Ambiguous marketing fluff
Terms like 'archive' are ambiguous so it's best to adequately clarify exactly what you are talking about. This article seems to use the term to mean several different things at different points and indeed simultaneously. I say seems because the marketing-speak quoted throughout is somewhat sales-y and vague.
What I have found when discussing this topic with clients (internal or external) is that labels like 'backup', 'archive', 'disaster recovery', 'nearline', 'hot', 'cold', etc... are all a distraction. For me, the place to start from and that must be always kept as you guide throughout any implementation/management/review cycle is what are you trying to achieve?
Saving money is great but must take a back seat to ensuring you have a system that actually does what you need.
For example, if the requirement you are trying to fulfill is to meet the obligations of a particular tender, that specifies that data from the client must be kept segregated from other client data - both while live and 'backed-up' - with monthly point-in-time copies to be stored in an off-line format (i.e. unconnected to any external or internal network whatsoever) at a nominated, 3rd-party off-site storage service then that requires a different approach and solution than "we need to keep 7 years of payroll data".
Both these situations call for what would be termed an 'archive' but both are quite different.
As with everything, the key to assessing different solutions is to have a clear, well-defined idea of what you are trying to achieve.
That is just common sense; the important point is that labeling those goals with terms like 'backup' and 'archive' make them less clear and lesswell-defined.
Marketing teams love such labels for precisely the same reason.