Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Gorilla and King Portfolio Candidates -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Apollo who wrote (37742)	1/10/2001 3:34:57 PM
From: Allegoria	Respond to of 54805

Oh, I must have missed that. Thanks anyway, Eric

To: Apollo who wrote (37742)	1/11/2001 7:28:35 AM
From: Allegoria	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 54805

Wait! Before we vote can I say just one thing(What a lie!)? Eric: "…may I nominate EMC as a gorilla for SAN?" - Part I. Apollo: Certainly. It's just that no one on this thread has been able to describe EMC's proprietary architecture. Can you describe and a make a case for proprietary architecture held by EMC? On this thread a while back there was a very good discussion about the logic in dividing and sub-dividing a given market over and over. I believe it was pointed out that if you narrow your scope far enough you can crown almost as many gorillas and kings as you desire. Does anybody know of a link to that discussion? Is this generally recognized by our esteemed leaders on this thread as a potential pitfall of the definition game? Or not? What criteria is used in defining a particular market? So part of my reasoning for nominating EMC as a SAN gorilla was to point out the logic in perceiving the storage market from the proposed NTAP judgment. I love NTAP as a NAS gorilla too. But there have been lengthy discussion (agreements?) that they are merely network architectures in the storage market. From DownSouth: Eric, why are you looking at SAN and NAS as separate markets? They are merely network architectures in the storage market. They are not niches, they are architectures. They have, for all intents and purposes, merged into mere topologies that fit within the storage network architecture--soon to be joined by InfiniBand, DAFS/VI, etc Message 15039714 In fact I wasn't looking at NAS & SAN as distinct markets and I couldn't agree with DownSouth more! But the market place does use these categories as reference points for discussion. The storage market is evolving very quickly and the merging of the SAN / NAS architectures is already upon us. Witness HighRoad, DAFS/VI or the other efforts blurring these distinctions. I'll expand more on this in the next post. And a huge amount of effort is being poured into the continued decimation of these distinctions. Others have persuasively argued that the two technologies are actually more complementary than competitive. NAS v. SANs -- It's being increasingly portrayed as the major battle in the world of information management. Truth is, however, it's largely hype. Network-attached storage and storage area networks are rivals no more than sight and sound were in the early days of cinema. So it appears we have general agreement (?) we are discussing a storage market, not a NAS or SAN markets anymore. So for the sake of GG designations, would it be better to stick to the storage market in its entirety? But as I said, the market places a partition between the NAS / SAN markets for a reference for discussion. Before a 'this-or-that' gorilla is crowned, consider the storage sector in this light: According to Dataquest, NAS last year was a $68.2 million market and projected to become an $8.3 billion market in 2004. SAN was a $1.8 billion market last year, and expected to grow to $40.4 billion in 2004. NAS: $68m to $ 8b SAN: $1.8b to $40b Part of the 'gorilla-hood' mystic of NTAP and the wish for coronation revolves around the concept of disruption. Prof. Christensen notes in The Innovator's Dilemma: "Historically, disruptive technologies involves no new technologies; rather, they consist of components built around proven technologies and put together in a NOVEL PRODUCT ARCHITECTURE that offers the customers a set of attributes never before available." P.246 DownSouth says it perfectly (as usual!): "What you must remember is that NAS is NOT A DISRUPTIVE INNOVATION! What is disrutpive is NTAP's dis-integration of the file system of the general purpose OS. That is what WAFL does so effectively." siliconinvestor.com So I have to question the wisdom (not our esteemed elders wisdom however - never!) ;) of sub-dividing the storage market into SAN / NAS. Thanks, Eric

To: Apollo who wrote (37742)	1/11/2001 7:29:36 AM
From: Allegoria	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 54805

Eric: "…may I nominate EMC as a gorilla for SAN?" - Part II. Apollo: Certainly. It's just that no one on this thread has been able to describe EMC's proprietary architecture. Can you describe and a make a case for proprietary architecture held by EMC? Architecture - A design. The term architecture can refer to either hardware or software, or to a combination of hardware and software. The architecture of a system always defines its broad outlines, and may define precise mechanisms as well. An open architecture allows the system to be connected easily to devices and programs made by other manufacturers. Open architectures use off-the-shelf components and conform to approved standards. A system with a closed architecture, on the other hand, is one whose design is proprietary, making it difficult to connect the system to other systems. webopedia.internet.com Addressing Apollo's question specifically: The entire EMC product line is based on a proprietary architecture which is a combination of hardware and software. EMC is investing $2.5 billion in research and development this year and next, with the majority going into software development. EMC is focused on developing a single solution for NAS and SAN requirements. Software sales growth is running at nearly 100% year-over-year. In the most recent quarter, software made up 16.3% of EMC's total sales. That's up from 10.9% only one year earlier. The network storage model is creating strong demand for sophisticated software. EMC has responded with software products that are becoming an increasingly large component of the overall revenue mix. Witness EMC's CrossStor software. As with most software, up-front fixed costs and unlimited duplication at zero cost combine to form some very favorable economics. EMC's model has begun to demonstrate strong operating leverage by taking a play from the Microsoft economic handbook -- software sales. The networked storage model has opened the door for EMC to sell sophisticated software management tools. Over the past year, EMC has packed more than $1 billion of this software into its data storage boxes. Software sales growth is running at nearly 100% year-over-year. In the most recent quarter, software made up 16.3% of EMC's total sales. As you can see, software is becoming an increasingly important component of EMC's business model. The software side of EMC's business is ramping up so quickly that operating leverage is becoming quite strong. fool.com The advantages of software fool.com EMC's Proprietary architecture: Enterprise Storage Network: Rather than being constrained by LAN, NAS, or SAN technologies alone, EMC has developed the EMC Enterprise Storage Network ™ (ESN)-the convergence of NAS and SAN into one infrastructure strategy, more powerful and more flexible than any one technology choice alone. HighRoad fuses the industry-standard file sharing of network attached storage (NAS) with the high-performance information delivery of a storage area network (SAN), for the first time creating one unified storage network. Future of their proprietary architecture? With EMC investing $2.5 billion in research and development they have formidable patent caches. Open architecture? I don't know, but here is one comment: "Some people talk of 'open' in terms of ability to access third-party hardware and servers, hubs, and switches and in that respect, EMC is the most open," said John McCarthur, vice president of storage research at IDC, Framingham, Mass. techweb.com Okay, I made my pitch…I know no one read this far so I'll quit at this… Regards, Eric

To: Apollo who wrote (37742)	1/12/2001 8:36:32 AM
From: Allegoria	Respond to of 54805

It's just that no one on this thread has been able to describe EMC's proprietary architecture. In a sentence: Sophisticated hardware, software and software management tools. Bundled together and called Enterprise Storage Network (ESN). Hardware includes even the director switches marketed by MCDT. Can you describe and a make a case for proprietary architecture held by EMC? Thanks for the nice comments, I made the best case I could using the time I committed. EMC owns and operates a proprietary architecture. There is no dispute about that which I detect. Its questioned whether its as good as NTAP's proprietary architecture, but then the two architectures (SAN & NAS) serve two different functions / market segments. So what's the problem? Where is the SAN gorilla crown? Ignoring NTAP's NAS, what doesn't EMC have? If NTAP takes NAS, I still think EMC has all the attributes required of a gorilla and deserves the SAN crown. What specific attribute is still questioned? Disruptive technology? Thanks and I am looking in my mail box daily for my crowning party tickets! Eric Regards, Eric