GITNUXSOFTWARE ADVICE
Technology Digital MediaTop 10 Best IT Cost Management Software of 2026
Ranking of it cost management software for budget tracking, with short notes on ProsperOps, CloudZero, and Vantage and key tradeoffs.
How we ranked these tools
Core product claims cross-referenced against official documentation, changelogs, and independent technical reviews.
Analyzed video reviews and hundreds of written evaluations to capture real-world user experiences with each tool.
AI persona simulations modeled how different user types would experience each tool across common use cases and workflows.
Final rankings reviewed and approved by our editorial team with authority to override AI-generated scores based on domain expertise.
Score: Features 40% · Ease 30% · Value 30%
Gitnux may earn a commission through links on this page — this does not influence rankings. Editorial policy
ProsperOps is the best fit for cloud teams that want policy-controlled automation to optimize AWS commitments across complex multi-account setups, whereas CloudZero works better if engineering and finance need product-level accountability, and Vantage is a strong low-budget entry for configurable reporting across providers and cost centers.
Editor’s top 3 picks
Three quick recommendations before you dive into the full comparison below — each one leads on a different dimension.
ProsperOps
Closed-loop automation that evaluates cloud usage and executes approved savings actions through provider APIs.
Built for fits when cloud teams need policy-controlled automation across complex multi-account environments..
CloudZero
Editor pickCloudZero Dimensions create business-specific cost views from billing attributes, workload metadata, and shared-resource allocation rules.
Built for fits when engineering and finance teams need product-level cloud accountability across multiple environments..
Vantage
Editor pickVantage Cost Reports combine hierarchical grouping, custom filters, shared dashboards, and scheduled delivery in one reporting model.
Built for fits when cloud teams need configurable reporting across providers, Kubernetes, and engineering cost centers..
Related reading
Comparison Table
ProsperOps
vertical specialistAutomated AWS commitment management and savings plan optimization.
Closed-loop automation that evaluates cloud usage and executes approved savings actions through provider APIs.
ProsperOps combines usage analysis with automated action through cloud-provider APIs. It evaluates commitment utilization, rightsizing recommendations, and idle-resource opportunities across large multi-account environments. FinOps teams can review savings activity and exceptions without repeating manual reviews for every account.
The tradeoff is a strong focus on public-cloud resources, which leaves on-premises assets and SaaS license reclamation outside its primary scope. During cloud migrations, teams can use account and resource exclusions to prevent automated changes from affecting temporary test workloads.
- +Executes approved savings actions instead of only presenting recommendations.
- +Supports exclusions by account, region, service, and resource.
- +Automates commitment decisions as usage patterns change.
- +Provides exception visibility for workloads excluded from automation.
- –Public-cloud focus excludes on-premises assets and SaaS license reclamation.
- –Unattended changes require carefully maintained exclusion policies.
- –Automated decisions may need finance-facing explanation and review.
- –Application-level attribution remains dependent on accurate ownership metadata.
FinOps operations teams
Multi-account waste reduction
Lower recurring cloud waste
Cloud infrastructure leaders
Commitment coverage management
Improved commitment utilization
Show 2 more scenarios
Enterprise platform teams
Policy-bound test environments
Safer optimization across environments
Teams can exclude temporary accounts, regions, or resources from unattended optimization actions.
Migration program managers
Post-migration resource cleanup
Faster post-migration cleanup
ProsperOps identifies idle resources after workloads move and routes eligible cleanup actions through configured policies.
Best for: Fits when cloud teams need policy-controlled automation across complex multi-account environments.
More related reading
CloudZero
SMBCloud cost intelligence platform for unit economics and anomaly detection.
CloudZero Dimensions create business-specific cost views from billing attributes, workload metadata, and shared-resource allocation rules.
CloudZero ingests data from AWS, Microsoft Azure, Google Cloud, Kubernetes, and selected services such as Snowflake. Dimensions let administrators define views using accounts, tags, services, namespaces, clusters, and other attributes. Teams can create dashboards for applications, environments, customers, or internal groups, then use alerts and budgets to monitor changes. CloudZero also exposes API capabilities for connecting cost data with internal reporting and operational workflows.
The interface offers strong analytical depth, but meaningful results require consistent source metadata and careful allocation rules. Kubernetes reporting depends on cluster telemetry and workload labels that accurately describe ownership. CloudZero fits organizations that need to explain a sudden increase in service costs, assign shared infrastructure to products, and track cost per customer or workload.
