back to article IBM to end NetApp OEM sales pact: report

IBM will reportedly end its pact with NetApp, according to Bloomberg. Citing “an internal memo reviewed by Bloomberg, the newswire says IBM has simply decided to sell its own kit rather than continuing to resell the N-series network attached storage devices it sources from NetApp. IBM's storage sales aren't exactly stellar, so …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
Silver badge

Netapp dedupe is a scam

The patents are expired. It is essentially Stacker for SAN with bucket hashing. I could have designed this in the 80's.

0
2

Re: Netapp dedupe is a scam

Stacker was a data compression technology. NetApp dedupe is taking 4KB blocks that are duplicates and eliminating all but one of them. NetApp also has compression as well.

NetApp gives compression & deduplication as part of the base license (i.e. no additional cost).

Please explain the scam further since I work at NetApp and am not aware of it.

2
0
Silver badge

Parties of the Erotic Left of TEMPESTuous Centres

If you think you have security storage problems in hardware on Earth, they pale into relative insignificance with those to be encountered and vaingloriously guarded against and surrendered to in the Cloud Containment Cluster System ..... which be Virtual Terrain Team Territory with whole new worlds of novel and noble opportunies to exploit and extrapolate for friends and country against former old ignorant and arrogant ignoble foes/perverse leaderships/corrupt administrations/dodgy business empires.

0
2
Silver badge

Re: Parties of the Erotic Left of TEMPESTuous Centres

Disliking the reality does nothing to improve or change it.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Passage of time

It's taken IBM ages to catch up with software functionality on the NetApp. Only in June will the V7000 Unified support NFSv4, SMB etc. So it's only just now that IBM will be able to offer their own solution that can match NetApp for these two features.

In any case, IBM sales guys have been inclined to sell their own kit because of better margins.

The clincher is IBM's kit runs GPFS. Coupled with SSDs, these can give the IBM kit a distinct performance advantage (of course, depending on the application).

0
0
Anonymous Coward

But where's the real value

Storwize range catching up on NFS, SMB etc is long overdue, but until it has simple and effective SnapManager functions it remains behind.

NetApp as a replacement for Windows file servers was a great idea (and still is) but it is no longer their key USP. On the reverse side NetApp cluster mode is an effective replacement for the SVC non-disruptive data movement capabilities that was it's key USP (IMHO).

0
2
Anonymous Coward

Re: But where's the real value

Netapp's USP for replacing WIndows servers became questionable with the release of 2008 and definitely went west with the release of 2012.

As far a Cluster mode being an effective replacement for SVC, how does that work then ? SVC supports heterogeneous storage, whereas cluster mode is pretty much a Netapp only play unless your using the Netapp V-Series / FlexArray which will require you to format the backend storage with WAFL. So extremely disruptive and you've then just added yet another bump in the wire and locked yourself in even deeper.

0
0

Re: But where's the real value

How similar is NetApp cluster mode to SVC ? What's the equivalent of Image mode and work with a large variety of vendors' storage?

IBM have FlashCopy Manager which is similar to SnapManager.

I can see why IBM feel they can satisfy customer requirements with their own products.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: But where's the real value

Err it's not similar to IBM SVC in any way, Netapp passed on the LSI StorAge tech that was very similar. There isn't an equivalent to image mode, you have to format the back end storage in it's entirety and it has extremely limited vendor support.

0
0
This topic is closed for new posts.

Forums