. But we never did max out even the old ones by the time we were done with them. And we ran them for seven years. We've had no issues with scalability. We never outgrew them or ran into storage space issues. 

I believe the maximum they recommend is about 40 days, but whatever their default was is what we left it at. We could probably even increase that some if we wanted to and not have any major problems, but we haven't had any need to.

The only way we would be able to increase the usage would be to add more servers. They're doing exactly what they were designed to do, which is give us an assurance that, should we lose one of our production servers, we can spin it up on the onQ's within a matter of minutes and keep working.

How are customer service and technical support?

Quorum's support, compared to any of the people we've dealt with, which has primarily been Symantec, is far superior.

Their support agents are very efficient, for the most part. They can usually resolve things. A couple of times we've had things that an engineer needed to look at. That was a case where our network connection between the two offices dropped, due to nothing related to Quorum. They had to go in and do a little bit of cleanup, get the files cleared out so it could do a proper backup. But that's happened maybe once or twice in seven years. Overall, they do what they say they do and they do it very well.

When you buy the server it comes with three years of support and, after that, you have to do a renewal process. But it's the standard support that comes with the system. When you buy it, you can pick which support level you want. You can get it five days a week during business hours, seven days a week during business hours, or 24/7. It all depends on what you need. We have the five-day, business-hours support but it's worked very well for us.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We were using Symantec prior to Quorum and we still have it because the system is still running. We keep a support contract with them. Our tape library is so large that we can hold six months' worth of backups. That gives us an extended range if we really needed to get some old data off of there. But generally, we go to the quorum first because it is just a lot simpler to use.

What prompted us to look into getting another solution was beefing up our disaster recovery plans, because of things like the hurricanes that we have. Ten or 15 years ago you'd get one hurricane every five or 10 years. Now we're getting to the point, with whatever's happening in the environment, that we have hurricanes two or three times a year. The onQ's are an "insurance policy" that if something fails, we've got a pretty complete system that we can bring online in a short amount of time. Or if we had to replace the hardware, we could copy everything back onto a new piece of equipment and it would work. It allows us to sleep at night.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup was easy. They helped us. All we had to do was install the boxes. Once we installed the boxes, they connected remotely and helped set everything up. We installed the client on the servers that needed to have them and they configured things and made sure everything was running with a little bit of testing. Then they let us go. They checked back a week or two later just to see how things were going. But we've had so few issues that it's pretty infrequent that we have to talk to these guys.

The integration process with our organization's network was easy and seamless. There was very little impact. The only thing we had to do is because we have an internet connection to our sister office, an MPLS network. At one point we had to increase our bandwidth. At certain times of the day — although we tried to do it just at night — if there was a large amount of data to replicate, then it would still be running the next morning. And that impacted things to a slight degree. After upping our bandwidth we had no issues at all.

The deployment of our newest boxes took two-thirds of a day or so. The biggest problem was my getting the other box up to Tallahassee. We could have had it shipped, but we don't have any IT in that other office, so one of us had to go up there. So the delay was really on our end because I had to get the hardware up there and install it. We spent two or three hours in the Orlando office setting all that up and then another two or three hours in our Tallahassee office setting up the other box. Altogether, it was definitely less than a day.

Quorum maps out the implementation plan for you. They do some research in the beginning, before the box is ever shipped. They needed an IP range for five or six IP addresses. We sent that to them and they labeled what was going to be the interface for each office. They've got it down to a pretty streamlined process where there's really not a lot of lag time or any mysterious questions.

It takes one person, from our side, for deployment. We have a staff of two people in our IT department. The other person I work with stayed here while I was in the other office setting it up. Since we're the only people in the IT department, nobody else would be going in and using it.

In terms of maintenance, there really is none on the Quorum boxes. They push out updates every once in a while. Generally, they contact us and say, "Hey, we have a couple of updates to put on there." It's usually 30 minutes every now and then. I wouldn't even say that happens on a regular basis. They've done their homework and their hardware works pretty dependably.

What was our ROI?

In terms of capital expenditure, the main thing the solution has done is to allow us to really utilize our hardware to the maximum. Money is always an issue for a company of our size, and we don't always have the capital to replace servers on a regular basis. This gives us the ability, technically, to run servers until they just stop running, if we really want to. We're in that scenario now where we've got a system that still runs, but we have to replace the hardware because the operating system is no longer supported. onQ has allowed us to get every bit of life out of a server, which does lower our bottom-line.

It has saved us $40,000 or so, the cost of two or three servers. It has allowed us to run two or three servers a lot longer than we normally would have. Sometimes, we're getting another year or two out of them.

