Advanced Digital Information Corp., Arkivio, Avamar Technologies, Hewlett-Packard, Hitachi Data Systems, IBM, NuView, OuterBay Technologies, Princeton Softech, Softek, StorageTek, Sun Microsystems, Troika Networks and Veritas Software Corp. all responded. You can find their complete responses here.
Computer Associates chose not to participate, insisting that it's too soon to talk about ILM. EMC, a vocal proponent of ILM, told us it intended to take part, but it never submitted a response. Instead of a questionnaire response, Rainfinity submitted an essay describing the need for building-block technologies to enable ILM.
We're passing no judgment on the vendors' relative strengths and weaknesses--our aim is simply to illuminate their ILM goals and visions. In the final analysis, ILM seems to mean whatever the vendor says it does. Moreover, in many cases, the term describes a proprietary approach to data management that locks the consumer into a particular vendor's technology for as long as the data must be retained. Our best recommendation is a familiar one: Caveat emptor!
Advanced Digital Information Corp.
Well-known in the tape automation world and a comparatively recent player in the SRM (storage-resource management) market, ADIC distinguishes DLM (data life-cycle management) from ILM.
The latter, the company notes, "uses applications that can look inside files, and use the content of them to help an end user determine their value and different use requirements. ILM applications are very specific, dealing with a particular application area (SEC regulations for e-mail retention, for example), and end users are likely to use several different ones. ILM can help users understand different requirements for files, but to actually manage map files to storage resources--to actually move data, protect it [and provide] access [to it]--ILM needs to use DLM."