- +Dimensions model maps cloud spend to products, teams, environments, and customers
- +Supports AWS, Azure, Google Cloud, Kubernetes, and Snowflake data sources
- +Anomaly alerts identify unexpected changes without relying on fixed reporting periods
- +Unit cost views connect infrastructure usage with customer and product metrics
- –Meaningful allocation depends on accurate tags, labels, account structures, and ownership metadata
- –Kubernetes analysis requires reliable cluster telemetry and workload attribution
- –Native SaaS license and general IT asset tracking are outside its core scope
- –Advanced dashboards require administrator involvement as organizations and allocation rules change
FinOps teams
Assign shared infrastructure costs
More defensible ownership reporting
SaaS engineering leaders
Track customer infrastructure costs
Clearer customer profitability
Show 2 more scenarios
Platform engineering teams
Investigate service cost anomalies
Faster cost investigations
Alerts and drill-down views expose unexpected changes by service, account, workload, or deployment context.
Finance business partners
Build product cost reports
Consistent management reporting
Custom dashboards present allocation results by business dimensions instead of raw provider invoices.
Best for: Fits when engineering and finance teams need product-level cloud accountability across multiple environments.
Vantage
SMBCloud cost transparency and optimization platform with reporting dashboards.
Vantage Cost Reports combine hierarchical grouping, custom filters, shared dashboards, and scheduled delivery in one reporting model.
Vantage centers its experience on Cost Reports rather than a fixed executive dashboard. Reports can group spend by account, service, tag, namespace, or custom dimensions, which gives engineering and finance teams a shared view of cloud financial management. Kubernetes reporting connects cluster namespaces and workloads with underlying infrastructure costs.
The tradeoff is narrower coverage for software licenses, on-premises assets, and general IT asset management than dedicated ITAM suites. Vantage fits a multi-account engineering organization that needs scheduled reporting, budget alerts, and consistent cost allocation without building internal dashboards.
- +Cost Reports support custom grouping across accounts, services, tags, and namespaces.
- +Native Kubernetes views connect cluster workloads to infrastructure spend.
- +API and Terraform support automate report and budget administration.
- +Scheduled alerts deliver spend changes through email and collaboration workflows.
- –Coverage for software licenses and non-cloud IT assets remains limited.
- –Optimization actions often require separate cloud-provider workflows.
- –Advanced allocation depends on consistent tagging and account structures.
- –General-ledger workflows are less developed than in enterprise ITFM suites.
Multi-cloud finance teams
Monthly cloud spend reporting
Consistent monthly reporting
Kubernetes platform teams
Namespace cost visibility
Workload-level cost attribution
Show 2 more scenarios
Engineering managers
Budget variance monitoring
Earlier spend intervention
Managers configure thresholds and alerts for team or project spending before variances become difficult to correct.
FinOps administrators
Automated report provisioning
Repeatable administration
Administrators use API and Terraform workflows to standardize report creation, budget setup, and configuration changes.
Best for: Fits when cloud teams need configurable reporting across providers, Kubernetes, and engineering cost centers.
ManageEngine ITAM
SMBIT asset management suite with cost tracking and license optimization.
End-to-end software license reconciliation workflow tied to entitlement and asset relationships for governance-driven reclamation planning
ManageEngine ITAM is an IT cost management tool focused on IT asset inventories, license governance, and cost reporting tied to real usage signals. It supports software asset management workflows such as reconciliation, entitlement tracking, and unused license reclamation planning tied to device and user associations.
Cost views can be mapped to organizational structures for budget variance analysis and chargeback style reporting when integrations provide the necessary cost drivers. The main differentiator is how strongly ManageEngine ITAM couples asset and license data with reporting and governance controls inside the ManageEngine ecosystem.
- +License reconciliation and entitlement tracking reduces mismatches in audits
- +Device and user association improves defensible cost allocation narratives
- +Governance workflows support approval chains for license reclamation actions
- +Reporting ties asset baselines to IT financial reporting outputs
- –Deep cost allocation requires disciplined tagging and organizational mapping setup
- –APIs and automation surface are less extensive than dedicated FinOps tooling
- –Cloud billing and workload cost ingestion is not the central design focus
- –Cross-platform normalization can require custom integration work
Best for: Fits when IT financial management depends on hardware and license accuracy for internal showback and chargeback reporting.
