To KJ Moy's last post..
<<Supposedly Ancor switches "mesh" together better than anyone else's (read Brocade's).>>
>It is the fact, not just supposedly.
That's the fun thing about the few rabid Ancorites.. They never provide real measurable, reproducible, data that is useful to anybody interested in actually evaluating the technology.. Just hearsay, rumor, hype, and umm.. "facts" like these..
I guess that only thing I can say to that is.. ".. if you say so.."
<<"Multi-staged (Ancor exclusive: Highest performance, lowest cost-per-gigabit, highest resiliency, ideal for
larger installations and/or tape drives)">>
>That's right. I am glad you noticed. For a company which claims to have 80% of the FC switch market share, why pay attentions to such minor details and went to such great length to pay for a test of your best against an old generation product. And, the test did not even include switch throughput. Wouldn't it be ironic Brocade's best switch would lose to Ancor's old switch in throughput performance?????
Unthinkable.
You're glad I noticed what? That Ancor misrepresented information by describing a "multi-stage" configuration as an Ancor exclusive?? Also you should check your facts better, Brocade isn't the source of the claims of 80% market share. Industry analysts are, (I think one was Dataquest, but you're more than welcome to check your favorite one..).
But I actually see that those jabs were only intended to setup working your real point into the discussion (since I never brought it up.. you HAD to..) and that is the tired point that the Keylabs test featured Brocade's switch against an "older" Ancor switch. I'm just curious, for a long time (seems like forever actually) the rabid Ancor vocal few, had been saying that Ancor was always technologically superior. You did mean the MK-II didn't you? I mean you didn't mean a year ago that the Sanbox was better than the Silkworm did you?
Well anyway that hardly matters as NOW you are saying that it's the Sanbox that's the better switch. It doesn't matter that when the tests were commissioned and when they were performed the MK-II WAS the GA switch. But now that the Sanbox has been announced, that is the actual Ancor FC switch that should be considered by the marketplace (maybe Ancor was just kidding with the MK-II line..). Where is one actually? I mean a Sanbox FABRIC switch.. (You'd actually need one to run through the same tests as described in the Keylabs piece) Hmm.. why did Ancor announce products that weren't actually available yet? What Ancor reseller can actually sell me an 8 port fabric Sanbox or even a 16 port fabric Sanbox? TODAY? How about who can tell me WHEN I will be able to buy one from an Ancor reseller?
For those that are curious (and openminded) the Keylabs report actually documents some good test methodology to use for testing ANY SAN switches. And I am sure that as soon as Ancor ships a new fabric switch (they don't yet) that SOMEONE will test it.. However I'm sure that by then the rabid Ancorite argument will change again.. (that's at least consistent..)
BTW I'm not sure what you mean by the tests did not include tests for single switch throughput. They do. Did you read the report? I did. What do you mean by single switch throughput? Do the tests on page 59 entitled "5.2.4 Scalability Test Case 4 ? Full bandwidth performance" count? If that's the case then I hate to (again) burst your "we always had the technical lead" bubble, but the Ancor switch performed worse than both the Brocade and Vixel switches (at HALF the overall single switch data rate). Pretty indicative of the overall crappy ASIC design that forms the basis of the product. But then again the reason for the Ancor switch performing at HALF the data rate was because Brocade paid for the test, I mean you couldn't recreate that and get the same results could you..?
Unthinkable..
>Or may be SUN, MTIC, ADIC, Thomson chose Ancor because of their inferior Sanbox. Right, yeah, ok.
Hmm.. There you go again.. Saying this begs the response that I'm sure that Compaq, IBM, Dell, SGI, DG/Clariion, McData, StorageTek, and the other (13 or 14 total now) Brocade OEMs, chose Brocade because THEY had the technically inferior switch. Or maybe you mean that somehow Sun, MTI, ADIC, and <hehe> Thomson, (where's HDS in your list..?) are somehow technically more astute at FC switch solutions than those OTHER OEMs.. right.. Considering how much FC SWITCH based fabrics those OEMs you mentioned ACTUALLY SELL, this point is made with the same amount of rational thinking as other rabid Ancorite points..
>Is it true that Greg Reyes just register to sell more shares? How's the moral of Brocade's employees lately? Tell them Ancor is hiring a few more good people.
You should probably ask Greg about his stock position, and Brocade employees about their morale.. If I had to work and I had the choice of working for Ancor or Brocade, I know which one I would choose.. |
