Tivoli

Tivoli (TSM) takes backup by using progressive incremental backup, which means that once it takes the full backup, it only takes the backup of changed data. By using this technique, it provides lots of benefits, like using less network bandwidth and taking less storage space.

Tivoli basically provides an archive and retrieval service for data at a cheaper cost that needs to be stored for long period due to compliance.

Tivoli (TSM) backup software provides the feature of migration and recall service for space management on client systems or servers.

Tivoli is not manageable from the GUI console and I believe it needs a dedicated resource to manage the software.

Tivoli (TSM) configuration is complex, granular, and scalable with customizable configuration features, but it requires a good administrator that has a strong knowledge of the product.

It needs additional agents or plugins for administration; for example, I have to use an MMC plug-in on the servers.

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.

For Oracle and SQL Server, there are other solutions that provide more "bells and whistles" such as storage-side restores, alerting, etc.

We sometimes struggle with passwords expiring, etc. It is not a complete "hands-off" solution, as it requires SOME maintenance (not much, really).

VMware backup capabilities lag behind competitors.

Very Client Driven (which is a mixed bag). I like this feature. New, younger users may not.

Fully customizable

Automate various portions of various applications

Great at Access Management (but also Release, Change, Event, etc)

Older versions are complex to install

The GUI isn't the best for an older product

Compatibility with server systems is troublesome at times