Cloud Custodian
API-firstOpen-source cloud governance engine with cost management policies.
Policy engine that combines resource filters with action execution using configurable schedulers and event triggers.
Cloud Custodian turns cloud policy definitions into scheduled and event-driven actions that identify and remediate cost waste. It organizes controls around targeted resources and attributes, then applies filters and actions to stop, resize, tag, or report spend drivers.
The product includes an API surface for policy execution and tooling for extending policies through custom resources and filters. For IT cost management, it can produce cost allocation inputs by writing consistent tags and generating audit-friendly reports from existing cloud metadata.
- +Policy-driven actions for cost waste detection and remediation at scale
- +Extensible custom resources and filters for workload-specific cost logic
- +Event and schedule triggers support near-real-time cleanup workflows
- +Audit-friendly reporting captures what changed and why
- –requires setup discipline to prevent unsafe actions during rollouts
- –Coverage depends on how cloud resources map to supported policy targets
- –Many advanced workflows need policy authoring rather than point-and-click rules
- –Cost allocation reporting is strongest when tagging standards are already in place
Best for: Fits when teams want automation-as-code to control cloud spend drivers and write consistent tagging outcomes.
Flexera One
enterpriseIT optimization platform covering SaaS, cloud, and on-premises spend.
Flexera One’s governed allocation rule engine links software asset and entitlement context to cost mapping decisions.
Flexera One is a technology cost management suite aimed at enterprises managing IT and cloud spend with tight governance over assets and applications. It combines financial allocation workflows with software asset context to connect consumption, entitlements, and cost responsibility across cost centers.
The suite supports automation and reporting workflows for budget variance analysis and forecast visibility based on ingested cloud and IT data. Flexera One also emphasizes admin controls like RBAC and audit logging to manage who can change allocation rules and provisioning decisions.
- +Allocation rule governance tied to technology and entitlement context
- +Strong integration surface for cloud billing and asset data ingestion
- +Automation workflows for recurring variance reporting and exception handling
- +RBAC and audit log coverage for changes to financial mapping rules
- –Complex configuration when aligning assets, services, and allocation structures
- –Deeper cloud showback and chargeback often depend on data model alignment
- –Forecast output quality depends heavily on upstream tagging and ingestion completeness
- –Automation runs can require operational tuning to avoid alert noise
Best for: Fits when IT finance and FinOps teams need governed cost allocation tied to assets and applications.
CAST AI
vertical specialistKubernetes cost optimization with automated bin-packing and instance selection.
Kubernetes workload scheduling signals feed cost recommendations that can be automated with controlled approval.
CAST AI places workload-aware cost optimization at the center of IT cost management by pairing cloud spend data with scheduling and capacity decisions. It ingests cloud billing details to drive allocation views while connecting recommendations to Kubernetes-driven scaling and resource changes. Governance comes through RBAC controls, audit logging, and configurable automation so teams can validate changes before broader rollout.
- +Workload-aware Kubernetes recommendations tied to measurable cost drivers
- +Automation supports approval workflows before applying scaling changes
- +Cloud billing ingestion mapped to engineering workload constructs
- +RBAC and audit logs support shared operations across teams
- –Deep Kubernetes setup is required to realize full optimization accuracy
- –Governed automation adds operational overhead for approval and review loops
- –Chargeback and showback require careful tag and workload ownership mapping
- –Forecast variance analysis depends on consistent workload labeling practices
Best for: Fits when Kubernetes teams need automated, workload-scoped optimization tied to cloud spend allocation.
Zylo
enterpriseSaaS management platform with spend optimization and license rationalization.
Allocation configuration supports governed chargeback or showback views with change history attached to configuration edits.
Zylo targets IT cost management teams that need consistent visibility from cloud billing through allocation and reporting. The workflow centers on spend ingestion, cost allocation logic, and chargeback or showback views by business unit and service.
Automation is driven through configurable allocation rules and reusable mappings, which reduces manual spreadsheet reconciliation. Admin controls focus on restricting who can configure allocation settings and who can view downstream reports.
