It probably depends on what you trying to archive.
I have some experience with FileNet. It worked quite well for over two decades but required some attention. But we had some volume (~150k pages scanned and CI pages per day) for the time and the system was highly customized.
Today it is easier to accomplish the technical and regulatory requirements with the available systems. But for a larger volume, long archival times (20++ yrs) and guarantees for reliability and imputability it's still a task that require it's attention.
I've seen some inhouse developed system due to the high price tags, but these had there issues too.
With long archival times I would always recommend something as "KISS" as possible, even for smaller environments. Supporting special features for a long time can we demanding task on its own.
One thing I'm missing especially is a standardized API like you have SMPT for email systems.
The same with file formats originally used for archival (e.g. PDF/A) have much to many revisions with too many features.
We had quite good success with conversation of complex data formats to TIFF (limiting to basic features of this format) or plain text at the time of the archival together with the original format.
I've seen some inhouse developed system due to the high price tags, but these had there issues too. With long archival times I would always recommend something as "KISS" as possible, even for smaller environments. Supporting special features for a long time can we demanding task on its own.
One thing I'm missing especially is a standardized API like you have SMPT for email systems.
The same with file formats originally used for archival (e.g. PDF/A) have much to many revisions with too many features.
We had quite good success with conversation of complex data formats to TIFF (limiting to basic features of this format) or plain text at the time of the archival together with the original format.