The two companies have integrated products in the past, including NetApp’s SnapManager software, which allows its storage arrays’ snapshots to be controlled from Microsoft applications in their native management console. But NetApp vice president of solutions and alliances Patrick Rogers says this is the first formal agreement between the two companies.

The new three-year agreement will see “top to bottom” integration points between Microsoft applications and the Windows operating system with NetApp storage products. Rogers said NetApp’s ApplianceWatch Pro 2.0, which added discovery, health monitoring, and performance monitoring of NetApp storage systems with Microsoft Systems Center Operations Manager, “warranted a longer-term committment” between the vendors.

The two companies will be “aligning roadmaps” around virtual infrastructure, application-based storage management, and cloud computing going forward, Rogers said. According to a joint press release announcing the partnership, joint Microsoft and NetApp products will also be on display at Microsoft Technology Centers and at industry events.

Rogers and Microsoft’s Microsoft director of virtualization strategy David Greschler insisted the “formalization” of their partnership was not a response to the recently formalized alliance between Microsoft rival VMware, NetApp rival EMC, and Cisco. Those three also pledged to align roadmaps and product development going forward under an alliance called VCE.

“That’s about a closed system,” Greschler said of VCE. “Microsoft has always been about working with partners, but we’re not locked into one approach.”

Ostensibly, VCE isn’t either — EMC CEO Joe Tucci made much of the VCE vendors continuing to offer “a la carte” products as well as the “fixed menu” of vBlock stacks. “It’s completely coincidental,” said Rogers. “This strategic alliance agreement has been in process since last summer.” He added that the Microsoft/NetApp alliance “will focus on applications as well as virtualization.”

Whether competition with VCE is the intent of the alliance or not, Taneja Group analyst Jeff Boles predicted in an email to Storage Soup yesterday that that’s where the impact of this partnership will be felt.

“NetApp still remains pretty closely coupled to the VMware infrastructure, and I think if anything, even post-VCE, they’ll still be gaining ground there,” Boles wrote. “I think this is actually an incredibly important announcement from Microsoft’s perspective, because this is the one area that they are substantially weaker than VMware in. In my book, storage for Microsoft is a bigger deal even than memory oversubscription.

“Meanwhile, NetApp simplifies storage management underneath a virtual infrastructure, whether that is VMware or Hyper-V. In response to some of the storage challenges, VMware is still struggling in some areas (messing with a multi-extent VMFS volume and then figuring out where and how to protect data is less than lots of fun). I’ve seen users shift to NetApp as the storage layer to overcome some of those issues. If Microsoft gets a leap on VMware’s storage capabilities through partnership with NetApp (which at the end of the day the [EMC] Celerra guys will probably mimic), then they might be able to throw down with VMware in interesting new ways.”

Much of the carryover involves STEC’s Zeus IOPS SSD products. EMC makes up about 90% of STEC’s business for the Zeus IOPS drives, and had placed an order for $120 million of the drives for the second half of this year.

STEC officials said that about $55 million of that order has been delivered, and the rest would be shipped before the end of year.

A flurry of class action lawsuits have been filed accusing STEC executives of misleading investors before making their revelation last Tuesday. This all leads me to wonder if the industry has been wrong about SSD adoption overall.

All EMC would say in a statement released through a spokesperson was “EMC is pleased with its SSD demand and growth. In Q4, EMC will introduce unique FAST (fully automated storage tiering) capabilities, which are expected to increase SSD growth and demand even further.”

Does this inventory carryover send a signal about wider SSD adoption in the market, given how dominant STEC’s share is (and EMC dominates its business)? I asked a couple of analysts for their opinions.

“Well, what I have been hearing is that EMC is giving SSD away for free to try to spur adoption, but so far it doesn’t seem to be working — it’s too costly, and too wasteful without some type of FAST capability,”  Forrester Research analyst Andrew Reichman responded in an email. “SSD as a performance add-on is not popular in this economy… It’s interesting to see that STEC can’t make a go of this business even though they have a number of the major storage vendors signed up as partners. That says to me that it’s not competition, but the whole category being slow so far.”