I wouldn't look at it as a return on investment, any more than you would look at the return on investment for an insurance policy. It's there if you need it and you hope you don't have to use it. In the meantime, we use it for some basic file recovery and some other things, plus it helps us meet some of our HIPAA compliance issues in terms of being able to recover, and as part of our disaster plan. There's value there, but I'm not a bean-counter so it's hard to put a dollar amount to it without doing a lot of analyzing.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

The initial expenditure for us was a little under $40,000 for the recent renewal. For the first three years after that, other than electricity, there's no cost. After that, their support contract has to be renewed annually. We spent close to $6,000, between the two offices, for support. That's not a big deal when you're pretty much guaranteed that you're going to be able to recover in an emergency situation. That's well worth it.

I think they're really reasonable. If you price out servers like the ones they put in here, and even if you were to put it in your own system — without figuring out the software and all of the logistics of doing that — it would cost you almost as much just to buy the hardware. Microsoft licensing is very expensive and, if you're going to do anything on your own, you've got to have a team of developers. That's just not something we're in the business of doing with a small IT department. We don't have time to do stuff like that.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We didn't evaluate other solutions. A colleague of mine and I went to a lunch, to one of Quorum's seminars one day, and we were very impressed with the presentation. Everything they said made sense and we didn't really see any need to look any further. And we still don't or we wouldn't have bought another set of them.

Symantec is slow, at least for our solution. I'm sure they have cloud backups but, as I said, our resistance to putting any more in the cloud than we have to is pretty high. We're really trying to keep things in-house. And without spending a ton on hardware, tape is just slower. 

It was a cost thing primarily, but also speed. Personally, and not to bad-mouth competitors, Symantec's support is very difficult to navigate and to get any real attention from on a lot of issues, and that definitely doesn't happen in a timely manner. We don't have that problem with Quorum. They're very responsive.

What other advice do I have?

Check out the competitors. I was so impressed with Quorum that we haven't checked out anybody else. We just wanted to stay with them. We have a good relationship with them. But do your homework and have them really demonstrate what it can do for you. I think you will be just as impressed.

The biggest lesson we've learned from using onQ is that it's a system that works. We've lost a server and done a complete recovery in a matter of hours. That's really all the convincing we needed, to know that the system works. If needed, it does what they say it will do. It did it flawlessly. There was no, "Oh, we're going to have to tweak this" or, "Oh, we're going to have to do that." When we lost that server, as soon as we got it up and running, they were on the phone. They guided us through the few things we needed to do. The whole thing was just a matter of hours to have it back up and running. It doesn't get any better than that, to me.

The solution hasn't affected our overall storage efficiency. It doesn't impact anything on the servers. It's a small footprint and runs in conjunction with our Backup Exec. They don't seem to step on each other, so it doesn't cost us any additional time. It just does its thing on its own without any interference. It's pretty slick.

They're always coming up with new stuff, but we haven't really looked into everything. Our needs are pretty simple. Things change very slowly in our company so we're not really looking to expand anything right now. But if they had other products, we'd probably look at them.

The solution is a 10 out of 10. It's well-designed. It does what they say it'll do and they back up what they say. They help you if you need it. I wouldn't change anything. We're really pleased with them. They're a great company and anytime we've needed help they've been there. They have jumped right into it.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Learn what your peers think about Quorum OnQ. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: November 2021.
552,305 professionals have used our research since 2012.
WilliamEstlow
Network Manager at Century Savings
Real User
Enables me to have a virtual version of a server up and running in minutes

Pros and Cons

  • "From a disaster-recovery point of view, one of the things I really like is that I can test the virtual copy of the physical server on a test network and compare the servers side-by-side, without interfering with the production network. So I can see and make sure that the latest copy of the server is the physical copy of the server, without interfering with production."
  • "One thing that could be done to improve it would be a single pane of glass for doing disaster recovery testing, where I could have remote consoles in one place... I still have to go to each location in a browser and then bring up the console. I'd like to see them integrate that into a single pane of glass so I don't have to go to each server."

What is our primary use case?

We mostly use it for disaster recovery and high-availability. In case of a server failure, we can deploy a server and have the location up and running instantly, within minutes. And then, once the location closes, if we need to, we can do a full restore of the server to new or similar hardware. If it's something as simple as the server going down or becoming unresponsive, we can bring it up, use it for what's needed, and then just transfer the files that needed changing.

How has it helped my organization?

The locations don't even know that anything has happened because, if a server goes down they call me. In minutes, I have a virtual version of that server up and running as if nothing had ever happened. It's actually pretty awesome. It's not necessarily that it saves me time on anything. It saves me the headache of losing productivity from my users. In other words, if something were to happen to a physical server, none of my users would lose productivity throughout the day, and the business keeps going as usual.

