Do you want a VW bus type array or the go-blindly-faster Veyron-type 3PAR array? This is the thrust of an HP attack programme for its channel sales bods to use against EMC – and against VNX arrays specifically. It's called the EMC VaNquish(X) campaign and a slide deck image gives us the flavour of it: VaNquish(X) VNX accounts …
I have to chuckle at that slide, I remember seeing a similar one years ago with the EVA and look how that turned out.
Several things the slide misses;
If VNX to VNX2 is forklift upgrade then what is going to 3par? (If you're migrating unified to unified then this has been made extremely easy now between VNX models).
3par dedup (if you can really call it that) works at a 16kb granular level, VNX2 works at 8kb. 3par main dedup is also file only (comparable to Gen 1 VNX), 3par's so called block is just deduping zero blocks not actual data!
How does a free backup assessment compare to a dedup guarantee? (BTW EMC also offer free backup assessments!!).
Re: Flawed slides!!!w
This comment has a few incorrect statements.
At this time, 3PAR lacks deduplication as a feature (zero compression doesn't count). 3PAR thin provisioning uses a 16KB extent size (within preallocated 128MB regions). It would be difficult for 3PAR to offer anything as file only as it is a block only box, not counting the capabilities of HP's Windows Storage Server 2012 gateway.
Re: Flawed slides!!!w
Why aren't you counting the Windows Storage Server 2012 Gateway? Doesn't it provide file services?
Re: Flawed slides!!!w
So you can't count zero compression why ? and you can't count file controller de-dupe and compression, again why ? and you're also incorrect about pre-allocated 128MB regions. What about 3PAR's reservation-less provisioning, no pools - so no stranded capacity, multiple raid levels on each drive, the fact it's true symmetric active / active, zero impact reclaim of deleted space, snapshots on different tiers etc etc etc .
I know EMC will attempt to claim many of these but they don't really work in the same way now do they ?
I'm sure its intentional irony but HP / El reg are, i trust, aware that bugatti is owned by VW...
I came here to post similar. Have an upvote.
Hmm, faster, but costs 100x as much, uses a lot more juice and is much more expensive to maintain.
100x as much? You must be joking. When was EMC ever cheap? Every storage vendor out here is making a killing on licenses. No one is a saint.
On top of that
People buy storage arrays, for, you know, storing stuff. There are cases when storage needs to be fast too, but I doubt that's often the primary consideration.
So one would want to compare the storage capacity (and the flexibility thereof) as well as the speed of a particular set of options. And their operating costs.
If you need to move a vanload of stuff, the VW bus (NOT bug; HP fails again) is likely to be a lot faster overall.
Hang on a minute
As someone that really is just in the process of buying a new SAN, I'm pretty certain that I want a VW rather than a Bugatti. The VW is a workhorse, decent value for money, reliable, easy to maintain. The Bugatti is a mid-life-crisis vehicle for willy-waving idiots with more money than sense. Just try calling the AA out to fix your Bugatti on the M1 on a rainy Friday night.
Have I missed the point here?
Also, FWIW, each time we've done a storage upgrade (5 major ones spring to mind) it's been a forklift job. It's safer that way: you have old SAN A and new SAN B, and you copy the data across. If it doesn't work, you stop and think, then try again.
That's loads better than having some half-arsed vendor tool that munges your data for hours/days, then declares that it has failed and its time to break out the backup tapes...
So if this is a true comparison ...
... does this mean HP lose money on each 3PAR array they sell, just like VAG do on the Veyron ?
Re: So if this is a true comparison ...
Oh no, if you listen to HP storage big guns, they make a hell of business with the 3PAR!! You just shouldn't mention though the 2.2 bn acquisition cost, or the fact, that HP storage business "jumped" from the 2nd to 5th place in terms of market share/revenue. By no means are they cannibalizing their own storage business, never, ever..
Crossed brands and TCO
Can no one in IT avoid crossing brands? Vanquished is a Aston Martin model. The VW shown is Camper not a Bug. Not sure I want my storage to have a Bugatti TCO, think I'll stick with VW .... Less FUD in 2014 please. Merry Christmas :-)
Upgrade my F200, forklift. Upgrade my F400, forklift. Upgrade my T400, forklift. Upgrade my T800, forklift. Upgrade my 7200, forklift. Upgrade my 7400, forklift. Upgrade my 10400, forklift
Pot, kettle ...
In other words
HP is a vanity project by a departing executive that costs 2.5x as much to build as it sells for.
