Archive for the ‘Quest Software’ Category

And then there were two (independent virtual directory vendors that is)…

June 11, 2011

So, since the big news from Quest Software announcing the acquisition of Symlabs, the independent virtual directory market has shrunk down to two.  That would be Optimal IdM (my firm), and Radiant Logic.  On tha tnote, I thought it would be a good time to browse the short history of virtual directory vendors and products and see just where they all are today:

OctetString OctetString Virtual
Directory – (Java)
Acquired (Oracle) Acquired by Oracle in 2005
(now Oracle Virtual Directory)
Sun Virtual Directory Server – (Java) Acquired (Oracle) Acquired by Oracle in 2009
(no longer sold)
MaXware MaXware Virtual Directory – (Java) Acquired (SAP) Acquired by SAP in 2007
(now SAP NetWeaver Identity Management Virtual Directory Server)
Symlabs Virtual Directory Server – (C & Java) Acquired (Quest) Acquired by Quest Software
in 2011 (will be embedded into some Quest product and no longer sold)
Identyx (Penrose) – (Java) Acquired (Red Hat) Acquired by Red Hat in 2008
(Identyx sold a special version of the Open Source Penrose Virtual Directory)
ID-Unify Acquired (Citrix) Acquired by Citrix in 2010
(no longer on the market)
MyVD My Virtual Directory – (Java) Open Source No updates in over 3 years (likely cannot keep up
with commercial vendors)
Novell Virtual Directory Services – (Java) Never made it to market Project was disbanded in
Virtual Directory Server – (Java) Commercially Available Written in Java and
requires Java run-times and third party binaries.
Virtual Identity Server – (.NET) Commercially Available The ONLY .NET Virtual
on the market.  Microsoft-Centric, but connections to
heterogeneous systems.  Since its initial roll-out in early 2008, the
product has been proving to be a true innovator in new features and new ways
to leverage virtual directory technology.  Deep integrations into the
Microsoft suite such as SharePoint 2007/2010, AD FS 2.0, UAG,
and more.  Optimal IdM has three recent head-to-head wins against
Radiant Logic with Fortune
100 companies in 2011 alone!

Now to return back to the Quest acquisition of Symlabs, it’s worth nothing that the intention of this acquisition was not for Quest to enter into the virtual directory market, but rather to leverage the technology to make their own products better.  This tells me that they are pretty forward in their thinking of how to solve some common LDAP related issues that exist in many products on the market today.  As Dave Kearns points out in this article, this is the same reason that many companies purchase these products.  I believe this trend will continue, but what’s interesting to note is that as these vendors get swallowed up by the bigger vendors to solve their own internal issues, they are removing products from the market that are proving to be a vital part of the identity management technology stack.  After this latest acquisition, Symlabs customers will be asking questions and perhaps seeking a replacement product.  In order to ease this transition, Optimal IdM, will be making special offers to existing Symlabs customers to help them migrate to the Virtual Identity Server solution at a very low cost and no increase to their existing support expense.  Stay tuned for more details or contact Sales for more information.


Why not use a Virtual Directory?

September 2, 2009

Bob Bobel from Quest posted an interesting blog today, posing the question “Why are Multiple Directories Deployed and Virtual Directories Ignored?“.  Basically stating that based on the concept of what a Virtual Directory provides, that everyone should have one (or want one).  In his quest to find out why clients don’t have or don’t use a Virtual Directory, his general feedback was that “it just doesn’t fit our needs”.

Hmmm, that’s interesting that this would be the hightlighted response.  In our experience, when talking with organizations (with multiple LDAP’s), most people really don’t know what a Virtual Directory is and exactly what one can do for them (although, they don’t want to seem behind on new technology, so they say things like “it just doesn’t fit our needs”).

It really all boils down to the lack of education on this emerging technology and the fact that there really isn’t much information on how they work or where to truely discover the benefits.  When Microsoft comes in to help a client solve technical challenges around LDAP (AD, AD-LDS, Multiple-Domains/Forest, etc.), they mostly won’t recommend technology that they don’t have to sell.  So clients miss out on opportunities to get educated on newer technologies that can help in certain situations.  For example, Microsoft will almost always recommend to synchronize instead of virutalize, because that’s all they know and sell.  Makes sense to me, but the client loses here by not always using the right tool for the job.  Take a look at this for a quick guide to using a Virtual Directory.

Anyway, I look forward to part II of Bob’s blog on this topic.