
Subscribe
Enter your email address:
Delivered by FeedBurner
About the Author
David West has served as our Vice President, Marketing and Business Development since September 2005 and our Vice President, Business Development from August 2000 to September 2005.
Prior to joining our company, Mr. West served as a director of strategic alliances from April 1999 to July 2000 and vice president of storage solutions in July 2000 at Legato Systems, Inc., which was subsequently acquired by EMC Corporation.
Prior to joining Legato Systems, Mr. West served as vice president of sales at Intelliguard Software, Inc., which was also subsequently acquired by EMC Corporation, from 1990 to April 1999.
Mr. West obtained his bachelor's degree in electrical engineering from Villanova University.
David's Archives
Wednesday, June 10, 2009
The past two weeks have been an extremely exciting time in the storage industry as NetApp and EMC duke it out over the nearly $2 billion house that Data Domain built. On one hand, it's fantastic to see deduplication in the mainstream as it's an excellent technology for reducing data footprints. On the other hand, I think we're missing the point if this high-priced battle leads customers to believe that hardware-based deduplication is the panacea for fixing out-of-control data growth. They deserve more, and it's up to us–the companies responsible for both providing the tools to protect their data and, ironically, for contributing to the proliferation of data copies in itself–to give them a longer-term solution than just another appliance.
Don't get me wrong. I applaud Data Domain's ability to create massive momentum for what has been the best-selling standalone deduplication product on the market. I give both EMC and NetApp credit for recognizing the rising importance of deduplication and I totally understand why they're facing off to add the No. 1 dedupe appliance to their respective arsenals. But I take issue with the implication that this appliance really is the long-term solution for customers. I question where customers will find themselves in six months or even a year from now.
No one should lose sight of the fact that dedupe appliance vendors have been successful because traditional backup and archive companies lacked the foresight and innovation to eliminate redundant data when they created the copies in the first place. (Remember, stand alone dedupe appliances rely on a data feed from legacy backup/archive vendors.) In other words, dedupe appliance vendors essentially built their companies on a foundation of broken backup. Do you really think that if EMC Legato, or EMC Documentum, or even EMC Dantz all had built-in data deduplication, there would be a need for them to make a $2B acquisition? But, then again, deduplicating redundant data probably wasn't that important to EMC when money from IT budgets flowed freely to disk vendors so companies could add more capacity.
The content of this blog reflects the thoughts and opinions of the author, and does not represent the thoughts, opinions, plans or strategies of CommVault Systems, Inc. ("CommVault") and CommVault undertakes no obligation to update, correct or modify any statements made by the author of this blog. Any and all third party links provided by this blog are not affiliated with, nor endorsed by, CommVault.