NetApp has had a good week. The company posted a really impressive set of results and slipped out a totally un-humble post on the subject, titled “Why NetApp is winning.” No-one has fired back because, we suspect, NetApp can point at the fiscal scoreboard to back up its boastfulness.
By submitting your email address, you agree to receive emails regarding relevant topic offers from TechTarget and its partners. You can withdraw your consent at any time. Contact TechTarget at 275 Grove Street, Newton, MA.
But that does not mean the vendor gets off scot free, as StorageBod reports on a stoush between EMC and NetApp over the extent to which the former supports the latter. StorageRap picked up on the exchange in a post that drew a comment from EMC’s Chuck Hollis, who wrote:
“C'mon, Marc, this ‘holier than thou’ nonsense doesn't stand up.”
Marc is 3Par’s Marc Farley, author of StorageRap, which also contains musings on the state of the EMC/Dell relationship and posits that EMC isn’t getting much love these days, seeing as it has cuddled up to Cisco for servers and Dell has discovered that its whole direct thing works pretty well for storage (Farley also found time for a swipe at Drunken Data).
Weightier analysis comes from ESG’s Steve Duplessie, who looks at what EMC/Cisco vs. HP/3Com might mean.
Elsewhere, IBM’s Tony Pearson takes issue with EMC employee and blogger StorageZilla for an old-ish post about x86 being a jolly good idea for powering arrays, instead of the rather more exotic processors employed in some recent IBM kit.
‘Zilla has a lovely term of phrase, describing the IBM product in question as:
“Like an automobile from Eastern Europe during the cold war … with one gammy wheel, bad suspension and worse brakes …”
Reading that again, we almost feel like it is sucker-bait for competitors. What do you think?
Storage Anarchist also cops it from HDS, via. Claus Mikkelsen and a 70s TV allusion.
While we are on IBM, StorageIO became the latest to question the relevance of its XIV platform. Another analyst, IDEAS International, thinks about the recent deals in terms of their impact on virtualization.
One verrrrrry interesting post this week comes from HP, which refutes a Register report about the nature of its relationship with HDS. The post niggles Sun on the way out, as does IBMer Elisabeth Stahl in her post about just who rules the roost in the supercomputing caper.
While we are on Sun, have you checked out our story with basic specs for four new arrays it will release next year? We’re pretty sure you won’t read this anywhere else. Check ou the pic below for a taste:
An interesting debate this week centres on whether or not Information Lifecycle Management and Storage Tiering are the same thing. Storage Nerve got things going at about the same time Greg Schulz asked similar questions about ILM. NetWorker had a crack, too.
Data Robotics gets a big slab of bloggers’ attention this week after releasing a pair of new models. The Drobo Elite and Drobo S were written up by Online Storage Optimization, Stephen Foskett, Techhead, Tony Asaro and Storage Architect. (Now if only Drobo’s local distie would return our emails …)
We’re down to the miscellanea now, but they are very good miscellanea this week. For example, Information Playground has an interesting recount of a lecture about the availability of scientific data. The Backup Blog asks if one really needs backup? Tony Asaro reports on a customer event and offers some insights into what storage users really want. Aprigo blogs about what storage admins are really like, digging at Symantec along the way. Pivot Point has some worthy data about the performance of thin provisioned disks under virtualisation.
William Vambenepe looks at Fujitsu’s cloud standards play and Storage Mojo analyses ZL Technologies’ lawsuit against Gartner. Drunken Data takes issue with the way SSDs are being pushed and vTacit gets exxcited about Axxana (see what we did there with the double x).
See you next week!