<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Cisco&#8217;s unified computing system</title>
	<atom:link href="http://storagemojo.com/2009/03/16/ciscos-unified-computing-system/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://storagemojo.com/2009/03/16/ciscos-unified-computing-system/</link>
	<description>Data storage info &#38; analysis</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 20 May 2012 13:26:14 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Scott P.</title>
		<link>http://storagemojo.com/2009/03/16/ciscos-unified-computing-system/comment-page-1/#comment-204194</link>
		<dc:creator>Scott P.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 13 Jul 2009 15:11:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://storagemojo.com/?p=1174#comment-204194</guid>
		<description>Initiailly I though this was Cisco simply jumping into server market. However, now that I have seen the technology and delved down into the components, I have to say. This anything but. The UCS changes the game. They have blended the lines such that the server, the network and the storage work as one cohesive unit rather than components that service each other. 

 I am a huge fan of HP (Compaq), but they have nothing that comes close and I think they will spend at least two years catching up. It requires a strong networking core compentency which they don&#039;t  currently have.  I predict they are going to attempt to buy either Foundry or Entarasys in the next year. 

The biggest losers are Dell and Brocade. Dell spent a lot of money trying to catch HP and still lost the blade server battle. They won&#039;t have the cash to fight this battle. Brocade bet the farm on their version of unified fabric (FCoE), then EMC and NetApp both went with Cisco (ratified as the standard last month). They were already steadily losing market share in the FC switch market now they are starting off with one foot in the grave on the unified fabric market. Look to see them either be bought by Foundry or Entarasys.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Initiailly I though this was Cisco simply jumping into server market. However, now that I have seen the technology and delved down into the components, I have to say. This anything but. The UCS changes the game. They have blended the lines such that the server, the network and the storage work as one cohesive unit rather than components that service each other. </p>
<p> I am a huge fan of HP (Compaq), but they have nothing that comes close and I think they will spend at least two years catching up. It requires a strong networking core compentency which they don&#8217;t  currently have.  I predict they are going to attempt to buy either Foundry or Entarasys in the next year. </p>
<p>The biggest losers are Dell and Brocade. Dell spent a lot of money trying to catch HP and still lost the blade server battle. They won&#8217;t have the cash to fight this battle. Brocade bet the farm on their version of unified fabric (FCoE), then EMC and NetApp both went with Cisco (ratified as the standard last month). They were already steadily losing market share in the FC switch market now they are starting off with one foot in the grave on the unified fabric market. Look to see them either be bought by Foundry or Entarasys.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: David Nicholson</title>
		<link>http://storagemojo.com/2009/03/16/ciscos-unified-computing-system/comment-page-1/#comment-200845</link>
		<dc:creator>David Nicholson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Apr 2009 00:10:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://storagemojo.com/?p=1174#comment-200845</guid>
		<description>IBM, HP, and SUN? R&amp;D? 

Last time I checked they were a bit less focused than EMC with those R&amp;D dollars. I notice that your blog is not called &quot;Printing Mojo&quot;. 

I certainly hope that the PhDs dying to publish go to a place where they can bask in intellectual elitism. Like Sun.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>IBM, HP, and SUN? R&amp;D? </p>
<p>Last time I checked they were a bit less focused than EMC with those R&amp;D dollars. I notice that your blog is not called &#8220;Printing Mojo&#8221;. </p>
<p>I certainly hope that the PhDs dying to publish go to a place where they can bask in intellectual elitism. Like Sun.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Wilson Craig</title>
		<link>http://storagemojo.com/2009/03/16/ciscos-unified-computing-system/comment-page-1/#comment-200447</link>
		<dc:creator>Wilson Craig</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 18 Apr 2009 06:40:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://storagemojo.com/?p=1174#comment-200447</guid>
		<description>Brocade CEO Mike Klayko&#039;s take on Cisco&#039;s annc. here:

