|
Market Roundup HP Announces BladeSystem c-Class |
|
HP Announces BladeSystem c-Class
HP has announced the HP
BladeSystem c-Class that features innovations in virtualization, power and
cooling, and system management, which seek to reduce operational, and capital
expenditure costs for the data center. The company stated that with the new
design, an average enterprise data center can realize over a three-year period
system acquisition cost savings of up to 41%; data center facilities savings of
up to 60%; and initial system setup time cost savings of up to 96%. New c-Class
server blades include the HP ProLiant BL460c and the BL480c, which matches the
features of the HP ProLiant DL380. The HP Virtual Connect Architecture enables
customers to wire just once; administrators can manage resources dynamically
through virtualized Ethernet and Fibre Channel connections that feature 5Tbps
of aggregate throughput. The BladeSystem c-Class and StorageWorks SANs can
simplify IT consolidation by integrating the server-to-storage interface with
4Gbps Fibre Channel
Blades are one of the
most innovative, if not exciting, technological advancements of the past few
years. The potential for reduced server sprawl, improved real estate
efficiency, and enhanced system performance and flexibility is considerable.
While
It is clear that HP has put a lot of thought and commensurate design resources into the c-Class, and we suspect that the engineering teams will feel proud of their achievements, and rightly so. HP has always excelled at engineering, and there is little reason to believe this would not be the case with its BladeSystem. One concern we have is that with the new blade chassis, it seems that HP is placing existing BladeSystem customers in a quandary. While the p-Class blades and chassis will be supported for some time, customers who want to take advantage of the c-Class features could find themselves owners of two sets of blades and chassis that do not appear to be interchangeable.
Granted, over time
technology refresh is inevitable and most all equipment will be replaced, but
if an organization buys into the notion of consolidation and simplification, it
would seem that a single consolidated blade standard would be preferable to
maintaining two (or more). But perhaps more important is what impact this might
have on potential
Previously, a 1Gbps
switch was a top seller for
It’s early in the game,
but while not all organizations will be able to employ the full capacity of a 10Gb switch—anywhere other than in their backbone networks
in the data center—this class of switch may very well become both more
pervasive and more commonplace over the next few years. However, a major factor
in any network has to be the ability of organizations to manage their network
infrastructure securely without having to expand great manpower, especially as
network skills are not very common and therefore can be expensive. Adding
heavyweight switches into the mix may increase network bandwidth, but it may
also complicate infrastructure management exponentially as the increased
bandwidth will undoubtedly beg more devices be connected through it. Although
this in itself might be an opening for
The last week has
witnessed a flurry of product announcements in the increasingly competitive
area of IP Telephony. First out of the traps came Avaya Inc. with announcements
on its latest range of IP Phones that have been designed to be as simple to use
as a cell phone/mobile handset along with details of an expanded array of
offerings from a large number of partner applications to run on the Avaya one-X
Deskphone Edition IP Phones. The new Avaya one-X Deskphone Edition is a range
of simple-to-use IP telephony handsets that also supports a wide range of advanced
applications allowing organizations to increase the productivity of their
staff. In addition the new IP handsets are amongst the first to offer
high-fidelity audio, a feature that makes a significant difference to the sound
quality and that can greatly enhance the interaction process. At the heart of
the phone is its simplicity. All of the functionality is available in a very
intuitive fashion considerably simplifying, almost removing, the need for
training to allow previously complex tasks and applications to be accessed in a
very straightforward fashion. When combined with the company’s central IP
Telephony software, Avaya Communication Manager, it becomes easy to handle the
many functions available including multi-party conferencing, automatic dialling,
missed call details and transferring a live call to
another handset, even direct to a cell phone. without losing the connection.
Avaya simultaneously released details of expanded
There is no doubt at all that Voice over IP has caught the attention of organizations large and small. Indeed, it is fair to say that the question today is not one of whether IP telephony will become accepted in the big wide world but rather one of when it will become the norm. The number of telephone lines that now run on IP is growing at a much faster rate than traditional lines and by some estimates 50% of all telephone lines will be running on IP technology some time around 2008/2009. It is calculated that IP telephony already accounts for well over a tenth of all lines in use and is growing by somewhere between 35% and 40% a year.