An example of how it has helped us is that about a year-and-a-half ago, we had a physical server that completely failed. It was our primary domain controller. It's what sends all the instructions to every other domain server to tell it what to do. If it doesn't communicate, we lose a lot. We noticed weird errors happening on the server. We had a hardware technician here and we tried to check things and we tried to repair the actual file system but we lost the array so we lost the data. But, because of Quorum, within two minutes, the branch was back up and running. They knew nothing had happened.

That night, we completely restored that server. It took us about an hour to get everything back up and running. There were some minor configurations that we needed to change after we got the server up and running, the next day. And everything was back to normal. If we hadn't had Quorum in place, within 24 hours, all of the servers would have been out of sync. We would have lost the entire domain and have had to rebuild the domain servers from scratch. That would have taken weeks.

We had noticed the errors at around five o'clock in the afternoon and we decided to wait a little bit. Around six o'clock is when the server failed. By seven o'clock we were back up, everything was running, and we went home for the night.

What is most valuable?

When it comes to recovering what you need from a backup, it's super-easy. I give their dev team credit for making it super-simple. When we first started with them, it was a little on the clunky side. We were an early customer for them but they have upgraded it over time. I can open up a window share within three minutes and copy the files I need, if I just need specific files. In five minutes, I can have all the files I need for a specific day and go back as many days as I want. We store for 30 days so I can pull 30 days' worth of data. Six years ago that would have taken me about 10 to 15 minutes. It wasn't terrible. 

Now, if it was a restore of servers, that's a different story. If I had to take a server and completely do a bare-metal restore before, it was down a good 4 hours, maybe a little bit less. Now, it's 30 minutes. They really changed the way things go. 

From a disaster-recovery point of view, one of the things I really like is that I can test the virtual copy of the physical server on a test network and compare the servers side-by-side, without interfering with the production network. So I can see and make sure that the latest copy of the server is the physical copy of the server, without interfering with production.

Also, it automatically tests the copies of the servers for me. Whenever there's a copy of a server — bringing it over to the Quorum device to make a copy — it tests it and makes sure it will boot, that everything works fine, and then shuts it down. It sends me a notification saying "backup successful, test successful." I can choose a date that I want within the last 30 days, boot that server up on that specific day, and it will show me every file that was on there. So it does versioning. It will make the changes incrementally, so I can go through them by days. If there are any errors with a snapshot that has been created, I will get a notification and I can test it manually if I need to, or I can look into it why it failed. Maybe the server was in the middle of a reboot when it was trying to create it and created some errors. I can just create a new backup with one click. It sends it over to DR site and it's done.

We're protecting the data we currently have against failures, malware, or ransomware. We can do a one-click restore of files without losing them, so we don't have to pay ransom.

Also, all of the data is significantly compressed, so it does reduce data usage, but it's not something that we use to reduce our data usage.

One nice thing that they added is a single pane of glass to see all of your servers. You can see whether up, down, or transferring. That was a nice addition in version 5.

What needs improvement?

One thing that could be done to improve it would be a single pane of glass for doing disaster recovery testing, where I could have remote consoles in one place. They may be working towards this, and I haven't necessarily tested all of the features of version 5 yet. It is completely new to me. But as far as DR testing goes, I think I still have to go to each location in a browser and then bring up the console. I'd like to see them integrate that into a single pane of glass so I don't have to go to each server.

For how long have I used the solution?

We are going on our sixth year using Quorum.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

In six years, on the old hardware, I never had to replace the drive and the server never went down. Rarely did I have to do any software maintenance. Updates were done automatically on a device and whenever there was an update that required my intervention, Quorum contacted me and they were more than willing to just say, "Hey, do you want us to do this for you?" and they did most of the stuff on the back-end. I didn't have to do much of anything. 

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

You have to size it to what you think you're going to be doing. Cloud is different, if you're doing cloud, scalability is infinite. We do on-premise machines, so we scale slightly larger than what we need for future expansion. If we're doing a local branch, which are just file servers that do Active Directory, they're not anything special. But our operations center is backing up six to seven servers, so it's a little bit more beefy. We decided to go 64 cores, just to have that extra power.

Currently, we have everything backed up that we need backed up. Unless we're expecting additional servers to be added, which at the moment I don't think we are, for DR purposes it's exactly what we need.

How are customer service and technical support?

As far as support goes, whenever I have had an actual problem with something — like one of the servers for some reason stopped transferring data from the HA device to the backup device itself — within a day, I had somebody from Quorum fixing the problem.

If I email tech support I get an email back within the hour, with a date and a time when they are next available. As soon as I agree to that, I have a schedule on my calendar for that specific date and time.

There are a couple of engineers that I talked to regularly because I actually got to know them for deployment. So when I called them, they picked up the phone. They knew it was me. You can create a rapport with them and they're all really nice guys. They're in California and Seattle and one guy I talked to is out of New York.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We were just using NAS devices to back up the data itself. If something were to happen, we would have to physically rebuild a server and import the data back into the server to be up and running.

