Bradley
The merger makes a ton of sense. The switch guys have a problem in that their per port costs are too HIGH. To spread that cost (on an AL port) you put a hub in front of that port and 5-10 connections share that $3000 port instead of 1. That;s the compelling reason to do the deal. I don't imagine this is the last deal you'll see. Selling just hubs, switches or HBA's is a tough standalone business. So combining FC product families into one company, whether by joint marketing or merger, makes alot of sense to help win deals. Ancor's strategy of providing host bus adapters with their switches early on was instrumental in every win. The most difficult thing about making a swtiched fabric work is the HBA drivers (spoken from experience) it is what has delayed switch FC the most.
I think Ancor needs to work with Hub vendors to insure interoperability and help them penetrate smaller accounts.
Roy
-------------------------- bfm-----------------------------
Hey Roy!
CraigS1 keeps talking about how ANCR should team with a hub vendor. I am not so sure
myself about the wisdom of this course of action - it looks to me that the hub vendors
would have lower margins.
However, that said, G2 as a hub vendor would be a candidate for such a partnership, and
based on Mr Taborak's credentials, it looks like you would bring some interesting
technology to the party.
In light of the Vixel/Arxcel partnership, what is your take on this? Do you see any need to
hook up with a switch vendor (not necessarily ANCR) in the future to provide a growth
path for the system integrators? Would it likely be Brocade if you did, or have those
bridges burned down given the "management disagreements"?
My understanding was that given the work in the standards area, interoperability is the
goal. If that is the case, could you provide what you think might be the business case for a
hub vendor/switch vendor merger? Bigger base to cover overheads, maybe - I am just
guessing.
TIA,
-------------------------- efm----------------------------- |