Added Taneja Group analyst Jeff Boles, in another email, “while we’re in the midst of an unusual market that likely over-penalizes STEC for perceived risk, while over-endorsing other companies for perceived value, I remain cautious about the speed of SSD adoption.”

But, he added, the newness of SSD could be creating a vicious cycle of perceived risk.

“What the market needs is a good round of commoditization, brought on by integration of some of this intelligence into the storage system itself,” Boles wrote. “At that point, obsolescence will start to look a bit more unusual, and the roadmap for future devices a little more predictable. After all, if your XYZ array had solid state intelligence in it, and you were buying highly commoditized drives that only changed with the density and performance of the flash memory itself, then there seems to be less risk that your flash investment could be rapidly outdated by the next rev of a drive controller.”

As always, the peanut gallery is invited to weigh in.

The subject came up again today at the 451 Client Conference in Boston, where an EMC employee who requested anonymity clarified: OEM means anything Dell sells under the Dell brand. That means Clariion and some Celerra, for which Dell handles some of the manufacturing. The reseller relationship was based on opportunities turned up by Dell that were referred to EMC — this involves Clariion and Celerra, but also Symmetrix in some cases.

On the earnings call, Goulden said Dell Clariion revenues decreased 15% sequentially, though overall Clariion revenues were up 1%. Dell still accounted for 25% of overall Clariion revenues, and within that, 15% was attributable to the OEM business.

So, the first thing this change in relationship means is the potential loss of about 10% of EMC’s Clariion revenues, although those customers may still buy Clariions through EMC or its other channel partners. Tucci said EMC and Dell would try to “pick up the slack” with OEM sales as the reseller relationship is de-emphasized.

It also means, ostensibly, that Dell will no longer be referring Symmetrix sales when suitable opportunities arise.

Dell’s margins are higher and it makes more money from the OEM deals — where it also handles support -– than from the reseller deals. But by giving up Symmetrix reseller deals, will Dell leave an open door for its customers to go to Hewlett-Packard or IBM? Or will Dell find another partner? If so, who? And just how close would that partnership be?

Dell’s acquisition of iSCSI vendor EqualLogic – which makes systems that sometimes compete with Clariion – worked out well, and Michael Dell said in June he was looking to acquire companies. 3PAR, which makes disk arrays that compete with Symmetrix, was mentioned by storage industry watchers as a potential acquisition target for Dell, although the $3.9 billion buy of Perot Systems in September put the kibosh on most of that speculation. 3PAR’s market cap is currently at a little over half a billion, so it wouldn’t be quite as much to swallow as Perot.

In light of all this, what should we make of Dell’s surprisingly aggressive response to EMC’s announcement of a new joint venture with Cisco and VMware this week? What about the fact that Dell’s Clariion sales declined though EMC’s grew? Is the on-again/off-again Dell/EMC coziness back off again?

A story from the Dow Jones Newswire that appeared on the Wall Street Journal’s website said the partners are set to launch the venture this week with a product dubbed V-Block. According to this report, the new joint venture will have its own CEO.

Meanwhile, according to a Reuters report that also appeared Friday,

One part of the partnership calls for the two companies to form a joint venture that will sell vBlock as a hosted service. Customers can pay for that service based on the amount of computing power and storage that they need, accessing it via the Internet.

That joint venture will assemble computer systems for customers, integrating all necessary hardware and software to make the systems work.

According to reports and previous rumors, the joint venture would involve Cisco’s Unified Computing System and EMC storage. VMware, Cisco and EMC have had a longstanding alliance, dubbed VCE. What would make this different is that it would be a separate company with its own sales force, meaning the companies wouldn’t have to pay multiple commissions to multiple sales people for the same sale. It’s unclear what this joint venture would mean for customers that the existing partnership doesn’t offer today outside of one throat to choke for support.

For perhaps the first time at an official public event, the word “storage” was uttered by an exec from the merging companies, who have already assured the world that server hardware development will continue.

According to McNealy,

If you think about the Sun technology that we’re bringing to the party, here, it’s the data center. It’s the servers, the storage, the networking, the infrastructure software, all the pieces, all of the executable environment within the cloud, the data center, the distributed computing environment, whatever else you want to say, and then you bring in the database, and the applications and ERP and middleware capabilities and developer tool capabilities of Oracle, and you have a very nice data center. A very robust, very scalable…enterprise data center.

