Pretty weak Chuck...
Now I hate both Netapp and EMC as much as the next guy, but EMC set the snapshot reserve to 100% on the netapp filer in Chuck's response, chopping the effective usable disk space in half.
No storage admin would ever actually do that (nor would their Finance department allow it), which puts the Netapp back up to the tried-and-true, been-that-way-forever, 65-70% usable range, negating Chucks entire post. Which makes EMC's rebuttal that much more comical. Set a value in the test to 5X what it would actually be, and call that a legit comparison? That's all they got???
Netapp's are in general slow and expensive (having admined 100's of TB of Netapp and EMC over the years, I know, trust me), but at least they published a legitimate face-off with the SPC-1 benchmark.
The EMC gets it's ass handed to it by a Netapp once you turn on snapshots? Imagine that... That's RAID-6 + WAFL, kicking RAID-5's ass for you. Nothing most storage admins didn't already know.
EMC, please stick to the big iron, and leave the scraps to Netapp....
Netapp, please un-fuck your next-gen/GX product, and add block-level features to it before the next millennium, so you can actually compete with the big boys.