http://www.youtube.com/brocadevideo

Thanks,

Wilson Craig
Director, PR, AR, Social Media
Brocade</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Brocade CEO Mike Klayko&#8217;s take on Cisco&#8217;s annc. here:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/brocadevideo" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/brocadevideo</a></p>
<p>Thanks,</p>
<p>Wilson Craig<br />
Director, PR, AR, Social Media<br />
Brocade</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Former Cisco</title>
		<link>http://storagemojo.com/2009/03/16/ciscos-unified-computing-system/comment-page-1/#comment-199814</link>
		<dc:creator>Former Cisco</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Mar 2009 21:50:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://storagemojo.com/?p=1174#comment-199814</guid>
		<description>Cisco has eliminated partner programs with IBM, HP, and other server providers.   Now its a small channel team, not focusing on growing revenue with partners, but with its own server.     Can they do it on their own?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Cisco has eliminated partner programs with IBM, HP, and other server providers.   Now its a small channel team, not focusing on growing revenue with partners, but with its own server.     Can they do it on their own?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: RC</title>
		<link>http://storagemojo.com/2009/03/16/ciscos-unified-computing-system/comment-page-1/#comment-199776</link>
		<dc:creator>RC</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Mar 2009 19:53:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://storagemojo.com/?p=1174#comment-199776</guid>
		<description>COMPAQ&#039;s success should be attributed to T.I.

AMD and Intel both owe a nod to DEC though, for all the ex-Alpha engineers that fueled advances in Athlon and various Intel processor advances. (Intel would deny that I suspect.)

And we all benefit from DIX, whether we realize DEC was a key player in ethernet or not. DLT tape? The list goes on.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>COMPAQ&#8217;s success should be attributed to T.I.</p>
<p>AMD and Intel both owe a nod to DEC though, for all the ex-Alpha engineers that fueled advances in Athlon and various Intel processor advances. (Intel would deny that I suspect.)</p>
<p>And we all benefit from DIX, whether we realize DEC was a key player in ethernet or not. DLT tape? The list goes on.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Robin Harris</title>
		<link>http://storagemojo.com/2009/03/16/ciscos-unified-computing-system/comment-page-1/#comment-199763</link>
		<dc:creator>Robin Harris</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Mar 2009 22:22:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://storagemojo.com/?p=1174#comment-199763</guid>
		<description>I&#039;ve signed up for a Cisco analyst preso next week so maybe everything will become Perfectly Clear. Or not. I know some of my techie Valley friends think this is pretty cool, so maybe I&#039;ll be revising my opinion - not the first time that&#039;s happened.

Dave, IBM, HP and Sun together spend a heck of a lot more on R&amp;D than EMC does - and since they let their PhDs publish and don&#039;t punish them with non-competes, they have a better shot at top talent. VMware has been hiring storage engineers like crazy for the last 3 years and they still haven&#039;t fixed the problems. Maybe they will next week, but I&#039;ll believe it when I see it.

RC, how much of Compaq&#039;s success should be assigned to DEC? Just asking.

Robin</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve signed up for a Cisco analyst preso next week so maybe everything will become Perfectly Clear. Or not. I know some of my techie Valley friends think this is pretty cool, so maybe I&#8217;ll be revising my opinion &#8211; not the first time that&#8217;s happened.</p>
<p>Dave, IBM, HP and Sun together spend a heck of a lot more on R&#038;D than EMC does &#8211; and since they let their PhDs publish and don&#8217;t punish them with non-competes, they have a better shot at top talent. VMware has been hiring storage engineers like crazy for the last 3 years and they still haven&#8217;t fixed the problems. Maybe they will next week, but I&#8217;ll believe it when I see it.</p>
<p>RC, how much of Compaq&#8217;s success should be assigned to DEC? Just asking.</p>
<p>Robin</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: RC</title>
		<link>http://storagemojo.com/2009/03/16/ciscos-unified-computing-system/comment-page-1/#comment-199758</link>
		<dc:creator>RC</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Mar 2009 19:49:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://storagemojo.com/?p=1174#comment-199758</guid>
		<description>How much of HP&#039;s success should really be assigned to COMPAQ? Nothing revolutionary about a bunch of Wintel server sales.

Seems like battle lines are forming around the virtualization space, with IBM possibly picking up VirtualBOX in the Sun acquisition.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>How much of HP&#8217;s success should really be assigned to COMPAQ? Nothing revolutionary about a bunch of Wintel server sales.</p>
<p>Seems like battle lines are forming around the virtualization space, with IBM possibly picking up VirtualBOX in the Sun acquisition.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: David Nicholson</title>
		<link>http://storagemojo.com/2009/03/16/ciscos-unified-computing-system/comment-page-1/#comment-199667</link>
		<dc:creator>David Nicholson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Mar 2009 20:42:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://storagemojo.com/?p=1174#comment-199667</guid>
		<description>“VMware’s storage infrastructure is pathetic…”

Yep. And the stereo in my Porsche sucks. 