This end to end “stack” vision would be in keeping with the other big players in the market, which are beginning to offer prepackaged product bundles and looking to be soup-to-nuts suppliers to the enterprise data center. Oracle’s competitive landscape for end-to-end stacks includes Cisco Systems Inc., IBM Corp., Hewlett-Packard Co. (HP) and Dell Inc.

There are advantages, Ellison said, in a company being able to control the engineering of both hardware and software. “We are not selling the hardware business-no part of the hardware business are we selling,” Ellison said in his keynote, though he went on to specifically discuss mostly server technologies like Sun’s SPARC chips. (Here’s where Sun might point out that it recently merged servers and storage together in terms of its engineering departments and in terms of its strategic thinking with Amber Road…)

So the biggest question for the storage hardware market with this merger still comes down to tape. Some of the competitive ”stack” offerings like those from IBM include tape — in fact, with its latest Information Archive appliance, IBM is offering tape as an option managed by the GPFS global namespace, a setup highly remeniscent of the way Sun’s SAM-FS can manage data in disk repositories as well as StorageTek tape libraries.

Judging by the speeches from McNealy and Ellison, it seems no hardware product is being taken completely off the table yet, but what the newly merged entity will do with tape storage hardware specifically remains uncertain at this point.

The prevailing wisdom so far is that, for all the seeming enmity between Data Domain’s management and EMC Corp., the ultimate decision lies with the shareholders, and it’s unlikely shareholders will choose NetApp mixed stock / cash deal over EMC’s all-cash bid. Some shareholders have already filed suit against the Data Domain board, saying the board failed in its responsibility to shareholders by agreeing to be acquired by NetApp.

Talk has also turned to anti-trust due diligence currently being carried out on the proposed deal by government regulators including the FTC.  According to a Reuters report last week,

The U.S. government could hinder EMC Corp’s (EMC.N) $1.8 billion bid for Data Domain Inc
(DDUP.O) as antitrust regulators are expected to scrutinize it more closely than a competing offer by NetApp Inc (NTAP.O).

While by far the bigger company, EMC is in a more precarious antitrust position than its smaller rival because EMC is the largest player in the market for so-called data reduction technology in which Data Domain specializes.

Both bids are being reviewed by the U.S. Federal Trade Commission, but antitrust experts and industry analysts say EMC’s offer could get delayed for weeks or months, while they expect NetApp’s to win quick approval.

However, storage industry analysts say it would be a stretch for antitrust laws to block an EMC acquisition. “It’s tough to unravel,” said Forrester Research analyst Stephanie Balaouras. ”Given [that] dedupe will exist everywhere,  [in both] hardware and software, I think there are plenty of options.”

In the meantime, the Motley Fool published an interesting post yesterday entitled “EMC’s Just Not That Into Data Domain Anymore“:

EMC’s (NYSE: EMC) tender offer for storage efficiency expert Data Domain (Nasdaq: DDUP) was set to expire today, so the company filed an extension until July 10. Data Domain will hold its annual shareholders’ meeting in the meantime. And none of it matters.

As of last Friday, with an already-extended deadline looming large, only 0.28% of Data Duplication’s shares had been tendered to EMC’s offer. That’s tantamount to a vote of “no confidence” in the deal…. it looks like Data Domain’s owners prefer to see the competing NetApp (Nasdaq: NTAP) offer coming to fruition…EMC would have to cough up more cash to win this battle. Even then, EMC might have to resort to downright hostilities if it really wants Data Domain…That’s just not a healthy way to get hitched, unless you want to start planning the divorce party already.

Acrimony is nothing new between NetApp and EMC, of course, but the lack of interest from Data Domain shareholders as pointed out here is quite interesting. After all this, might the original news we reported on a month ago might still wind up being the story, give or take a few hundred million dollars?

Curiouser and curiouser.

Emulex said it would review the revised offer, but I think it’s a long shot they’ll accept – it’s clear the Emulex board doesn’t want any part of merging with Broadcom. In the meantime, Emulex is advising its shareholders to take no action while it reviews the new bid.

