Inside System Storage -- by Tony Pearson

Tony Pearson Tony Pearson is a Master Inventor and Senior IT Specialist for the IBM System Storage product line at the IBM Executive Briefing Center in Tucson Arizona, and featured contributor to IBM's developerWorks. In 2011, Tony celebrated his 25th year anniversary with IBM Storage on the same day as the IBM's Centennial. He is author of the Inside System Storage series of books. This blog is for the open exchange of ideas relating to storage and storage networking hardware, software and services. You can also follow him on Twitter @az990tony.
(Short URL for this blog: ibm.co/Pearson )
  • Add a Comment
  • Edit
  • More Actions v
  • Quarantine this Entry

Comments (9)

1 localhost commented Trackback

Geez, Tony - did you feel slighted because Chuck didn't include you in his Valentine's list, or something?<div>&nbsp;</div> Or did you actually miss his comment where he acknowledged that maybe he had been a bit myopic, and backed down. You've already won - no need to pig-pile on the topic a week later...<div>&nbsp;</div> (And yes, I cut him some slack for stealing my word - plagiary is the sincerest form of flattery, you know :)<div>&nbsp;</div> Or perhaps you and the new management team of IBM storage still haven't gotten over the fact you lost your soup-to-nuts vertically-integrated proprietary vendor lock-in on servers and storage back in the 1980's to a little upstart company with mainframe compatible storage offered at a fraction of your previously sole-source offerings. A company who then went on to earn and maintain #1 market share in almost every storage market segment they engage in - even to this day.<div>&nbsp;</div> I guess the bitterness is understandable.<div>&nbsp;</div> Why else would IBM be today trying to reverse the server/storage mitosis with repeated rounds of server+storage lock-in tactics like DB2 integration with DS8K flash drives (or EAVs and HyperPAVs for that matter)? <div>&nbsp;</div> I mean seriously, is that really in the best interests of our customers?<div>&nbsp;</div> I think not.<div>&nbsp;</div> Here's an idea - how about you get IBM to immediately publish the DB2/Flash interface specs so that anybody's storage can participate in that little piece of proprietary vendor lock-in? You know, level the playing field, open coopetition, let the products compete on their merits rather than restricting competition, and all that...<div>&nbsp;</div> I should think that many of your server and DB2 customers would prefer to get those same benefits from Flash without having to switch storage vendors...don't you agree?

2 localhost commented Trackback

Actually I think its a good thing that you posted this despite chuck clearly already having lost the argument.....<div>&nbsp;</div> How often to do we see the press (usually the gutter press - any comparisons with the EMC blog machine purely coincidental) make front page articles dragging somebody or something through the mud. Only to issue a tiny apology in microscopic print on page 23 where nobody sees it. Quite clever of them actually.<div>&nbsp;</div> I think its good to put this on your front page barry. well done.<div>&nbsp;</div> And TSA this is not a cheap attempt at mutual back slapping between myself and barry W.

3 localhost commented Trackback

obviously that should be "Tony" and not "Barry W" in my above comment :-D

4 localhost commented Trackback

Hi BarryB,As you know, some of my posts take several days to research and write. I had actually started this post the week before ChuckH had made his update, and then spent a few days figuring out how to answer his new question, which is why I then posted cogent response to address that instead.<div>&nbsp;</div> I guess it is fair for EMC to ask IBM for help to make its DMX as good as IBM's DS8000. IBM DS8000 is the recognized leader for mainframe attachment disk arrays.<div>&nbsp;</div> Synergy is one area that the IT supermarkets (IBM, Sun, HP and Dell) offers added value over the storage specialty shops. That IBM and HP, both IT supermarkets, hold the #1 and #2 market share for storage solutions overall should not surprise anyone.<div>&nbsp;</div> Offering great products that work well together is not "fighting mitosis" but embracing the benefits of having exerts in each area collaborating to make the world a better place. No, an example of "fighting mitosis" would be to keep the AS/400 with internal disk. Instead, IBM now has POWER systems that run the new "IBM i" operating system that allows for standard external disk attachment such as IBM DS4000 disk via open standard Fibre Channel interfaces.<div>&nbsp;</div> Of course, IBM would be happy to help any mainframe customer migrate from DMX to IBM DS8000 to improve their performance.<div>&nbsp;</div> -- Tony

5 localhost commented Trackback

So, are you saying that IBM is NOT willing to share information that would allow DB2 to take better advantage of flash drives on non-IBM storage platforms?

Add a Comment Add a Comment