This is Dave's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following Dave's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
Dave
Recent Activity
Hi Chuck. In my experience price declines are historically steeper than 30% but maybe I'm understating the effects of software. For my historical planning assumptions with customers I typically use 60%-65%+ TB growth (in normal times) and 37% annual $/TB declines-- driven off of Moore's Law. Since most software is tied to TB's I think the two track together pretty well, but I'm open to suggestions otherwise. This creates an interesting anomaly in the storage world...that is to say, very high growth in TB but very low growth in revenue. In fact, by my estimates, for spending to increase even modestly, your 60% growth rate, which is higher (and more accurate imo) than I've heard many execs in the business use (including JT), will eek out an ever so slight spending growth. Academic? Sure...but my point is having watched this space for many years, TB consumption is highly price elastic. If vendors find ways to reduce data consumption and lower costs...users will consume more. Kind of like closet space...there never seems to be too much. Bottom line is I think the industry is short-changing growth expectations. Here's my math: http://www.internetevolution.com/author.asp?section_id=654&doc_id=177503
Interesting topic Chuck. I've made similar assessments of EMC vis a vis competing with $100B giants (from a revenue or market cap standpoint) such as IBM, HP and ORCL. I would agree EMC used to be not so good at acquisitions (anyone remember Epoch?) and improved over time. However I don't think EMC is quite yet in the league of Oracle or IBM when it comes to acquisitions. It's easy with the success of VMware to forget Documentum. Even Avamar was a struggle for at least two years before you perfected that forumla-- and it's still not quite there globally. Will acquiring DDUP gets EMC out of the grow or be acquired category? I doubt it. So EMC suffers from the same lack of acquisition candidates as does NTAP. Further, I don't think EMC makes a great acquisition target. I think it's price is too high to get the prized VMware asset, which is by far the most interesting to potential acquirers. So I think EMC remains independent and must figure out a way to grow. My advice would be, rather than spending $2B+ on a $3B de-dupe market, EMC should be targeting potentially higher growth, more strategic businesses such as the information management space. This biz is a mess, no one owns it and it's a much larger opportunity than de-dupe. It's also one where CIO's are active and EMC needs a way to become more strategic to CIO's as are IBM, HP and Oracle today.
I thought Steve Kenniston's pitch at EMC World put forth the best vision I'd ever seen around data reduction technologies from any vendor. Basically it said the goal is to place data reduction IP (source and target-based de-dupe, single instancing, compression, etc...) across EMC's portfolio and allow those technologies to speak the same language such that you don't have to re-hydrate data as it's moved around the enterprise. Essentially making data reduction incremental and cumulative. At that time, which of course was before the DDUP announcement, I said to myself - "awesome vision...and pigs will fly before that happens." :-) I realize you're talking more about company integration but users would clearly benefit from the vision Steve put forth...Best of luck to you and the good folks at Data Domain.
That's absolutely awesome... Where do we send the check? -----Dave, as it sits currently there is no need to send anything - if and when we find out who the match is we'll act accordingly. In the meantime thank you for all your effort and support. You are a good human being. -- Steve.
Toggle Commented Jun 30, 2009 on Miracle - Thank you!!! at Steve's IT Rants
Agree on the distinction between cloud compute and cloud storage. Seems competition is cohering along these lines. "Having the right information in the right place at the right time dramatically improves end user application performance and can dramatically reduce associated network costs." This makes a lot of sense. Will Google File System (GFS) characteristics will be more prevalent in this space and is objects per second (OPS) a more useful measurement than say IOPs? To wit: http://wikibon.org/wiki/v/DataDirect_Networks_aims_at_cloud_storage
Toggle Commented Jun 29, 2009 on Storage And Cloud at Chuck's Blog
T Lives-- I love it! I just checked Youtube. For the series, over 600K views with a 4.5 rating by nearly 1500 people. Not too shabby...Go figure. Remember the viral video challenge I put forth way back in Nov of 2007 on this blog? (see comments): http://thestorageanarchist.typepad.com/weblog/2007/11/0049-hds-rifs-m.html#more No one ever claimed the $1,000 prize I put up!
Toggle Commented Jun 12, 2009 on 2.010: pity the fool at the storage anarchist
1 reply
Thanks Steve for coming up with the idea and organizing the pledge. I'll kick in $1,000 each to the donor and the referrer. Dave Vellante http://wikibon.org/blog/help-save-a-life/
Toggle Commented May 22, 2009 on Please Help at Steve's IT Rants
I'm not sure Google wants to 'catch up' Mark.
1 reply
Good post and comments - glad my RSS feed is back up I was missing all the fun. What people seem to be ignoring in my view is that VMax could be the 'last man standing' in the high end. Just like when IBM out-invested the competition making it more attractive to run 'the next app' on mainframes. Hitachi bailed, Fujitsu bailed and IBM now has the market to itself. IBM invested in CMOS and Sysplex and a bunch of software that Scott McNealy called a 'hairball.' It's quite a profitable hairball today. VMax's CMOS analog is Intel chips and like Sysplex it offers the ability to do things at greater distances. FAST (when it ships) should make it more attractive to put 'the next TB' on VMax. Is it worth some premium for Symmetrix customers to store data on VMax and get the highest reliability, the best remote recovery, etc? I would think so, especially if they don't have to rip out all their Symmetrix processes. Hope to find out next week at EMC World.
In the case of EMC I'm quite certain that not all EMC employees in MA are bound by non-competes. I believe EMC applies the requirement to Director level positions and above-- but am not positive of that. MA is an extremely employer-friendly state and companies here take advantage of the law-- almost to a firm. I'd be shocked if Donatelli has anything but an iron clad agreement with HP to defend him. DD has uprooted his life for HP.
1 reply