We looked into Quorum for the ability to have a hot-standby server to power on. It was pretty enticing to not have to worry about rebuilding a server on the spot, if it failed. Being able to image the server back to the physical hardware was also enticing.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup was really straightforward. I received the servers and, in one day, I had the servers physically deployed to each location. Within two days, we had every server up and running and backing up its current node, and we do have a fairly high amount of bandwidth availability. We had finished with the servers on a Thursday and Friday. By Monday, all of them had sent all of their data to their DR systems. Everything was replicated.

In a matter of five days, we went from having the old system up and running, to dismantling the old system, bringing the new system online, and copying everything over.

When we talked about the deployment, there was a team of engineers I was working with. They took our previous environment — they had all of the information from that — and they sent me a document that I had to fill out, which was super-easy. I gave them a list of IP addresses that they needed. I gave them subnets, gateways, server names, and what I would like the onQ servers to be named. They reviewed that information and came back to me with some changes that they would like to see. We reviewed it and talked and, within a day or two, we had something set that we were going to deploy. Once we did that, they started the work on their end and when I got the servers, they were 90 percent configured.

There were two or three engineers I spoke with for implementation. Then I spoke with an engineer for deployment and another engineer for the miscellaneous odds and ends that we had to finish up with. They were all from Quorum. On our side, it was just me involved. 

As for the integration into our network, I didn't have to do anything. I plugged it in. I'm dead serious. I plugged it in and that's it. You can't get any better that that. Because I sent them all the information for IP addressing, subnetting, servers, set up, how many servers at each location, where the DRs were going to go, how they were going to transfer, it was all done on their test network. They plugged everything in and created all of the links to the devices and then they sent them to me.

Including the ordering of the servers, the whole process took about a month. Once they got the information from me, they had to order servers and receive them, install and configure the software, and get confirmation on where they were going to be shipped.

And I'm the only one involved in maintenance of the solution. I rarely have to do anything with these. They are incredibly low maintenance.

What was our ROI?

Having Quorum gives us 100 percent uptime. That would be the easiest way I can quantify it. If a server fails, we're still in business. Everything still runs as it should.

It's not possible to put an actual number or value on how much it's saved us. But to give you an idea, without that server — the one I told you about that went down — our lending department would not have been able to function and the branch would not have been able to function, so no transactions would have happened.

What I know is that it saves me headaches.

It depends on the scenario. Sometimes it might not be as impactful. It could be a hard drive failure in a RAID, which is not a big deal. One hard drive fails, you pop it out, pop a new one in, it's rebuilt. Operating system failures can be fixed, but it takes some time. If it's a catastrophic failure, that's where it really comes in handy because we have a copy of the server. We just boot it up, let it run, copy it over to a new server. Done.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

If you were to go out and buy a server, you would not pay much more than what you would pay for the devices that they sold us. They took a massive discount off of these devices.

If I were to give you a quote on what the servers would cost, it might not be accurate across the board because each device is configured differently, depending on how much memory you need, how much hard drive space that you need, the processor size, and how many HA devices you're going to be putting on it. There are a lot of factors involved in pricing.

There is also a maintenance agreement for the software and updates. Those also vary in pricing, depending on how many protected nodes are going to be on it. Included in that is the support from Quorum, so if something goes wrong, you give them a call. You get somebody on the phone an hour or so later. You start a remote session and they log in and they take care of everything. It's really nice.

What other advice do I have?

Think about your use case. If you need high-availability immediately, where you don't have to worry about routing and forwarding and transferring the information that you have locally to the cloud, that comes down to choosing cloud versus onsite/on-premise physical devices. 

Cloud is nice. You can route, although it does take a little bit more time, but you have no physical devices on-premise. There is higher bandwidth utilization when you're using cloud, versus on-premise, where you're using your local LAN and WAN. In the latter case, you have a little bit more flexibility.

The other thing I would recommend is making sure that you have enough bandwidth to transfer the data to your DR sites. When we first started, we had T1 lines and it was painful. It worked, but it was painful. Now with the increase in speed, with Metro Ethernets and high-speed fibre, you can do 150 MB or higher, it's really not a problem. Just make sure you have enough bandwidth to transfer the data.

It is a DR solution. It's there for the possibility of a disaster, so we don't have to pull our hair out and work 20-hour shifts just to get a server back up and running. We can actually relax, take our time, and do things right, rather than having to panic and do things in a rush.

The biggest lesson I've learned from using it is that, like with all hardware and software services, you do have to monitor it. It is there in the background doing its job and it does it well, but you have to make sure you're monitoring it, because if something does go wrong and that server fails, you still have the possibility of a failure. But it is good at what it does. It will backup servers, it will do its job well.