Underestimating the ability of EMC and Cisco to put together end to end magic seems to be a favorite sport of folks who rally behind companies with R&amp;D budgets the size of my mortgage.   VMWare only recently learned that &quot;storage&quot; was not &quot;the place where we keep our mops&quot;.  

Just like my stereo problem, that can easily be fixed.


Dave</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>“VMware’s storage infrastructure is pathetic…”</p>
<p>Yep. And the stereo in my Porsche sucks. </p>
<p>Underestimating the ability of EMC and Cisco to put together end to end magic seems to be a favorite sport of folks who rally behind companies with R&amp;D budgets the size of my mortgage.   VMWare only recently learned that &#8220;storage&#8221; was not &#8220;the place where we keep our mops&#8221;.  </p>
<p>Just like my stereo problem, that can easily be fixed.</p>
<p>Dave</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Max</title>
		<link>http://storagemojo.com/2009/03/16/ciscos-unified-computing-system/comment-page-1/#comment-199633</link>
		<dc:creator>Max</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 22 Mar 2009 17:12:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://storagemojo.com/?p=1174#comment-199633</guid>
		<description>a Few Points:

From a Networking perspective, do you really think that a &quot;low cost&quot; Sun/HP/IBM Switch can compete with Linksys?  Hard to go lower than Cisco at some level since they already own the bottom :)      At the high end routing / DWDM space you have to deal with a whole host of players, some you&#039;ve likely never heard of like Infinera.   Google already makes their own ethernet switches, so I&#039;m not really seeing a downside for Cisco networking wise.

Don&#039;t you think that Cisco has EMC or NetApp (or both) as an acquisition target if the Three Stoogies (IBM, Sun, HP) actually get their act together?  What would they do in response? Buy Brocade, Juniper &amp; Citrix? LOL. 

In any event, Cisco is targeting the low hanging fruit of windows consolidation with a fancy Cobalt like server in a can that plays nice with the data engineering teams while gracefully handling a number of oblique issues related to monitoring and security (VN-link/ nexus v1000) which will benefit VMware by removing some of the few remaining barriers to adoption related to compliance and security (extending IDS&#039;s to the vm networking environment).  This of course is a very unsexy but practical solution  to existing business problems.  Note that these aren&#039;t &quot;Storage&quot; issues; which are really only relevant to any one but big web players. 

~Max</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>a Few Points:</p>
<p>From a Networking perspective, do you really think that a &#8220;low cost&#8221; Sun/HP/IBM Switch can compete with Linksys?  Hard to go lower than Cisco at some level since they already own the bottom <img src='http://storagemojo.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' />       At the high end routing / DWDM space you have to deal with a whole host of players, some you&#8217;ve likely never heard of like Infinera.   Google already makes their own ethernet switches, so I&#8217;m not really seeing a downside for Cisco networking wise.</p>
<p>Don&#8217;t you think that Cisco has EMC or NetApp (or both) as an acquisition target if the Three Stoogies (IBM, Sun, HP) actually get their act together?  What would they do in response? Buy Brocade, Juniper &amp; Citrix? LOL. </p>
<p>In any event, Cisco is targeting the low hanging fruit of windows consolidation with a fancy Cobalt like server in a can that plays nice with the data engineering teams while gracefully handling a number of oblique issues related to monitoring and security (VN-link/ nexus v1000) which will benefit VMware by removing some of the few remaining barriers to adoption related to compliance and security (extending IDS&#8217;s to the vm networking environment).  This of course is a very unsexy but practical solution  to existing business problems.  Note that these aren&#8217;t &#8220;Storage&#8221; issues; which are really only relevant to any one but big web players. </p>
<p>~Max</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joe Kraska</title>
		<link>http://storagemojo.com/2009/03/16/ciscos-unified-computing-system/comment-page-1/#comment-199612</link>
		<dc:creator>Joe Kraska</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 21 Mar 2009 22:19:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://storagemojo.com/?p=1174#comment-199612</guid>
		<description>Bobby,

The &quot;cloud&quot; does not necessarily mean public cloud infrastructure. In clouds, there exist at least these two axes:

Private cloud vs public cloud
Infrastructure style (e.g., EC2) versus computing service style (e.g., MapReduce)

Anyway, to me &quot;cloud&quot; is Virtualization 2.0. Amusingly, most everything in the cloud is currently vapor. For a really innovative way of looking at data centers, however, if you have not seen 3TERA AppLogic, you really need to take a look. I think that applications like theirs offer the long term vision of where this whole virtualization thing is going.

