Cloud
11/12/2008
10:13 AM
George Crump
George Crump
Commentary
Connect Directly
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

Will The Cloud Hurt Storage Companies?

There have been a few articles written lately which claim cloud computing will hurt smaller storage companies like 3Par, Compellent, Xiotech, etc…. The theory being that there will have to be some industry consolidation. I disagree. Cloud computing should be a net gain for storage companies and here's why.

There have been a few articles written lately which claim cloud computing will hurt smaller storage companies like 3Par, Compellent, Xiotech, etc…. The theory being that there will have to be some industry consolidation. I disagree. Cloud computing should be a net gain for storage companies and here's why.First, what is cloud computing and cloud storage? In many ways it is the consolidation of small business and home users. Clearly there are cases where large companies are using cloud services, but for the most part it is small businesses. These are businesses that are too small for the storage systems manufacturers to cater to. The result of this consolidation of small businesses actually means more opportunities. If a cloud service provider consolidates the computing and storage of thousands of small businesses that are too small for these storage players to sell to into one large customer, that is a net gain for these companies.

Second, there is an assumption that cloud services will be the sole domain of a few big players. This will certainly not be the case, at least not initially. If cloud computing and cloud storage really catch on and grow like some analysts believe, there will be too many cloud service providers. Each of these will need to select a storage system based on their needs and business model. Most will buy a combination of fast online storage from the providers mentioned above and archive storage from companies like Permabit, Copan Systems, and Nexsan.

Third, cloud computing is an ideal use case for virtualized storage as provided by these manufacturers. Virtual storage's ability to provision on the fly, scale as the I/O and capacity needs demand while keeping the management of the system easy, are critical for the scale-out business model that a successful cloud services company will possess.

The other suggestion is that cloud service providers will take the route of Google and Amazon and create their own storage infrastructure. New entrants to cloud services will not have the resources or the need to roll their own solution. If, as a cloud service provider, you can remain cost effective without having to invest engineering resources in developing and, more important, supporting a customer storage platform, why would you? It makes more sense to focus on your core service.

What about the big storage players? They each now offer some sort of cloud storage play. Wouldn't it make sense to get all the storage types from a single manufacturer? It might, but there may be a stronger case in the cloud market for best of breed at each tier. Regardless, the challenge that the larger manufacturers face is that there is little to no integration between their cloud storage offerings and their other storage offerings. Other than logo's matching, what is the advantage?

Cloud service providers are typically going to have a heavy IT knowledge base internal to the company, they're going to understand the value of not reinventing the wheel and focus more on optimizing the asset.

Join us for our upcoming Webcast, Cloud Storage 101.

Track us on Twitter: http://twitter.com/storageswiss.

Subscribe to our RSS feed.

George Crump is founder of Storage Switzerland, an analyst firm focused on the virtualization and storage marketplaces. It provides strategic consulting and analysis to storage users, suppliers, and integrators. An industry veteran of more than 25 years, Crump has held engineering and sales positions at various IT industry manufacturers and integrators. Prior to Storage Switzerland, he was CTO at one of the nation's largest integrators.

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Flash Poll
Current Issue
Cartoon
Video
Slideshows
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2014-0972
Published: 2014-08-01
The kgsl graphics driver for the Linux kernel 3.x, as used in Qualcomm Innovation Center (QuIC) Android contributions for MSM devices and other products, does not properly prevent write access to IOMMU context registers, which allows local users to select a custom page table, and consequently write ...

CVE-2014-2627
Published: 2014-08-01
Unspecified vulnerability in HP NonStop NetBatch G06.14 through G06.32.01, H06 through H06.28, and J06 through J06.17.01 allows remote authenticated users to gain privileges for NetBatch job execution via unknown vectors.

CVE-2014-3009
Published: 2014-08-01
The GDS component in IBM InfoSphere Master Data Management - Collaborative Edition 10.0 through 11.0 and InfoSphere Master Data Management Server for Product Information Management 9.0 and 9.1 does not properly handle FRAME elements, which makes it easier for remote authenticated users to conduct ph...

CVE-2014-3302
Published: 2014-08-01
user.php in Cisco WebEx Meetings Server 1.5(.1.131) and earlier does not properly implement the token timer for authenticated encryption, which allows remote attackers to obtain sensitive information via a crafted URL, aka Bug ID CSCuj81708.

CVE-2014-3534
Published: 2014-08-01
arch/s390/kernel/ptrace.c in the Linux kernel before 3.15.8 on the s390 platform does not properly restrict address-space control operations in PTRACE_POKEUSR_AREA requests, which allows local users to obtain read and write access to kernel memory locations, and consequently gain privileges, via a c...

Best of the Web
Dark Reading Radio