Conclusion
Both solutions are easy to handle. Find a safe spot for the backup device, plug it in to a power outlet and the USB cable, install the software and you’re ready to go. Iomega bundles Retrospect Expess 7.5; Quantum adds its own software solutions. We found that the time required for a 6.5 GB backup and restore process was less with the Iomega REV 120 GB even though the Quantum drive offers much better read and write throughput.
De-Duplication vs. Disaster Recovery
Quantum’s de-duplication feature, which only saves modified blocks of files it already stored in a previous backup session, goes a step further than incremental backups that only save modified files. It is an excellent tool to reduce the capacity required for daily backup of the same data pool and thus helps to accelerate repeating backup tasks of a given set of files (e.g. project files on a server). However, the device slows down the initial backup process compared to the physically slower Iomega REV 120 GB drive, which splits backups into 600 MB increments and allows for the creation of a CD set with a bootable disc for disaster recovery. Quantum only handles individual backup sets and requires a workable host system.
Iomega Proprietary, Quantum Expensive
We aren’t sure where Iomega will go with its REV drive concept. The current version offers sufficient capacity for small business backup, and it works like clockwork thanks to the Retrospect software. The cost per gigabyte is still acceptable with 64 cents per GB when you purchase one 120 GB disk, or 54 cents per GB for the five-pack ($325). But it’s a highly proprietary product, which is limited to the 120 GB capacity point per medium. If you are sure that your backup capacities will not multiply then this product will suite your needs.
Quantum offers simpler handling if you ever intend to copy files onto a GoVault cartridge, because these are treated like hard drives. The de-duplication is a smart addition and shortens the time required for daily backup from 21 minutes to around one minute after repeating the test with few modifications on the 6.5 GB file pool. Yet the biggest advantage is the scalability of the product, which can be upgraded with higher-capacity cartridges, because these are based on conventional 2.5” SATA drives. Unfortunately, pricing is unreasonable at $209 for 80 GB and $339 for 160 GB. This equals $2.6 and $2.1 per gigabyte. A 30%-40% price cut seems appropriate. We recommend going for a SATA version for performance reasons.