Joe.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Bobby,</p>
<p>The &#8220;cloud&#8221; does not necessarily mean public cloud infrastructure. In clouds, there exist at least these two axes:</p>
<p>Private cloud vs public cloud<br />
Infrastructure style (e.g., EC2) versus computing service style (e.g., MapReduce)</p>
<p>Anyway, to me &#8220;cloud&#8221; is Virtualization 2.0. Amusingly, most everything in the cloud is currently vapor. For a really innovative way of looking at data centers, however, if you have not seen 3TERA AppLogic, you really need to take a look. I think that applications like theirs offer the long term vision of where this whole virtualization thing is going.</p>
<p>Joe.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bobby</title>
		<link>http://storagemojo.com/2009/03/16/ciscos-unified-computing-system/comment-page-1/#comment-199550</link>
		<dc:creator>Bobby</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Mar 2009 20:58:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://storagemojo.com/?p=1174#comment-199550</guid>
		<description>Robin,
I&#039;ve read many articles on the various aspects of cloud, including storage, and still wonder if its hype or factual direction.  Some aspects are compelling, while others are questionable; like keeping your personal/business critical data &#039;somewhere&#039; out there.
BB.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Robin,<br />
I&#8217;ve read many articles on the various aspects of cloud, including storage, and still wonder if its hype or factual direction.  Some aspects are compelling, while others are questionable; like keeping your personal/business critical data &#8216;somewhere&#8217; out there.<br />
BB.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jason</title>
		<link>http://storagemojo.com/2009/03/16/ciscos-unified-computing-system/comment-page-1/#comment-199538</link>
		<dc:creator>Jason</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Mar 2009 21:33:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://storagemojo.com/?p=1174#comment-199538</guid>
		<description>&quot;VMware’s storage infrastructure is pathetic...&quot; -- I second that.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;VMware’s storage infrastructure is pathetic&#8230;&#8221; &#8212; I second that.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Robin Harris</title>
		<link>http://storagemojo.com/2009/03/16/ciscos-unified-computing-system/comment-page-1/#comment-199536</link>
		<dc:creator>Robin Harris</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Mar 2009 19:28:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://storagemojo.com/?p=1174#comment-199536</guid>
		<description>Benr - got the headshot back up. Does it make my head look big? 

I&#039;m still mulling the whole ad thing. Could be happier - will continue pursuit.

Sub, VMFS can run a maximum of  32 ESX nodes. Running a group of shared-storage clones? Make that 8. 

Cisco announces bong-sized clouds. Frat boys cheer!

Robin</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Benr &#8211; got the headshot back up. Does it make my head look big? </p>
<p>I&#8217;m still mulling the whole ad thing. Could be happier &#8211; will continue pursuit.</p>
<p>Sub, VMFS can run a maximum of  32 ESX nodes. Running a group of shared-storage clones? Make that 8. </p>
<p>Cisco announces bong-sized clouds. Frat boys cheer!</p>
<p>Robin</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: subbukl</title>
		<link>http://storagemojo.com/2009/03/16/ciscos-unified-computing-system/comment-page-1/#comment-199518</link>
		<dc:creator>subbukl</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Mar 2009 07:53:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://storagemojo.com/?p=1174#comment-199518</guid>
		<description>&quot;the Unified Computing System won’t unify much if the storage issues aren’t addressed&quot;
what are the major issue Mojo thinks are issues which are posing immediate roadblocks ?

~subbukl</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;the Unified Computing System won’t unify much if the storage issues aren’t addressed&#8221;<br />
what are the major issue Mojo thinks are issues which are posing immediate roadblocks ?</p>
<p>~subbukl</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

