I always appreciate it when someone attempts to educate others about identity management and related technologies. So when I saw the the following presentation, it quickly caught my attention as I was working with both products when the Oracle deal to purchase Sun went down.
Why Oracle Dropped Waveset Lighthouse and Went to Oracle Identity Manager (OIM)
Not to be too nit picky, but there are quite a few errors in this presentation that I simply couldn’t ignore.
- OID is not the acronym for “Oracle Identity Management”, it is an acronym for “Oracle Internet Directory” – Oracle’s LDAPv3 directory server. OIM is the acronym for “Oracle Identity Manager”.
- SIM (“Sun Identity Manager”) was not a “suite of identity manager products” as you state. SIM was a data synchronization and provisioning product. SIM was part of the suite of Sun Identity Management products that also included Sun Directory Server Enterprise Edition (SDSEE), Sun Access Manager/OpenSSO, and Sun Role Manager (SRM).
- It is stated that one reason that Oracle did not elect to continue with SIM was because it did not have a Web 2.0 UI. SIM version 9.0 (the version being developed when Oracle purchased Sun) did have a Web 2.0 UI. So this is not quite an accurate representation.
- “Oracle IDM” is Oracle’s suite of identity management products which includes Oracle Virtual Directory (OVD), Oracle Identity Directory (OID), Oracle Access Manager (OAM), and Oracle Identity Manager (OIM). The presentation uses “Oracle IDM” (and later, simply “IDM”) to refer specifically to Oracle Identity Manager, however. This is both confusing and misleading.
- It is stated that “IDM allowed faster application on-boarding.” As an integrator of both OIM and SIM, I can honestly say that this is not a true statement. We could have simple SIM deployments up and running in the order of days/week and a production deployment in a month or two. OIM, consistently took several months to deploy – which was great for a billable professional services firm, but not so great for the customer (who had to pay for those services).
- It is inferred that OIM is able to provision to cloud and SIM was not and that was a reason why Oracle chose to go with OIM. That is a misleading statement as SIM was able to provision to cloud applications as well. SIM also supported SPML (not a big fan, myself) and SCIM for provisioning to other identity platforms and cloud based applications.
The main reasons that Oracle chose to go with OIM versus SIM was simply the deeper integration with Oracle products and their not wanting to alter the Oracle IDM roadmap. I was on the early calls with Oracle when they announced which products they would keep and which products they were getting rid of. During those calls, they had their “politically correct” reasons as well as the “real” reasons and it always came back to these two.
There was only one place where I saw Oracle forced into altering their position and they had to update their roadmap; this was with the SDSEE product. Oracle made it very clear that the only product they wanted in Sun’s identity product line was Sun Role Manager (which later became Oracle Identity Analytics). In fact, only a couple weeks after the purchase was made, Oracle had already set an end of life date for all identity products including SDSEE. What Oracle hadn’t counted on was how well entrenched that product was across Sun’s major customers (including the US Government and major Telcos). It wasn’t until the outcry from their customers was raised that Oracle “decided” to continue product development.
Purely from a technology perspective, if you are a company that has deployed a wide array of Oracle products, then it made sense to go with OIM due to the deeper integration with Oracle products, but not so much if you are a heterogenous company. In such cases, I have found other products to be more flexible than OIM and provide a much quicker deployment times at much lower costs.