What’s under my skin?
by Michael Hay on Jun 21, 2009
Recently, my competitors have asserted that V-Max has gotten under both mine and my HDS colleagues skin. Well last time I checked the only thing under our skin was flesh and blood just like Barry. I think that what Barry is talking about is the fact that EMC has copied Hitachi on several occasions and we appear mad about that for some reason.
He has several posts on the topic in general:
Well this is not getting under my skin personally at all. In fact I’m quite flattered as EMC again and again chooses to copy Hitachi. In the most recent article Barry is also asserting that we are censoring his comments and I can say that is far from the truth. HDS doesn’t do this, we only censor SPAM which leads to nasty web sites and malware, which I’m guessing Barry’s site does as well. Further I am glad that Barry spends serious quality time with customers I do to in fact just went to see on this last week in Japan.
The last thing that I want to point out is that I’ve been offering Barry a small olive twig. Basically my recent thesis is that all systems are now hybrid computing devices consisting of ASICs, general purpose CPUs, and potentially FPGAs. I think that V-Max is this very kind of system, even EMC admits to creating a link ASIC for node communications along with their usage of Intel, etc. I think that this is something which is largely overlooked in computing today and it is so important that I’ve been dedicating posts to it. I have one more coming out soon.
P.S. Barry the recent usage or hinting at derogatory four and three letter words is not doing your arguments justice. I urge you to please refrain from using them, I’ll commit to not using them if you will.
P.S. Barry and I worked this out on his blog. We will continue to joust much like Linus and Tanenbaum: http://www.dina.dk/~abraham/Linus_vs_Tanenbaum.html.
Comments (3 )
Claus admitted to censoring my comments, and you commented that you “support his approach.” So your assertion that “HDS only censors SPAM” doesn’t hold water…
As to copying – I think it’s you who is irritated, because your one-note “EMC copied HDS” song isn’t really true.
I do note that you’ve you’ve added a new stanza: “on some occaisions” though…so we’re making progress.
Let us not forget it was EMC who did EFDs in their high-end AND mid-tier arrays first, who did SATA in their high-end AND mid-tier arrays first, who did Thin Provisioning in their mid-tier arrays first, who did 3-site and 4-site replication first, who shipped the first 1PB storage array, who is shipping the only 2PB storage array, who built the first array with >64GB then 128GB then 256GB and now 512GB of usable global memory, and even who first delivered mirrored arrays for High Availability.
Feel flattered if you will, but there’s no prize for being first. In the end, it matters not who goes first – what matters is who best solves the customers’ problems.
Barry, look I think that you are being sensational and splitting hairs here. Claus was transparent about removing your comment to everyone in the blog sphere. I think that the point is that you are asking inane questions which I agree you should know the answer to already. As to my “agreement” I’ll eat crow I did supply it however as I look back at things I would qualify my agreement now: I don’t agree with censorship at all. I’ve made my case to Claus and others internally and I think we will be seeing some action here.
As to the point of copying I’ll quote you “I think we are making progress here” already you admitted that EMC does copy Hitachi (see http://blogs.hds.com/technomusings/2009/04/once-more.html#postcom first comment). Further you are now qualifying your first to market statements with Enterprise Storage and the like for a lot of things like FLASH drives. All that means is that you copied companies like Texas Memory who were early to market with FLASH and your innovation was to be first to market in the enterprise storage market segment. Further for the thin provisioning concept came first from 3Par and neither Hitachi or EMC. Additional qualifications state that it doesn’t matter who innovated first it matters who does it better. So again, I’ll take this as a back handed admission of routine duplication of the Hitachi direction.
If you want to continue this line of thinking I’m fine with that, but my stance will stay the same you copy us period!
Personally, I’d rather get back to the debate on processing and compute architectures, or even a joint collaboration on what it means for NetApp to buy Data Domain. Perhaps we can even find some common ground and collaborate on a series of posts? Thoughts, or would you prefer to snap the twig I’m handing you?
Damn, that sound’s so easy if you think about it.