Dark Reading is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them.Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

News

2/6/2008
09:49 PM
Terry Sweeney
Terry Sweeney
Commentary
Connect Directly
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

Total Cost Of Lead Generation

I know at least four vendors who'd be more than willing to help you calculate it, but does anyone really know the total cost of ownership (TCO) of their storage? Too often, these calculations have about the same gravitas as when someone starts describing what they're worth "on paper."

I know at least four vendors who'd be more than willing to help you calculate it, but does anyone really know the total cost of ownership (TCO) of their storage? Too often, these calculations have about the same gravitas as when someone starts describing what they're worth "on paper."Still, Compellent jogged my feeble memory that vendors still offer these things with a new TCO tool. In its basic version it asks users six questions about usable capacity, annual storage growth rate, percentages of active/inactive data, kilowatt hour charges, annual salary for a storage admin, and average cost of downtime.

Click, click, click, and what do you know? The Compellent SAN is cheaper than the garden variety out there. Uh-huh. Apparently a more advanced tool is available for free if you give them name, address, phone number, e-mail, etc. My hope is it's like that car insurance commercial where the best quote may be from a competitor. My worst fear is that tools like these are little more than lead-generation factories.

Dell, EMC, IBM, Oracle, and VMware all offer some flavor of TCO tool, and they're all pretty much the same. The issue of how much vendors stack the deck in their own favor we can leave for another time. I'm more curious to know what else goes into your calculations that vendors don't consider, or purposely overlook. Add a comment below, or if you want more privacy, hit the "E-Mail" button at the top of this page and write me directly.

We'll see if these vendor promises are worth the paper they'd be printed on.

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Why Cyber-Risk Is a C-Suite Issue
Marc Wilczek, Digital Strategist & CIO Advisor,  11/12/2019
6 Small-Business Password Managers
Curtis Franklin Jr., Senior Editor at Dark Reading,  11/8/2019
Unreasonable Security Best Practices vs. Good Risk Management
Jack Freund, Director, Risk Science at RiskLens,  11/13/2019
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Write a Caption, Win a Starbucks Card! Click Here
Latest Comment: This comment is waiting for review by our moderators.
Current Issue
Navigating the Deluge of Security Data
In this Tech Digest, Dark Reading shares the experiences of some top security practitioners as they navigate volumes of security data. We examine some examples of how enterprises can cull this data to find the clues they need.
Flash Poll
Rethinking Enterprise Data Defense
Rethinking Enterprise Data Defense
Frustrated with recurring intrusions and breaches, cybersecurity professionals are questioning some of the industrys conventional wisdom. Heres a look at what theyre thinking about.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2019-18885
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-14
fs/btrfs/volumes.c in the Linux kernel before 5.1 allows a btrfs_verify_dev_extents NULL pointer dereference via a crafted btrfs image because fs_devices->devices is mishandled within find_device, aka CID-09ba3bc9dd15.
CVE-2019-18895
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-14
Scanguard through 2019-11-12 on Windows has Insecure Permissions for the installation directory, leading to privilege escalation via a Trojan horse executable file.
CVE-2019-18957
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-14
Microstrategy Library in MicroStrategy before 2019 before 11.1.3 has reflected XSS.
CVE-2019-16863
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-14
STMicroelectronics ST33TPHF2ESPI TPM devices before 2019-09-12 allow attackers to extract the ECDSA private key via a side-channel timing attack because ECDSA scalar multiplication is mishandled, aka TPM-FAIL.
CVE-2019-18949
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-14
SnowHaze before 2.6.6 is sometimes too late to honor a per-site JavaScript blocking setting, which leads to unintended JavaScript execution via a chain of webpage redirections targeted to the user's browser configuration.