- +Configurable allocation rules for mapping spend to cost centers
- +Reusable mappings reduce repeated setup across environments
- +Role-based access controls for separating config and reporting users
- +Audit trails for changes to allocation configuration
- –Requires careful tag and mapping hygiene to prevent misallocation
- –Automation coverage depends on the quality of source billing attributes
- –Report customization needs ongoing governance as services change
- –API surface is limited for deep custom ingestion pipelines
Best for: Fits when IT finance needs standardized cost allocation and controlled reporting across multiple cloud sources.
Productiv
enterpriseSaaS spend management platform with engagement-based license optimization.
Allocation rule engine that generates traceable cost assignments from invoice and usage inputs with audit-ready results.
Productiv focuses on IT cost management workflows that convert cloud invoices and usage signals into actionable chargeback views. It emphasizes rules-based allocation through configurable cost objects and mapping to business dimensions like cost centers.
Product data is organized around allocation inputs, results, and auditability for month-end variance checks. Automation and integration features support scheduled refreshes so allocation outputs stay aligned with billing data.
- +Configurable allocation rules tie spend to cost centers and apps
- +Scheduled refreshes reduce manual reconciliation during month-end closes
- +Audit-friendly allocation outputs support variance investigation
- +API enables automation of configuration and data updates
- –Complex mapping requires governance to avoid misallocated charge lines
- –Some data sources need preprocessing before they fit allocation inputs
- –Advanced allocation scenarios take time to validate with test runs
- –Reporting customization can be slower than template-based viewers
Best for: Fits when enterprises need governed allocation rules that keep chargeback views current with cloud billing data.
Finout
SMBCloud cost observability platform with megabyte-level billing granularity.
Configurable allocation logic that turns raw cloud billing into repeatable cost assignment across accounts and organizational structures.
Finout is built for cloud spend allocation and IT cost visibility across accounts and workloads. It ingests cloud billing data, applies allocation rules to map spend to teams and business services, and supports budget variance and forecasting workflows.
Administration features focus on controlling allocation configuration and maintaining consistent cost definitions across the org. The main differentiator is how allocation logic is managed and operationalized for chargeback and showback reporting.
- +Allocation rule engine maps cloud costs to teams with consistent definitions
- +Chargeback and showback reporting supports structured governance of cost ownership
- +Forecasting and budget variance views connect allocation output to planning work
- +Integration workflow reduces manual effort for pulling and normalizing billing data
- –Complex allocation setups can require careful configuration and ongoing maintenance
- –Automation depth depends on the available integration points for each environment
- –Large tag and account sprawl increases effort to keep mappings current
- –Limited coverage gaps can appear when cost attribution data is missing upstream
Best for: Fits when cloud costs must be allocated consistently to teams for chargeback, showback, and planning.
Conclusion
After evaluating 10 technology digital media, ProsperOps stands out as our overall top pick — it scored highest across our combined criteria of features, ease of use, and value, which is why it sits at #1 in the rankings above.
Use the comparison table and detailed reviews above to validate the fit against your own requirements before committing to a tool.
How to Choose the Right it cost management software
IT cost management software in this guide spans ProsperOps, CloudZero, and Vantage alongside governance-first tools like Flexera One, ManageEngine ITAM, and Productiv.
The list also includes policy execution through Cloud Custodian, Kubernetes-scoped optimization with CAST AI, and allocation configuration with Zylo, Finout, and the broader automation patterns seen across these platforms.
Each tool review centers on how cloud billing and workload signals turn into governed cost assignment, showing which systems rely on provider API execution versus reporting and allocation rules.
IT cost management software for governed cloud spend allocation and automation
IT cost management software maps raw cloud usage and billing inputs into cost assignments that teams can view, reconcile, and charge back using defined allocation logic. ProsperOps focuses on closed-loop automation where approved savings actions execute through provider APIs after policy evaluation, while CloudZero emphasizes cost accountability through Dimensions built from billing attributes, workload metadata, and shared-resource allocation rules.
For cost governance, tools like Flexera One and Productiv concentrate on rule-based mapping that ties spend to assets, entitlements, and cost center structures with scheduled refreshes to keep chargeback views current. Where deeper automation exists, platforms such as Cloud Custodian rely on a policy engine with configurable schedulers and event triggers to execute actions based on resource filters and consistent tagging outcomes.