There is still a degree of fear of the “unknown” in some organizations about IP telephony but it is fading fast as VoIP clearly transitions from being perceived as leading edge and untested into becoming a mainstream solution. However, IP telephony is about much more than making calls more cheaply. To get the maximum value from IP communications organizations must consider integrating applications more closely into their IP telephony environment. To fully exploit the potential in the new systems simplicity of use is of crucial importance. The new handsets from Avaya when coupled with the company’s central management solutions have taken this to heart. It is clear that the simplicity of use that they provide to even the most complex of functions will appeal to organizations large and small. The simplicity of the installation and management of their solutions, while less visible, are of at least equal importance. IP telephony is still young but it is maturing very quickly. There is tremendous business value to be had in these solutions, much more than just reducing costs. IP telephony integrated tightly, but flexibly with applications will become the way to push new business functionality and thereby to deliver increasing value. It is the future.
Eurovision Summer 2006: Not
iTunes as It Is Today
Recently in the Scandinavian countries of Denmark, Norway, and Sweden various consumer-rights protection agencies have written to Apple with claims that their iTunes service in those countries breaches Scandinavian consumer laws. They announced that Apple has until August 1 to respond to their claims. Specifically, the consumer agencies allege that customers have to relinquish their rights to freely use legally purchased products in order to download music from iTunes. Norway in particular has indicated that it is prepared to take the issue to court. The issues surround Apple’s end user license agreement (EULA) and the implications of its implementation of its FairPlay DRM. The Danes have indicated they will watch the Norwegians carefully as their laws are close to Norway’s in this area.
One of the best ways to incite flame wars on the net is to talk about Apple’s iPod. Consumers, pundits, and analysts either love or hate the device, the company, and its approach. Of course similar statements can be made concerning any vendor with a digital rights management (DRM) scheme. Some view DRM as annoying but necessary to protect intellectual property. Others view it as infringement on consumer rights, while a third group views DRM as a challenge to be overcome. The truth lies somewhere in between.
In addition to the Scandinavian battle front, Apple is facing potential legal skirmishes with the French and with the EU over their UK pricing. The issue really isn’t isolated to Apple. The truth is that we have relatively new technology that allows us to deliver intellectual property in a commoditized manner and this presents challenges in allowing customers to use what they’ve purchased on one side in balance with protecting the legal right of the artist and the parties involved with bringing that IP to market on the other. Precedent discussions are hazy. Some people argue that gaming should be regarded as a precedent. No one expects Microsoft Xbox games to be usable on a Sony PlayStation, or vice versa. However, we reject that because from the start games from each vendor have been unique to that medium. Certainly that same Microsoft game if available in a PC edition will work equally well on a Dell PC as on an HP PC, or as on one created from a kit. Also, games are only played on a game system. Music now gets used in many places, and it is inherently more portable than a video game. Music traditionally has been available on media that was standardized. In this case, we haven’t agreed on a standard because each vendor believes it can be more creative than the others.
That is where the
real problem lies: not in the fact that we should be able to play our music in
multiple places, but that vendors should actively seek to make multiple
protection schemes or delivery mechanisms possible. Apple should make profit
through having superior players and a superior iTunes store experience and not
through an exclusive delivery mechanism that shuts out rival players’ and some
other technologies. A file is a file: it is a commodity. The content in that
file is certainly not a commodity, but the bit of format delivery technology,
whether it is an MP3 file or
The other difficult argument involves purchasing. In reality all one has ever purchased is a right to listen to that IP in the dominant format. In essence the same is true with the current Apple schema. What is different now is the increased portability of music and the range of devices and formats on which music can be played. Instead of building a vinyl collection or a CD collection, people in essence want to purchase a license collection and have that license applicable across a range of media. In the past there was a dominant medium and a period of transition between the incumbent and new technology. MP3s are to CDs in many ways what cassettes were to albums. The difference today is that there are many competing technologies and most consumers use more than one depending on the environment. Users do not want to pay for multiple licenses of the same piece. This is a rational desire. The problem is that the music industry has chosen to be reactive rather than proactive and the technology vendors have exploited that recalcitrance for their own gain. These legal challenges are not going to solve these core problem, but they are going to provide the momentum that prevents the industry from settling into a comfortable rut.