7 posts • joined Thursday 30th September 2010 02:51 GMT
In other news
BMW about to retire 2012 models, release 2013 versions. Drivers everywhere outraged as Mellorino reports they will have to relearn location of steering wheel, pedals, switch-gear and gas tank door.
The inevitable march to the top
If you observe NetApp's progression over the years, the conclusion is inevitable. They started out as a workgroup NAS vendor, then continued adding more and more enterprise-grade functionality, reliability and finally now, enterprise-class performance. Make no mistake, this is a Tier1 result from what is now a Tier1 SAN *and* NAS vendor.
See JJM's latest article for further affirmation:
For me, this benchmark result is nothing more than irrefutable proof that after many years of development, C-Mode represents a new tranche of scalability for Data ONTAP. I can see why those being disrupted by NetApp are upset and try to discredit the results via scattered nit-picking, but from an objective perspective, at the moment no one else can match NetApp's combination of storage functionality, efficiency and performance at scale.
Which is what makes it my favorite array to work with.
Read before you post
The amount of Anonymous cowtard ignorance on this thread is impressive - even for ElReg commenters! I know Chris likes to get eyeballs by generating controversy, but if you bother to actually read Val's original blog, you'll indeed notice this is not about NetApp vs. EMC.
It's about the potential for flash to disrupt them both and Val's pitch that VST is a consistent approach for NetApp customers to protect existing investments as technology moves forward. It should be clear to the reader that EMC employs a completely alternative portfolio approach to address the same disruption, with seemingly a lot less investment protection for existing customers.
While it's premature to predict which approach will win in the end, JJM has posted a very nice analysis here cutting through the clutter to point out what's really happening in the trenches. Good on him!
<a href="http://www.storagenewsletter.com/news/financial/netapp-fiscal-4q12-financial-results">StorageNewsletter Analysis of NetApp vs EMC storage-only revenues (see comments section)</a>
Apples vs Oranges
First of all congratulations to EMC for a very strong 2011H1. Note that NetApp's organic market-share gains here are 2nd only to EMC's Data Domain & Isilon acquisition-driven gains.
However, the NetApp revenue comparison here is misleading. Not only are IDC numbers always mis-aligned with NetApp's fiscal quarters, but the important Engenio acquisition ($750M in OEM revenue for a cost of $480M) is not factored into these results yet.
I believe by the end of 2011, IDC will better reflect NetApp's true revenue & overall market-share gains.
You don't reign in a $5B Fortune 500 company with velocity
You simply get out of their way and watch them continue to outgrow you, wondering all the while "what if?"
EMC really need to get past denial if they have any hope of stopping the NetApp juggernaut:
Hmmm. Perhaps you're the lucky one?
EMC SAN failure blamed for Intermedia hosted email outages
Or EMC guilt by association:
He who casts the first stone ...
Something for the cowardly NASty haters to ponder
"After tying with EMC in the last Quality Awards, NetApp prevails this time to nudge out EMC and IBM, which tied for second.
NetApp Inc. continues to shed its "NAS-only" image with another impressive outing in the Storage magazine/SearchStorage.com Quality Awards for enterprise arrays."