CommVault put out a press release shortly after the study was released trumpeting the findings that were flattering to its Simpana product (as virtually all storage vendors do when reports like this come out). The statement that drew Symantec’s ire was this one: “CommVault garnered a top spot in attracting new customers from competing solutions, according to TheInfoPro™ Wave 12 Storage Study. Twenty percent of respondents reported they had switched to CommVault from another vendor in the past year.”

Symantec responded by firing off this statement to press through its PR agency:

The actual figure is 0.2%, since TheInfoPro’s sample size was 848 and only 2 had switched. Also, only 10 respondents mentioned Commvault. For comparison, 66 mentioned Symantec, 86 mentioned NetApp, and 194 mentioned EMC. The full report with a chart and list of vendors and customer sample size is available from TheInfoPro.

Roughly 5 out of the 66 Symantec customers reported switching to Symantec solutions.  Clearly, this is not an accurate comparison, or a valid statistic and CommVault seems to be clutching at straws in an attempt to seem relevant to the market.

Rowr! Saucer of milk, table two!

Responded CommVault VP of marketing and business development Dave West:

This study is indicative of what we are seeing in the market and reflects historic trends within our customer base. In addition to sustaining strong customer loyalty, CommVault is experiencing notable year on year growth. We continue to see strong Simpana software adoption by former customers of competitive offerings. In May we announced we surpassed 10,000 customers; more of half of these previously were Symantec customers.

 
I don’t know how many CommVault customers came from Symantec, but it’s worth noting CommVault’s revenues actually dropped a bit year-over-year last quarter although it did grow for its entire fiscal year.

As for the spat over TIP numbers, TIP spokesperson Bernadette Abel clarified in an email to Storage Soup:

The percentages noted on this data point are per vendor and not an overall comparison among all vendor mentions. 20% of current CommVault customers interviewed said that they switched to CommVault from a competing vendor.

The press release put out by the organization said that it garnered a top spot, not the top spot as based on the 20% conversion rate.

Bottom line? Regardless of the statistics, these guys are clearly under each other’s skin. CommVault has been aggressive about taking share from competitors, and it would appear it has at least succeeded in getting some attention from them. The real winners in all this should be end users, who stand to benefit from better pricing when competition is intense.

Eric-Jan Schmidt, vice president of corporate marketing, said HDS grew revenue 1% to $672.8 million year over year last quarter while other large storage vendors declined. Storage software grew “in the high double-digits” year over year, high-end storage systems in the single digits, and modular storage was flat year over year, according to Schmidt, who did not give specific numbers for those products.
Total HDS revenue for fiscal 2008 — which ended last quarter — increased 11% to $2.864 billion.

Schmidt said it was specifically EMC that HDS had taken market share from in 2008, citing an IDC study that showed HDS edging to just under 30% market share in high-end disk arrays in 2008 while EMC fell to just over 25%. Schmidt attributed the growth in sales in part to a sales reorganization in February 2008, when former Unisys vice president and general manager of sales and service Randy DeMont was promoted to executive vice president. (Schmidt left EMC, where he worked in the Centera product division, in September for HDS.)

Schmidt added that HDS has seen increased success with its USP-V virtualization controller and storage software in this economy because they can be used to repurpose existing third-party storage. He said 15% of the 12,600 USP and USP-Vs in production so far have third-party storage virtualized behind them.

However, while HDS had a few things to crow about, Hitachi Ltd. did not fare so well, posting a record $8.1 billion loss for the year. That’s not a Hitachi-specific record – that’s the biggest-ever annual loss by a Japanese manufacturer, according to a report by the Associated Press. According to another report released Tuesday morning on the Dow Jones news wires, Standard & Poor’s Ratings Services cut Hitachi Ltd.’s (HIT) ratings to below-average credit quality.

In the meantime, HDS may have something up its sleeve for the Hitachi Content Archiving Platform (HCAP) product based on its acquisition of Archivas in 2007. “Our archive platform will morph into something different over the next year,” said Asim Zaheer, HDS vice president, product and competitive marketing.