IT cost management capabilities to prioritize for governed allocation
The category’s value shows up when cloud billing and infrastructure signals convert into repeatable cost assignments with defined ownership. The software also needs controls that prevent cost drift when tags, accounts, and entitlements change.
The highest-impact capabilities in this list are integration depth through provider APIs, allocation rule governance that links spend to cost centers or assets, and automation that can execute approved actions without breaking guardrails.
Closed-loop savings automation via provider APIs
ProsperOps evaluates cloud usage and executes approved savings actions through provider APIs instead of stopping at recommendations. This design fits when policy-controlled changes must run unattended after evaluation passes.
Business-specific cost views built from Dimensions and allocation rules
CloudZero uses CloudZero Dimensions to map spend to products, teams, environments, and customers using billing attributes and workload metadata. The Dimensions model helps finance and engineering reconcile cost attribution with how work is actually delivered.
Configurable hierarchical cost reporting and scheduled delivery
Vantage Cost Reports combine hierarchical grouping, custom filters, shared dashboards, and scheduled delivery in a single reporting model. Vantage also provides native Kubernetes views that connect cluster workloads to infrastructure spend.
License reconciliation workflows tied to entitlement and asset relationships
ManageEngine ITAM provides a software license reconciliation workflow tied to entitlement and asset relationships for governance-driven reclamation planning. It improves defensible internal showback and chargeback by reducing mismatches between what is deployed and what is entitled.
Automation-as-code policy engine with schedulers and event triggers
Cloud Custodian offers a policy engine that pairs resource filters with action execution using configurable schedulers and event triggers. It supports extensible custom resources and filters for workload-specific cost waste detection and remediation.
Governed allocation rule engine linked to software asset and entitlement context
Flexera One’s governed allocation rule engine connects software asset and entitlement context to cost mapping decisions. This approach is built for allocation structures that need audit-friendly traceability from assets and entitlements to assigned cost.
Decision framework for governed IT cost allocation and automation
Start by mapping the expected decision loop to the tool’s execution model. Tools like ProsperOps and Cloud Custodian can execute provider-impacting actions through APIs or policy execution, while others focus on reporting and governed allocation rules.
Next, align the allocation philosophy to the source-of-truth structure in the organization. Some platforms generate cost assignments from billing attributes and workload attribution, while others anchor cost mapping to assets, entitlements, or reusable allocation configurations.
Pick the execution model: API action versus allocation-only reporting
If the workflow requires savings actions to run automatically after approval, prioritize ProsperOps closed-loop automation that executes through provider APIs after policy evaluation. If the workflow centers on tagging-driven remediation and policy actions with schedulers and event triggers, Cloud Custodian fits the automation-as-code model.
Choose how cost attribution is constructed: Dimensions versus hierarchical reporting
If cost attribution must reflect product, team, environment, and customer mappings from billing attributes plus workload and shared-resource allocation rules, select CloudZero Dimensions. If the primary need is configurable reporting with hierarchical grouping and scheduled delivery across providers and engineering cost centers, select Vantage Cost Reports.
Anchor allocations to assets and entitlements when governance depends on license truth
When the organization needs license reconciliation tied to entitlement and asset relationships for governance-driven reclamation planning, ManageEngine ITAM supports the reconciliation workflow. When allocations must be governed through asset and entitlement context for cost mapping decisions, Flexera One provides the rule engine that links those contexts.
Validate Kubernetes scope requirements against the required setup
If Kubernetes workload costs must drive recommendations and actions scoped to workloads, CAST AI focuses on Kubernetes workload scheduling signals with approval workflows before applying scaling changes. If Kubernetes analysis is primarily needed for cost reporting connections rather than workload-driven scaling changes, Vantage provides native Kubernetes views tied to cost reports.
Check allocation governance and change traceability for finance chargeback workflows
If standardized chargeback and showback mappings require allocation configuration with change history tied to configuration edits, Zylo provides governed allocation configuration with attached change history. If current chargeback views must refresh with scheduled refreshes and traceable cost assignments from invoice and usage inputs, Productiv focuses on rule-generated traceable assignments with scheduled refreshes.
Who should buy this category and which tools match their constraints
IT cost management software fits when organizations need repeatable cost allocation that finance and engineering can reconcile during month-end closes. It also fits when cloud usage must be controlled through policy execution or when software license truth is required for defensible showback and chargeback.