In terms of recovering a file or data that someone has overwritten or deleted by accident, that happens all the time. It's normal that someone loses a file. We have several other ways of restoring files so I don't use Quorum all the time. Sometimes I'll use Shadow Copy, because we take shadow copies. Sometimes I have Azure; sometimes I use Quorum. It all depends on how far back and how frequently they need that data. I use whichever one is easily available at the time I need it. Azure is a little bit more difficult than Quorum; it takes two to three minutes to get a file back with Azure. Usually, with Shadow Copy, you can right-click on the folder and you can restore right from that. But we can only go back a few weeks with that. Quorum goes back 30 days.

When you use Quorum, it will go to protected mode. You log in to your portal, go to restore, select files, go to the server, select the date, and then you start. It gives you a URL and you go to that URL and your Windows Explorer and it opens up a File Explorer for that specific time and you can browse the folders.

I have to rate Quorum at 10 out of 10. There's no doubt. It's solid. I don't have to worry at night. Even in the middle of night, if a server fails and I get a notification on my phone saying a server is down, I can log in, start a server, and have that branch operate. In the morning, they don't know that anything happened. It gives me peace of mind. I don't have to stress. There's enough stress in IT; I don't need more.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: IT Central Station contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
DD
VP Director of Information Technology at a financial services firm with 51-200 employees
Real User
We're able to spin up a backed-up VM into production in a matter of minutes, if a VM goes down

Pros and Cons

  • "It's easy to implement, easy to spin up, easily configurable, to drop-in appliances and network. There wasn't a lot of time needed to spin it up."
  • "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"

What is our primary use case?

The primary use case for us is a high-availability. The ease of use is a part of that as well. The ability to spin up a backed-up VM or to put it on the production network, literally in a matter of minutes, if a VM goes down, is critical for us.

How has it helped my organization?

If a VM goes down for whatever reason — having that assurance that we've got a reliable backed up VM on a separate platform that we can spin up on a different piece of hardware and appliance in real-time, and get the resource back up and running again quickly, is the best use case for us.

One of the benefits of the onQ platform is that it does what it does, and it does it well. It's very easy to keep up and running. In terms of day-to-day management, once you have everything in place, it does its job and takes the snapshots for you and gives you the reporting back on them. From a solution standpoint, it works very well.

Being able to spin up another VM on the appliance, in production mode, within a matter of a couple of minutes, has been immensely helpful. Having the ability to reduce recovery time, for critical resources, from multiple hours to a matter of minutes, is huge.

What is most valuable?

It's easy to manage. We're a smaller team.  It's easy to implement, easy to spin up, easily configurable, to drop-in appliances and network. There wasn't a lot of time needed to spin it up. 

From a day-to-day management perspective, it's very easy to use as well.

And I get reporting on the latest backup every day, whether or not it was successful, and whether or not the test of the VM was successful. It comes to me by email and gives me the status of each of the VMs: When it was last backed up, whether or not the backup was successful, and whether or not the test was successful. 

What needs improvement?

Upgrading the software on the appliance feels to me like it's going to be a little bit more work than I originally anticipated.

The process for moving the VM off of the Quorum appliance and back into the production network again requires quite a number of steps. I don't know if there can be any improvement made on that, but in looking at it, I found it was pretty lengthy. There were quite a number of steps there so I requested that one of the Quorum engineers perform the process, which they were happy to do. That part was great. They were able to get that VM moved over from the appliance to my production network again and everything was fine.

For how long have I used the solution?

We've been using onQ since 2015. 

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The stability has been great. The appliance has been rock-solid. I've had no issues with the hardware. We've had the same appliance for the last four years now and it has been running great. It requires very little management time, if any. It just runs and works.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The scalability is  good, from what I remember. We haven't scaled up a ton. The capacity planning that was done originally, with the estimated growth that we put in for headroom, for expansion and growth, was accurate. We've been able to grow into the solution without making any changes or any adjustments. Scalability was planned out at the beginning. I've been in great shape there.

How are customer service and technical support?

One of the things that I like about Quorum is the level of support. 

Overall, their support folks are great. They have proactively reached out to me when they've noticed issues with the backup not taking for a few days, or outside of a threshold, or if they've seen any issue where a VM has not been successful in testing over the last couple of days. They'll proactively reach out to me.

I've had cases where I actually shut down a VM from production because I didn't need it anymore but forgot about the Quorum appliance trying to take snapshots of it. It kept failing and I just ignored it on the report because I knew about it. But the Quorum support folks didn't know that that's what happened. They were a little concerned that the device hadn't backed up in X amount of days. They actually reached out to me and said, "Hey, we saw that your VM X-Y-Z hasn't been backed up. What's going on with that? Do you need help?" That was impressive. It feels like they've got my back as well. It's not just me who has visibility or eyes on the backups. I'm getting a little assistance from their NOC or support team which, in some cases, keeps track of the statuses of those backups too.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We had a solution, but it was a very manual, labor-intensive, not-full-VM appliance. 