HCAP is already touted by HDS as a unified repository for multiple federated sources of content. HCAP uses a hierarchical file system, making it different from object-based or content-addressable storage (CAS) products, like Caringo Inc.’s CAStor or EMC’s Atmos or Centera. However, given the “federation” aspect of HCAP (also a hot buzzword at this year’s EMC World in discussions of cloud storage), my guess would be a scale-out system for active unstructured content in addition to where HCAP is already positioned, in secondary storage archiving. Zaheer would neither confirm or deny my suspicions.

Venture capitalists and business development types of all stripes met in downtown Boston today for the first BD Event, a new networking conference for vendors in the storage, security and virtualization markets. According to a panel discussion this afternoon, the IT market can expect further consolidation along the lines of Sun/Oracle and NetApp/ or EMC/Data Domain, but VCs said that will make room for new, more innovative companies, especially in cloud storage.

The panel included two executives from storage vendors with M&A experience: John O’Brien, senior director of corporate development at EMC; and Peter Levine, senior vice president and general manager at Citrix, and reps from three venture capitalist firms: Mark Rostick, director of Intel Capital,; Ash Ashutosh, partner with Greylock Partners (Ashutosh also sold AppIQ to HP a few years ago); and Charles Curran, general partner at Valhalla Partners, a VC firm that backed Nirvanix, LeftHand Networks, and Sepaton.

According to Levine, the IT industry can expect more heavy consolidation throughout this year, “but that consolidation is more financially driven than customer-driven,” he said. “I don’t think IT buyers really want one virtual integrated stack – the last thing customers want is IT lock-in.”

Nonetheless, he added, “Consolidation absolutely will happen. The big survivors, to grow, have to start getting into areas they weren’t in before, and without question that verticalizes the market.”

(As for who the likely candidates are for further consolidation – no one I talked to at the event had heard anything about actual talks, but there was a lot of chatter at the conference about IBM/Brocade and Cisco/NetApp acquisitions).

Levine and O’Brien said smaller acquisitions at their own companies are being scrutinized more and more carefully these days. Smaller companies take longer to add to an acquiring company’s bottom line and tend to raise operational costs during integration, Levine said. Instead, Citrix will probably focus more on new partnerships with promising small companies. EMC’s O’Brien said that EMC has done just two small asset deals so far this year (aside from its $1.8 billion bid for Data Domain).

Panel moderator Andrew Williamson of Alexander Dunham Capital Group Inc. said the percentage of asset sales among new acquisitions has risen in the last six months to 30%. That type of deal represented 16 to 20% of M&A activity in 2008. Meanwhile, the number of VC firms funding startups has declined since 2007 as has their average investment in new companies, along with the revenue multiples they can expect as a return when their portfolio companies are sold or go public.

In other words, get ready for a world in which the number of major vendors will shrink, but there will be less funding for the types of companies that popped up between 2000 and 2003 with a burst of innovation that led to a flurry of IPOs and acquisitions over the last few years.

However, the old rule still applies – “Big companies can’t innovate at the level of startups,” said Valhalla’s Curran. The VCs assured the audience that new storage and security products would still be coming down the pike.

Cloud storage and software will be king

The VCs on the panel agreed about where the money’s going in storage these days. They all indicated they were doing few if any deals involving hardware systems. “It’s less capital-intensive,” said Curran, adding that the shift towards IP networking in the enterprise data center and virtualization would be the biggest trends going forward. Ashutosh also said he was most interested in software companies. “The trend is shifting away from boxes and to the disruptive nature of virtualization and the cloud,” he said. Intel’s Rostick said his company would invest in at least one more security and one more storage company this year, and would also be focused on the cloud, virtualization and what he called “I/O complexity.”

EMC’s O’Brien said he’d been “well coached to stick to [EMC CEO] Joe [Tucci]‘s script” when it comes to Data Domain, and he wouldn’t get specific about what other areas EMC may be eyeing for acquisitions this year. He did say EMC also would focus on virtualization and the cloud going forward.

Some of the cloud technologies that come out in the next year or so may look familiar to IT users, but optimizing technologies for cloud deployment will become its own area of expertise, according to Ashutosh. “There’s an emerging trend of innovation around delivery and business model – not just new ideas in technology, but also business,” he said.