HP’s annual storage sales are growing much faster than IBM’s, but are eclipsed by the revenue growth of storage front-runners EMC and NetApp. Stifel Nicolaus MD Aaron Rakers has computed the annual percentage change in storage revenues for the companies and we charted his numbers: Major Storage vendors annual revenue changes …
...has already responded to the all-flash arrays with the 3PAR 7450.
IBM's problem is glitz and glamour. Look at how dull and boring the product line is! I've never heard an IBM rep get excited about their products. HP practically froths at the mouth about how the 3PAR stuff is the juggernaut of the storage industry, leaving everything else nothing more than a pile of smoking hardware and red flashing LEDs.
Plus HP positively jumps on any opportunity to do a proof-of-concept and ram the point home (I tend to be very critical of HP evangelists having come from HP before, but the products are sound and that is proven out in the field).
I asked my IBM rep about doing a bake off with a Compellent for me since that's what the very trusted VAR would sell us and he didn't want to participate but I should consider them anyways because of <marketing spew and boring Redbooks>. If the VAR sold HP I guarantee they'd be in like a dirty shirt with their goodies and free lunches and such.
Plus, 3PAR is yellow. Point for HP. If the rest of their equipment was painted to match my server room would look like a bumble bee because yellow means it's awesome.
As for EMC, they own so much of the worlds data (as in, resides on their products) that it is very tough to get people out of the ecosystem. Not that you'd want to as a customer, if you are an EMC shop with existing storage to replace, buying the newest version based on what the SE sizes up for you will certainly not get you fired.
And NetApp is NetApp. Apparently disk is dead and NetApp is so last decade, but it looks like no one got the memo.
Re: HP Storage...
Well, looking at these numbers it looks like you missed the class on reading charts...
Re: HP Storage...
Um "And NetApp is NetApp. Apparently disk is dead and NetApp is so last decade, but it looks like no one got the memo."
Really, then why is HP #4 with declining share in combined NAS and SAN and NetApp is #2 and increasing share?
Oh, and before you say that is because HP doesn't sell a lot of NAS, that is the point. according to IDC, NAS will be the dominant protocol moving forward, not FC or iSCSI. That is why HP is declining because they are not selling what customers want to buy. Also, to be clear, by declining I mean that according to IDC, HP dropped share in Open Networked combined NAS and SAN markets from 9.8% share this time last year to 8.1% now, according to the latest IDC chart.
Was this article written by HP marketing? The second chart shows that while Q4 this year (they're presumably not planning to sell anything in December) is about the same as Q4 last year (I assume this is where the 0.6% figure came from) whereas every other quarter this year is significantly down on last year. In fact, it looks like 2013 has been a shitty year compared to 2011 & 2012, and still worse than 2010.
The article seems to have focused on Q4 compared to Q4 last year. So how did Netapp, EMC and IBM do in those quarters? As shit as HP?
All this article is saying to me is that HP's revenue is down over the last 4 years and IBM had a bad Q3 compared to last year's Q3.
IBM had a bad Q3? I'd call an 11% drop a car crash of a quarter! The XIV bubble seems to have burst, and the V7000 hardly catches the imagination! I think HP have tidied up their portfolio well. Admittedly we are an HP shop, but we're most likely going to replace 3 different flavours of HP storage array (we have XP, EVA and 3PAR currently), all with 3PAR 7400's. I think we're a little way from implementing all flash arrays but when we do, they idea of the 7450 appeals.
You know nothing about enterprise market.