Does my midrange look big in this?

IDC defines three categories of external disk. The midrange market leaders are EMC, Netapp and IBM (followed by Dell and HP with both slipping slightly over the last 12 months). Netapp is almost entirely a midrange business, while EMC and IBM are the market leaders in highend. Over the last 4 quarters midrange has accounted for almost half of the spending in external disk (cf just over a quarter on highend) so clearly midrange is where the action is.

EMC’s CX4 and Netapp’s entire product line would have to be the two best-marketed stories in midrange storage. HP’s EVA might have been a contender once, but product development seems to have stalled and now it’s caught in a pincer between Left Hand and 3PAR.

IBM’s Midrange

There is a case to be made to keep disk simple, and put the smarts in the storage virtualisation layer above it (e.g. SVC) but that works mainly in larger environments. For true midrange customers they repeatedly tell me that they want all their function in one place because they find it easier to manage that way. IBM’s DS5000 has strengths around ease of use, performance and scalability, but it doesn’t provide a lot of advanced software functions if you are that way inclined – you’d need to layer SVC on top of it for that. Aside from DS5000, most of the midrange action takes place well below the typical XIV size and IBM’s N Series is generally focused on NAS. So that’s why I exclude IBM from the “best-marketed stories in midrange storage”. The IBM midrange has some breadth, but no strong central lynch-pin which would make it easier for buyers to relate to.

Over the last year IBM has been busy rounding out it’s high-end offerings with XIV now scaling to 161TB, SONAS Scale-out NAS supporting up to 14 Petabytes, SVC 5.1 which scales to 8 Petabytes, and DS8000 which has been rejuvenated with Easy Tier and major ease of use enhancements. Customers now have some great options when it comes to high end requirements.

Now it’s time for IBM to also turn its lamps on midrange storage and produce a kick-ass product that will delight customers with plenty of advanced features and no big buts…


3 Responses

  1. […] in the midrange saddle Posted on September 27, 2010 by rogerluethy| Leave a comment Good blog from the Storage Buddhist on Midrange […]


  2. As you say “N-Series is generally focused on NAS” but a lot of people think its a pretty decent SAN array too. Instead of reinventing the wheel, why not make the N-Series your kick-ass midrange SAN? What sort of advanced features are missing?



    • Well I don’t want to start a war here, but seeing as you ask… 1. Inelegant LUN management – the whole area of autodelete/autogrow/fractional reserve with potential space efficiency implications. 2. 25% space overhead for WAFL & Checksums 3. An incomplete SSD story (no support for FAS2040, and no great scalability higher up). 4. Datamotion is very limited. 5. Price seems to be generally higher than CX4, which is a tricky place to be in a pure SAN bake-off.

      Not all of these things will be an issue for all customers, especially if there is a NAS requirement somewhere in the mix. So I see Netapp as a strong NAS product, a strong Unified product, and a robust SAN product with some limitations.

      And finally, midrange being almost half of the market spend, IBM might want to control its own destiny there. IBM installed base is one thing, but Netapp has done a great job of gaining direct brand awareness, which does make it tricky for an OEM partner to add value in the competitive whitespace.

      All just my personal opinion, of course : )


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: