Don't think. Just use it. DISCO is the best.
February 23, 2021

Don't think. Just use it. DISCO is the best.

Anonymous | TrustRadius Reviewer
Score 10 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User
Review Source

Overall Satisfaction with DISCO Ediscovery

DISCO is a fantastic e-discovery tool. It is streamlined, and very intuitive. Yet it still retains the features of the more well-established document review platforms without requiring advance knowledge. It allows users to self-manage ingest and production, as well as managing in-house review teams. As it is web based, it is compatible with nearly every system.
  • Self-management of key functions. Ingests can be handled by users, as well as production sets. No need to wait on discovery vendors.
  • Simple, yet powerful, search syntax. It uses a familiar Boolean search syntax, and can search a wide variety of metadata fields easily.
  • It is fast. Not quick; outright fast. It blows away every other platform on the market. Review times are cut in half, and searches are lightning quick.
  • Web-based. Allows for multiple logins by one user at a time. If you are in the middle of a review, but see something else you want to look up, simply open a new tab in the browser, and go.
  • Additional ways to refine searches. If I have tagged all documents containing "phrase x," and then hit the family inclusion button, it expands the number of responsive documents. This is fine. But if I want to see those additional family documents to see if it changes the type of tag or category I need to assign, that is not easily done.
  • Audits of user actions. I can audit a single document for what actions were performed by specific reviewers. But if I want to pull all actions for a group of reviewers, for a specific set of documents, there are no good solutions.
  • More customization of export document lists. I would like to be able to easily customize the categories of metadata that are exported. Deep dives into opposing party data sometimes requires looking at very specific metadata fields. When it is exported to excel, the sort options make this easier. But I don't want to hide 30 columns to make that happen.
  • The ability to customize the document view screen. If I want to minimize or hide all the panels on the left, I want that screen space back. Or, I would like to only have the metadata pane, the conversation pane, and the tagging pane on one side, and hide the rest. This should be an option.
  • Hovering for more information is broken. It routinely will move to different spots, and sometimes out of view (i.e., below the bottom of the browser screen).
  • Metadata pane. If there are multiple paths, and you click it to see the hidden paths, it truncates the paths so you can't see the whole thing.
  • Document notes. If there are notes, you should be able to see them without having to click the "view/edit note."
  • It saves money by saving time. I can review hundreds of thousands of files in a fraction of the time than with other platforms.
  • It allows for meaningful review of large data sets when opposing parties try to data dump, or the case is document intensive.
Search result export. I can run a search, and then download a spreadsheet with all the metadata of the search results. Allows for locating information quickly about a large data set that is not readily apparent.

Multiple logins by the same user. It can kill progress to have to run a new search every time something interesting is located, and you want to run off on a side issue. I routinely keep 3-5 tabs open at one time just for this purpose.

Self-management of cases. The ability to ingest data and create production sets without the assistance of a discovery vendor is amazing. No more waiting to meet deadlines.

The searching. It is intuitive, and even if it wasn't, it has a search builder that doesn't require building new "coding templates" like other search platforms.
DISCO is incredibly cost efficient from a time management standpoint. Because the platform is fast, intuitive, and easy to use, it cuts down on reviewing time. Additionally, by cutting out a vendor, you save on the middle-man costs. Further, should you have a large data set that has been reviewed, but the case is on hold, you can "vault" the data, which cuts the monthly pricing, but still retaining the tags and organization.

One downside, DISCO is more affordable once you have a better negotiated rate. Its starting rate is too high to justify to a client. Once that is negotiated, then the product becomes more cost efficient.
I have only used DISCO's professional services when I have had issues with ingested data and needed to remediate files or .dat files. Incredibly professional, and efficient. Also, the rate charged is lower than my hourly rate, so it saves the client money rather than correct the issue myself.
I have never used DISCO's managed review service. I find it easier and more productive to handle review in-house because it allows the attorneys and support staff to gain institutional knowledge about the case, familiarize themselves with the key personnel involved in the day to day on the dispute, and hired reviewers may not know the value of files they are reviewing as they are not as informed on the case.
I have used a few others as well. DISCO is better than all of them. Full stop. Maybe if you have a big law case, with dozens of review teams, and a client willing to pay thousands to organize the data, then maybe you could get more use out of a Relativity type platform. But otherwise, most of those platforms appear to go out of their way to make it much more difficult to do the most basic things, and typically rely on a third party vendor to perform tasks that should be routine.
The best use for DISCO is having emails in native format. It easily threads them, and allows you to see full conversations with ease, and see what was not collected.

If you don't have a large volume of data, then you don't really need a discovery platform, and can self-review. However, even with small data sets, it can be much easier to open a new matter, ingest, and the run a production then to do it natively. There is no good option for converting large amounts of email files to pdf or tiff and then bates stamping.