EMC is a simple reliable product designed by one the greatest auto engineers, was built in vast numbers for half a century and is so loved by its owners even decades after it finished that a new rendition became a best seller?
offtopic; An American management consultant gave us a pitch in which they asked if we wanted to be a "Cadillac or VW sort of company". Much to their confusion we all agreed we wanted to be VW.
ie. A globally successful engineering led outfit, not an overweight wallowing piece of old fashioned junk driven by little old ladies.
The pricing wasn't nearly good enough...
...to beat Data Domain for us. EMC just mopped the floor in our backup RFP and took all the business for tape library, disk target, software, and services. The POC was flawless and the package did what they said it would. No one else enjoyed such results.
Now we're on to the storage front and EMC is off to an early lead with realistic sizing and reasonable performance claims, then adding data reduction and FAST goodies. Everyone else is basing their entire solutions around very optimistic performance expectations and data reduction technologies just to try and compete.
Considering that I need to live with the decision, good or bad, for the next 5 years or so at least, I'll take the workhorse general purpose storage array with lots of disk and flash and tons of expansion capability/capacity over the thoroughbred super arrays. I need reliable, predictable performance and capacity expansion increments based on real world data, not something based on best-case scenarios.
I suspect we will likely be an EMC shop for back and primary storage at some point in the future.
For now, we are using HP´s EVA not only for Vmware, but also for simple file server (SMB). As 3Par is getting more expensive, we will probably take 3Par for the virtual machines, just in case HP wins the next tender... So when the life of EVA is over I need a new powerful system for my virtual machines. But what about the file server? A VW would simply be enough. What hardware would you use for that one?
P.S.: Can anyone provide the full slides? ;)
Looks good, costs a fortune, requires specialists?
If I remember the VW bug, it ran forever, anyone could fix it, it cost next to nothing to own and with a Porsche engine, it hauled ass.
Bugatti, though I have no personal experience with it costs a fortune, requires extremely expensive specialist mechanics, requires booking appointments weeks ahead for service and most parts are not available after a few years and have to be special ordered or machines.
Was this the point they were making?
Re: Looks good, costs a fortune, requires specialists?
HP is talking about performance. I thought it was quite obvious.
Re: Looks good, costs a fortune, requires specialists?
I would just love to be in the audience to grill the presenter who thought the veyron was a good idea in that slide...
Taken from: http://www.autotrader.co.uk/articles/2012/01/cars/the-true-cost-of-supercar-ownership
to point out the following to him...
So HP is giving me something with no loadspace what so ever (think bandwidth of a station wagon comparison etc) - running costs are what your average house costs - every year!!! Apparently they are up to 192000 a year!!
yes .. I'd definitely take the VW - EMC solution... only thing is I hate emc... oh well..
Set of tyres for that car cost 25000 !!! haha..
whereas imagine the VW camper loaded to brim with backup tapes/hard drives ... hehe...
given the other stories about HP over the last couple of days they have got the expensive to maintain part sorted
Meh. For that kind of money just buy Tintri and get something that stomps both of the arrays on offer.
Who? What? ...
Haven't we just read that without contract no more firmware updates? For EVA - and soon for Proliant - and then maybe switches and printers too???
Well, well - looks like somebody at marketting is going to be happy?
I'll rethink my strategy towards HP - i've already looked at the alterinatives - and they're looking very cheap and nice!
[quote]I'll rethink my strategy towards HP - i've already looked at the alterinatives - and they're looking very cheap and nice![/quote]
Hm, "cheap" and nice?: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/12/10/not_a_nas_not_a_sannassan/
Poor analogies aside, the truth is that EMC is built on an aging and inflexible architecture and is struggling to keep up with the functionality and performance being offered by more modern architectures, of which 3PAR is one of many! And the point about the fork lift upgrade is not that moving to 3PAR isn't a forklift upgrade, but that if your upgrade is as complicated whether you stay with EMC or move to another vendor, then now could be a good time to move to another vendor.
HP, EMC, Why is Compellent never mentioned as much as these two? In my experience it's rather good - blew the EMC proposition out of the water on features alone for me.
Someone at HP doesn't like homework...
Seems someone at HP doesn't like homework...
Funny… As far as I know, both Bugatti and VM Bug are from the same company (VW). So are they EMC too?
From what I found, Bugatti closed operations back in the 1960s, then was purchased by an italian entrepreneur, and then became bankrupt in 1995. VW acquired the name back in 1998.
I wouldn't context my comparison based on a company that didn't survive on its own, and wouldn't compare to another car at the same car manufacturer.
Come on, HP… tell your marketing folks to do some homework first (lol)