For us, partnering with an organization like Quorum, a company that basically hands it to you in a box and it's all ready to go and implement quickly and easily, without a lot of management resource on my end to keep the thing running — it just does what it's supposed to do — is the best approach at this point.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup was relatively straight forward. That was one of the selling points of Quorum with the appliance device. I did some due diligence and figured out sizing capacity, so they could size the appliance correctly. They had me run some tools for capacity-planning in my environment. They took all that information and they came up with the right size solution for the appliance that I needed.

To provision the appliance, they had me drop it into my network and spin it up, which is very easy to do. Once they had connectivity to it we finished the configuration on it. They then gave me the ability to manage the appliance and start getting backups from my VM environment onto it. 

So the implementation rollout was a very easy, handheld process. They did a lot of handholding and it was very white-glove. It was very easy, which was great.

What about the implementation team?

I worked with one or two of their engineers.

What was our ROI?

We haven't really fully measured ROI.  I definitely believe there has been ROI.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

The solution can be on the pricier side depending on options selected but it's one of those situations where if time is valuable and resources are limited, it might be worth it.  Each use case is unique.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We evaluated a couple of other players, including Datto. Ease of use was one of the differences between Quorum and Datto. I think there were some problems with Datto, as I remember. I did a lot of research on forums and sites, like ITCentralStation.com, from an end-user perspective in different environments. That gave me an idea as to what the solution was like after it was implemented, installed, and up and running. I really relied on what the community was saying about the different solutions. Each one has its pros and cons.

For our organization, after reading all the reviews and commentary, and taking into consideration points that mattered to us, it really came down to Quorum, from many different angles, being the front-runner.

What other advice do I have?

Look at all the partners out there and pick the one that you feel is the best fit for you, based on your use case. Everyone is a little bit different and has different needs in terms of what's critical to them and what's not important.

I give Quorum a solid nine out of 10. Over a number of years it has been a rock-solid solution. It has worked for us. It's easy to manage. It doesn't take a lot of my time. It does what it needs to do. When I have had to use it and rely upon it, it has been there.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Hybrid Cloud
Disclosure: IT Central Station contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
SteveDenger
IT Manager at Trinity Logistics Corp
Real User
Top 10
Tests each VM after backups and provides a dashboard view of backup accuracy and the viability of my DR solution

Pros and Cons

  • "The change in the way that Quorum processes data has made a tremendous improvement in backup and replication times. While the familiar interface remains, the underpinnings have been finely tuned and the speed is incredible. My large Exchange Server went from 5- to 6-hour backups down to 22 minutes."
  • "I would like to see iSCSI support added so that NAS storage servers could be protected. We heavily utilize NAS storage and the risk there is minimal backup options. Currently, we are backing up NAS to NAS which is costly and slow. Being able to integrate NAS server backup would be the last item on my Quorum bucket list."

What is our primary use case?

Backups, file recovery, DR capability, and instant VM recovery are our primary needs and the OnQ system does those expertly.

Our infrastructure is a combination of hosted and on-prem. Co-locating our HA appliance in the data center near our SAN environment provides a knockout combination of speed and security, and the environmental fears are not present. This bunker approach protects our primary HQ data and also backs up remote servers across our WAN. We cover all our bases by protecting every server and VM in our environment, and even our specialty machines. The HA/DR appliances also provide us with a rock-solid implementation of DR.

How has it helped my organization?

We've used the Quorum OnQ appliances, HA and DR, for the past six years. It is a rock-solid platform that has served us well. We recently retired our aging OnQ appliances and upgraded to the new generation of OnQ servers. The change has been impressive. The new hardware is substantially faster and we are able to apply the OnQ solution to additional business segments in our company as the backup times have decreased between five and tenfold.  We are now retiring other backup solutions as we push out protection via OnQ to other business units.

What is most valuable?

The change in the way that Quorum processes data has made a tremendous improvement in backup and replication times. While the familiar interface remains, the underpinnings have been finely tuned and the speed is incredible. My large Exchange Server went from 5- to 6-hour backups down to 22 minutes. 

The instant file recovery is a great time saver, enabling us to pull up a version of a file instantly and restore. Typical restore times are about two minutes, start to finish.

The guarantee that my data is available and that my servers are recoverable is the best feature. The OnQ technology tests each VM after backups and I always have a dashboard view of the accuracy of my backups and the viability of my DR solution. Replication between units is flawless and I never have to worry about where my data is sitting if a disaster occurs.

What needs improvement?

I would like to see iSCSI support added so that NAS storage servers could be protected. We heavily utilize NAS storage and the risk there is minimal backup options. Currently, we are backing up NAS to NAS which is costly and slow. Being able to integrate NAS server backup would be the last item on my Quorum bucket list. 

