"Using SPEC SFS, you cannot create an apples-to-apples comparison of system price to performance," she says.
NetApp points out that Meta priced out 3-Tbyte configurations for the EMC NS600 and NetApp's F825c and FAS940c. However, the SPEC performance numbers used different configurations: The NS600 had 9.9 Tbytes of storage; the F825c had 3.6 Tbytes; and the FAS940c had an 8.4-Tbyte configuration. "A 3-Tbyte Celerra will not perform at the same level as a 9.9-Tbyte system," says Newton. "Essentially what Meta has done is compare the performance of a Ferrari to the price of a Honda."
Meta's Shafer does acknowledge that the performance numbers he cites "do not necessarily reflect the configurations specified in our table and were not performed in a database environment." But he insists that the benchmark figures and pricing can be used as a "reasonable initial relative reference" for IT buyers choosing between EMC and NetApp to host databases on NAS.
"I don't argue with NetApp's point," says Shafer. "It's legitimate -- these are not real-world pricing and performance numbers. But the point is to give users a gross idea that both of these vendors are in the same ballpark."
Just how gross the idea is, though, depends on whether you're looking at it from EMC's or NetApp's perspective.
To realize the benefits of cloud-native software, an application must actually be cloud-native—designed to run in the cloud, interacting with disaggregated cloud services, fully manageable as code—to deliver the expected benefits.
By combining resources and expertise, the AI-Enabled ICT Workforce Consortium will offer a blueprint for how industries can adapt to an AI-dominated future.
IT leaders should heed the guidance of cybersecurity insurance providers who think businesses should prioritize security education, incident preparedness, regular internal audits, and ongoing vulnerability scanning and patching.
