IBM Storage Protect vs. Quest QoreStor

IBM Storage Protect is well-suited for large heterogenous environments, with skilled IT staff on-hand. You need a person (or group of people) to monitor day-to-day operations, tweak schedules where needed and be mindful of things that might go wrong. It is also well-suited if you have other IBM products that integrate well with Storage Protect, like Storage Protect Plus or IBM Defender. It is less suited for small companies, with only one person responsible for IT. Employing Storage Protect would be overkill and use too much time of the administrator.

Incentivized

The product can be run on-premises or in the cloud. It is a fantastic option to reduce the size and storage requirements of backup jobs. If your backup system can already produce a reliable reduction in storage up to 75% then I would say the QoreStor appliance would be irrelevant in your case. It does not perform backups itself. It is simply an extra step to reduce size, encrypt and offload backups to the cloud. this reduces the load on a backup system to handle other tasks while the QoreStor takes over.

Incentivized

• Tight integration with Db2. As an IBM product, it works seamlessly with Db2. You can query what is stored in TSM via Db2 itself. You can also use DB scripts to maintain the items being stored there.
• Like most of its competitors, Tivoli handles deduplication well.
• Provides a GUI for browsing and maintaining items stored there. I rarely use this feature, due to the next item I will post:
• Command-line interface directly from my Db2 database servers.
• Both client and server-side deduplication, compression and encryption are available.
• If the requirements are zLinux and DB2 support then it's the most solid solution.
• Can be complex to implement, but once up and running, it is rock-solid and immensely scalable.
• Scalability is huge. Can be added onto easily.

Incentivized

• Deduplication
• Compression
• Cloud Connection
• Replication

Incentivized

• Deployment and configuration is not easy for an unexperienced IBM Spectrum Protect administrator
• Operations center uses a lot of data and needs a lot of storage for larger environments
• Have not seen a redbook about it in the past 10 years

• Disaster recovery from a populated cloud bucket needs improvement
• It would be nice to have some limited integration into the KACE SMA product
• The appliance is low resource use and virtual, but better access to system settings would be nice.

Incentivized

Not required, company closed. TSM is not used in my current role at my current job.

Incentivized

In the present, a backup solution is a must-have, but then companies start using a solution for virtual machines, another solution for bare-metal servers, and another solution for their ERP. By using Spectrum Protect you can have all of that in a single pane of glass. This way you can have a simple recovery plan for all your information assets.

Incentivized

The few times we've called for support we eventually got an answer, but it's IBM and a very big company and getting to a support agent is hard.

Incentivized

The support team is the main reason I am sticking to Quest/KACE products. They are stellar to work with and always responsive when I need help. The team listens to the user's recommendations for added features and tends to add the ones that really have merit. Support is everything when it comes to working with such a company

Incentivized

IBM Spectrum Protect is related to the other IBM Spectrum products listed because it is part of the suite and is also the main backup product for backup and restoration of information. With Veeam it is related as they present competence in different lines of technology, often the integration of both tools can be the best solution for clients looking for a successful backup strategy.

Incentivized

When I evaluated the Dell system it was an entirely new server on-site, with licensed levels of inlocking the storage it had on board. For a smaller organization, the Dell system was not cost-effective with a large upfront payment, and additional hardware to manage on-site. The QoreStor system was a virtual machine that could pop into my current system and just use allocated storage already in place. In addition, the upfront cost was dramatically less than the Dell option and no additional hardware

Incentivized

Not at the moment, but it can leverage the billing outcomes as per the scales.

Incentivized

• Tivoli does well running file-level backups, but Exchange is clunky and restores are really hard. With no SharePoint agent, if you use SharePoint you will need another product like AvePoint DocAve. The web-based GUI console is MUCH improved over earlier versions, but you will still need to be a command-line guru to make Tivoli do everything, and local (node) config files still rule. This product was originally ported from Unix and retains may of its 'nix roots.

Incentivized

• Dramatically decreased cloud storage costs
• Backup Jobs take less time on the Backup system
• An additional level of backup and encryption

Incentivized