I am excited to see enhanced support for Linux, which gives me an opportunity to let the Quorum start protecting my enterprise storage in our data centers. I would like to see this further developed as well.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using this solution, the new version of Quorum OnQ, for 30 days. I used a previous version of the solution for about six years.

How are customer service and technical support?

Quorum support is second to none. Their onboarding process for bringing you over to OnQ, or for upgrading units, is fantastic. Support is usually minutes away if needed, with a friendly voice on the first call to Quorum. All the support is based on the West Coast and they have a fantastic group of techs. Again, this adds to the value of your investment.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

I've used a number of backup solutions over the years. Backup Exec, Windows Backup, cloud backup, various media types, and previously, the early generation of Quorum OnQ. The switch to the OnQ system was a huge paradigm shift in how I run my department.

Moving, again, to the latest revision of OnQ appliances and software has resulted in a substantial improvement in speed. Quite frankly, once you've used the Quorum OnQ system, you could not consider any alternative. I am frequently asked to consider Veeam but there is simply no consideration of Veeam or others on my part. They just do not compare when you run the numbers on RTO and RPO, and compare the simplicity.

What was our ROI?

The OnQ appliance system offers tremendous time savings for your IT department. Your ROI should consider the time savings for IT team members.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We did not consider other options on this upgrade. We were so satisfied with the previous OnQ system that there was no suitable replacement to consider.

What other advice do I have?

Don't underestimate your capabilities with Quorum OnQ. It will far outperform the max recommended capabilities that Quorum suggests.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
reviewer1521792
Director of Information Technology at Pugh CPAs
Real User
Top 10
Helpful support, reliable, facilitates compliance, and provides a good return on investment

Pros and Cons

  • "Quorum OnQ has taken the guesswork out of backup/recovery and disaster recovery."
  • "It would be beneficial if file culling could be more granular."

What is our primary use case?

I am using Quorum OnQ for local file and application server backup and recovery, as well as local disaster recovery. Disaster recovery is delivered through individual virtual machines that we can spin up on-demand, or configure for automatic fail-over.

The OnQ platform duplicates these features, as well, as a data archive vault at a remote site. Data is transferred and archived to the remote site automatically.

This platform does the job that we needed multiple, disparate solutions to handle before.

How has it helped my organization?

Quorum OnQ has taken the guesswork out of backup/recovery and disaster recovery.  The holistic nature of the platform makes it a breeze to work with and test.

One of the biggest worries in an IT environment is the reliability of backup and DR. Will it work when we need it? I can see that OnQ is functioning properly and test the DR environment on a single pane of glass in just a few seconds. It lifts a huge burden from my shoulders and I rarely give it a second thought since implementing OnQ.

What is most valuable?

Local backup and file recovery are the features I use most but as a DR and archive platform, Quorum OnQ helps us check several compliance boxes, as well.

Solid technical support is another huge benefit. Whenever we need them, Quorum staff are always on top of it.

What needs improvement?

It would be beneficial if file culling could be more granular.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using Quorum OnQ for almost 10 years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

This solution is rock solid.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

We have actually scaled back from where we started with the solution because so much of our data has moved to the cloud.

How are customer service and technical support?

World-class! Tech support staff is very responsive and extremely knowledgeable. I do not recall a single instance where an issue has to be escalated.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

I used various, disparate solutions in the past to accomplish everything that OnQ does.

How was the initial setup?

Implementation of OnQ was one of the easiest I have ever been involved in. Quorum was involved throughout the entire process, even sending a tech onsite to complete the install.

What about the implementation team?

In-house with Quorum tech support assistance.

What was our ROI?

We also had a ransomware incident a few years back and OnQ saved the day. We were able to recover every file in just a few minutes. This cost savings on the loss of productivity for this incident alone paid for the solution multiple times over.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

My advice is to take a look at both the on-premises and cloud offerings from Quorum. We have been using an on-premises solution but we will probably evaluate the cloud version come renewal time.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We did not evaluate other options before choosing OnQ.

What other advice do I have?

The platform has been around for a while and is reliably rock solid. It already does everything that it advertises, really well. I have been in the IT industry for more than 30 years and there are very few platforms that I do not have at least a small annoyance to complain about, other than OnQ.

I have been using it for almost 10 years and I have yet to find a single fault with it. Quorum OnQ is one of the few solutions that I would recommend to a colleague without a single caveat.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Flag as inappropriate
NK
Senior Vice President at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Real User
Top 20
Very high level security environment for secondary data; ensures instant recovery of business processes

Pros and Cons

  • "A very high level security environment for secondary data."
  • "Lacks compatibility in terms of supporting other OS."

What is our primary use case?