The right tool depends on whether the organization needs provider-action automation, business-oriented cost mapping, Kubernetes-scoped optimization, or asset and entitlement-governed license reconciliation.
Cloud FinOps teams managing multi-account savings decisions
ProsperOps fits when cloud teams require policy-controlled automation that evaluates cloud usage and executes approved savings actions through provider APIs across complex multi-account environments.
Engineering and finance teams aligning cost attribution to products and customers
CloudZero fits when Dimensions must map spend to products, teams, environments, and customers using billing attributes, workload metadata, and shared-resource allocation rules.
IT finance teams that must reconcile licenses and entitlements for governance
ManageEngine ITAM fits when the workflow depends on software license reconciliation tied to entitlement and asset relationships so showback and chargeback narratives remain defensible.
Enterprises that want governed allocation rules that keep chargeback views current
Productiv fits when invoice and usage inputs must become governed cost assignments with audit-ready traceable outputs and scheduled refreshes to reduce month-end reconciliation.
Kubernetes operations teams seeking workload-scoped optimization with approvals
CAST AI fits when Kubernetes workload scheduling signals must feed cost recommendations that can be automated with controlled approval workflows before scaling changes.
Common failure modes in IT cost management implementations
Most failures come from treating allocation views as static while organizational structures and billing inputs change. Misallocation also happens when automation executes actions without maintaining exclusions and governance policies.
These mistakes usually show up during month-end closes when chargeback numbers do not match expected ownership or when Kubernetes and license data do not map cleanly to allocation structures.
Relying on recommendations without planning for governance when automation can execute changes
ProsperOps can execute approved savings actions through provider APIs, so exclusion policies for account, region, service, and resource need disciplined maintenance before unattended changes run.
Assuming allocation will be accurate without tag, label, and ownership metadata quality
CloudZero Dimensions depend on accurate tags, labels, and ownership metadata, so incomplete tagging will degrade allocation outcomes and make product-level accountability hard to reconcile.
Expecting software license coverage and non-cloud IT assets to match cloud cost tooling depth
Vantage Cost Reports focus on cloud and Kubernetes views, so software licenses and non-cloud IT assets remain limited compared with license reconciliation workflows in ManageEngine ITAM.
Skipping mapping governance and change control for allocation configuration edits
Zylo supports governed allocation configuration with change history attached to configuration edits, so teams must treat edits as controlled changes to avoid silent misallocation.
Underestimating Kubernetes setup work required for workload-scoped optimization
CAST AI requires deep Kubernetes setup to realize full optimization accuracy, so teams should plan the telemetry and attribution requirements before expecting reliable workload-scoped recommendations.
How We Selected and Ranked These Tools
We evaluated ProsperOps, CloudZero, Vantage, and the remaining tools based on features and implementation fit that directly affect governed cost assignment quality. Features and allocation mechanics received the highest weight at 40%, and ease of configuration plus ongoing operational effort each received 30%. ProsperOps ranked highest because closed-loop automation evaluates cloud usage and executes approved savings actions through provider APIs, and it also supports exclusions by account, region, service, and resource to control unattended changes.
Frequently Asked Questions About it cost management software
How do ProsperOps and Cloud Custodian differ in closed-loop automation for cost changes?
Which tools provide a business-oriented cost data model without forcing a fixed tagging scheme?
How does Vantage handle hierarchical reporting and scheduled delivery for cost management workflows?
When does CAST AI support workload-scoped optimization tied to Kubernetes scheduling decisions?
What breaks if cost allocation tags are inconsistent across accounts for tools like Productiv and Zylo?
Which platforms combine IT asset or license reconciliation with cost governance for showback and chargeback?
How do API and automation surfaces differ between Vantage and Cloud Custodian for administration and extensibility?
How do Flexera One and CAST AI handle access control and change traceability for allocation or optimization?
What integration approach works best for connecting allocation results to chargeback or showback reporting workflows?
Tools reviewed
Primary sources checked during evaluation.
Referenced in the comparison table and product reviews above.
Keep exploring
Comparing two specific tools?
Software Alternatives
See head-to-head software comparisons with feature breakdowns, pricing, and our recommendation for each use case.
Explore software alternatives→In this category
Technology Digital Media alternatives
See side-by-side comparisons of technology digital media tools and pick the right one for your stack.
Compare technology digital media tools→