Storage analyst Josh Krischer is upset at the way leading EMC bloggers, in his words, "spread inaccuracies and FUD on their competition and … attack personally someone who is pointing to the inaccuracies (without correcting or answering)." The spat has arisen because of responses submitted to Chuck Hollis and Barry Burke (aka …
Chris, it happens to the best of us.
We sometimes choose only to see, believe, acknowledge and accept statements and sources that agree with our positions and it blinds us to information that may disprove our perceptions or call them into question.
Krischer, Hollis and Burke are no different.
Hollis clearly hopes to "expose" any affiliation Krischer might have to competitors perhaps with the hope that such information might cause readers to question Krischer's motives and distract them from the questions asked. I don't know about Krischer--I've never met him--but we've done a substantial amount of business with most major vendors including EMC and HDS. While disclosure is important, it becomes mostly irrelevant to a discussion in which the participants/subjects of the discussion have all been clients at one time or another. In the context of most of the analysts I know who do business with hundreds of competitors in dozens of categories, Hollis and his peer's new found love of "transparency" is a red herring. The day an individual like Hollis questions my integrity based on "who is paying my bills" I'll gladly trot out every EMC invoice from the past 8+ years along with those from his competitors. Then what? then perhaps he can drop the song and dance and answer the questions.
Kirscher is, in my opinion, justified in his disgust with regard to any personal attacks. Such behavior doesn't belong in these discussions.
Having said that, it seems like all three gentleman are engaged in a phallic waving contest that will never be resolved by way of half-baked blog comments. It seems the back and forth comments quickly became one big unintelligible mess that few people will have the time or patience to navigate. They each refuse to acknowledge any shred of truth in the others' comments.
I urge readers to save their time and apply it to something more valuable and insightful than adult adolescent bickering. I speak from experience. I've wasted far too much time participating in the same.
You don't know me
If you don't know me why you wrote "Krischer, Hollis and Burke are no different"? I pointed to factual discrepancies and FUD in their block but instead getting viable answers or correction got a coordinated personal attack. There is a big difference between EMC and HDS, IBM, NetApp etc. bloggers- they continuously spread FUD about the competition. On the 25th October I spoke with a customer in Germany who was purchasing storage. He considered EMC and IBM XIV. One of the reasons that IBM won was that EMC pointed all the time to disadvantages in XIV saying very little about their own products. It must be corporation culture.
Anyhow, if you want to know more about me please visit www.joshkrischer.com. I will be also happy to discuss that with you over a phone.
the full quote
“Josh Krischer demonstrates a knowledge of the server and storage markets that is nothing less than encyclopedic. He is blunt, honest, uncompromising and often irascible - but very rarely wrong!” February 27, 2006
Vice President and Distinguished Analyst , Gartner Inc. (ex-colleague)
Those that don't learn from history...
t seems that all of the years of experience learned from dial-up communities, Usenet and today's online forums are lost on corporate blogs. If you got everyone in their suits or khakis/polos sitting in front of their bosses, few people would be rude to each other. But as soon as you take them out of meat-space and into their online personas, the bloggers and the visitors all feel like there are no social rules to follow.
Social networking? No, I think it's anti-social networking half the time.
Is it transparency you want?
Can you feel the hypocrisy of Mr. Hollis asking for more transparency? For those familiar with the campaign financing behind elections in the U.S. (and likely other countries), this is like a senatorial candidate asking a lobbyist to disclose all the resources and interest groups supporting their activities, while posturing that his/her own campaign is untarnished by such resources and special interest groups.
"You, sir, are a scoundrel and should be ashamed of compromising your integrity by kowtowing to the monied interests influencing your opinions and positions. I demand to see the complete list of those financing your campaign."
"And what of your campaign, sir? Are you not soliciting and accepting resources to back your candidacy?"
Vendors across the IT industry spend their resources and time with analysts to get access to their data and insight, as well as to educate them on their respective strategies and product plans. This, indeed, is a symbiotic relationship, and both parties need to be conscious of the ethics around building such a relationship, or they risk losing their credibility. Being a client or an advocate for something (a product, a candidate, and idea, etc.) should be based on knowledge and insight on that which is being evaluated, rather than on the appreciation for an expensive dinner and trip to a gentlemen's club a vendor provided.
I wager Mr. Hollis is unwilling to disclose the amount of gifts, travel expenses, and "recreation" his firm spends on clients and analysts to influence their behavior toward EMC offerings. It seems terribly disingenuous for him to ask for more transparency without offering his own.
The core complaint from Josh is the Cereva IP
EMC Purchases Cereva: August 2002
EMC Debuts DMX: Feb 2003
There's no way that EMC could swallow up IP and put it into their flagship prodcut that fast.
Whoever is hiding behind these initials?
First: If you think that the issue is Cereva you just missed the point, this is a result of one of the deviations.
Second: Some facts Cereva Networks was acquired by EMC in June 2002 and not August. Please see below a LinkedIn entry of one of the Engineers:
Staff Software Engineer
Public Company; 10,001 or more employees; EMC; Computer Hardware industry
July 2002 – May 2005 (2 years 11 months)
Worked for Advanced Development Team and a project coming from the AD Team. Worked in Linux Kernel, Windows XP Kernel. All code written in C, C++.
Principal SW Engineer
Privately Held; 51-200 employees; Computer Hardware industry
August 1999 – June 2002 (2 years 11 months)
Storage Startup. Worked in the I/O path. Code written in C on Unix for use in VxWorks platform.
Third: your remark “There's no way that EMC could swallow up IP and put it into their flagship prodcut that fast.”
You are right, it is much more logical that EMC developed a complete new high-end storage subsystem (hardware, software) after the departure of Moshe Yanai in less than two years and EMC acquired Cereva paying 10M$ because they have big heart and wanted to secure the future of 40 Engineers.
- Comment Renewable energy 'simply WON'T WORK': Top Google engineers
- Useless 'computer engineer' Barbie FIRED in three-way fsck row
- Game Theory Dragon Age Inquisition: Our chief weapons are...
- 'How a censorious and moralistic blogger ruined my evening'
- Leaked screenshots show next Windows kernel to be a perfect 10