The primary use case of this solution is for the instant recovery of servers and security. Our customers generally have in the range of anything between 20 to 75 servers. Corporate and enterprise customers purchase it for their on premises requirements. We not only recover the servers, we ensure recovery of the business process and that's very important. We have a partnership with Quorum. 

What is most valuable?

Quorum offers a very high level security environment for secondary data. Once data is in Quorum it is highly secured because the appliance is Linux-based. It does 256-bit AES encryption at rest and in motion. The replication agent and everything is all Linux-based including the hypervisor. And it is a ZFS, Zeta File System, which makes the environment highly secure. The dashboard is also quite new and elegant.

What needs improvement?

The solution could do more by improving compatibility in terms of supporting other OS. In addition, the platform support should increase as there are some restrictions there. It's the only challenge we face right now.

For how long have I used the solution?

I've been selling Quorum for the past eight years. 

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The product has been quite stable. We see less RMA issues than we used to have and less support issues. It's a robust solution because of its Linux base and the fact that it's not a software-based solution. It comes with a very high-end appliance which is built on a hyper-converge infrastructure.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

It has good scalability although there are some of the lower models where there is a restriction on scalabiity. From a 15dB appliance, you can scale it up to 100dB or 150dB. 

How are customer service and technical support?

Support is very much available from the UK and the US, directly from the vendor. They don't offer support via third-party support services, you're actually dealing with the people who have developed the solution so the turnaround time is quite quick.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is very straightforward. Deployment time depends on the number of servers but typically a 10-server implementation would take four to six hours.

What other advice do I have?

The solution is designed individually based on the customer's specifications. It's all hand-seated and then dispatched to the customers. We have a lot of references from happy customers. Many four-star, five-star hotels here in the Middle East use Quorum so within the hotel hospitality fraternity, everybody knows Quorum which makes it easy to sell to other hotels. A lot of prestigious customers use Quorum; government, tourism authority, chamber of commerce, police headquarters, airports. That in itself is a good reference and the product speaks for itself. Once you do a proof of concept with the customer, they can see how it works on their network, and then it's an easy sale.

The product serves the customer's objectives as well as securing secondary data and instant recovery of their complete applications and business process. The customer wants to ensure his business processes record and that's what Quorum ensures. Whether it is a single server failure, storage failure, network failure, a digital attack or a ransomware, or whether it's an application crash or a database corruption, or any kind of natural disaster or data center failure, Quorum ensures the recovery of the complete business process. 

I believe our customers would rate this product a nine out of 10. 

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner
Shrijendra Shakya
C.T.O at Sastra Network Solution Inc. Pvt. Ltd.
Real User
Top 5Leaderboard
A simple solution with ransomware protection and great support

Pros and Cons

  • "Quorum OnQ has a good ransomware protection feature, and customer service and support were very good."
  • "Quorum OnQ can be improved by providing support for other operating systems like Ubuntu."

What is our primary use case?

We use Quorum OnQ for backup, cloud service, and disaster recovery as a service.

What is most valuable?

Quorum OnQ has a good ransomware protection feature, and customer service and support were very good. Quorum is simple. They don't promise to do what they can't and always do what they say, and they are very good at that.

What needs improvement?

Compatibility with other platforms is the issue. Quorum OnQ can be improved by providing support for other operating systems like Ubuntu. Even Oracle supports other platforms. I would also like them to upgrade the hardware appliances. 

It'll also help our clients if they made the requirements and service level agreements easier to understand.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using Quorum OnQ for about one and a half years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

Quorum OnQ is a very stable solution. We haven't had any hardware issues. We have been doing backup and restoration without any issues.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

Quorum OnQ is a scalable solution.

How are customer service and technical support?

Quorum OnQ tech support is fantastic. They provide one to one support, we can meet them, or people over there can handle it for us. They even helped us with very small issues.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We were using this kind of backup in the cloud for a while. Sometimes we used Acronis and Macrium Reflects, but we found that Quorum was much simpler. It was also much easier to understand the solution.

The biggest difference between Acronis and Quorum is that Quorum is open-source, and the file system is better. It's like other platforms, and most people know about it. Also, compared to products like Acronis and Zetta, Quorum OnQ isn't hard.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup was very simple because we had all the technical support. But we do have issues like client connections to do the security, which takes time, but after that, the infrastructure is ready to go, and there haven't been issues.

It doesn't take more than a week to deploy the device. But to deploy the Quorum OnQ for a customer, and if it's a large client, it takes about a month to do the network setup and more.

What other advice do I have?

From using Quorum OnQ, I have learned that people are serious about their data, but they don't realize that data capturers are happening often. Some ransomware incidents keep reoccurring, and the backup function that we have helps our customers. That's why we keep giving it to them.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give Quorum OnQ a nine.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Public Cloud
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Distributor
Buyer's Guide
Download our free Quorum OnQ Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions.