Configuresoft Nicely Fills an EMC Gap

EMC continues to tease the market with its management software ambitions, taking another step this week to build on its portfolio. On May 27, EMC announced its intent to acquire Configuresoft, a vendor of server configuration and change management (CCM) software. Forrester views this as a positive development for both companies but we eagerly await more.

While EMC must still make additional developmental moves to graduate into the “anchor” class of management vendors, its M&A activity has proven it is a formidable player in configuration and change management across a number of technology domains. Obviously, EMC has strength in storage, but it has also become a key vendor in the network domain with its Smarts (2005) and Voyence (2007) acquisitions, and its purchase of nLayers (2006) gives it some of the best visibility into the application domain. Servers have been a notable gap even though some good “skunk works” monitoring technology was developed within its Smarts team. Server CCM was one big domain missing from the portfolio.

This acquisition does not come as much of a surprise. The two vendors inked an OEM agreement in 2008 that resulted in EMC’s Server Configuration Manager and Configuration Analytics Manager, a re-branding of Configuresoft’s technologies. By following through with full acquisition, the bond becomes stronger and any vendor risk is much lower. The near-term actual fulfillment of the technology itself should be little changed, however. Over the next several months, EMC must continue to consolidate its many parts into a cohesive CCM strategy and integrated product family. The current tools are each very strong, but the collective suite is still fragmented.

One hopeful step in the direction of consolidation is the CMDB that EMC gained with its Infra (2008) acquisition. Many questions remain about how this CMDB strategy will play out, but EMC has the right parts to assemble into what is potentially one of the strongest CCM families in the industry. Early indications suggest the EMC people charged with this evolution are on the right philosophical track toward building a properly federated configuration management system (CMS). We implore EMC’s leadership to give them the power to execute on fulfilling this vision. This includes the freedom to build federation to third party tools, an absolute necessity to lead in the CMS market.

This consolidated CCM is notable, as the configuration and change management processes collectively form the basic core of every function performed in IT. If you do not master these, all other processes will suffer. Conversely, excellent configuration information is a catalyst toward IT excellence that must be fortified with strong analytics and change controls.

Configuresoft includes some very impressive policy analysis capabilities, a much-needed but often overlooked use case for the configuration information delivered by such products. This is one of the more promising outcomes of combining the Configuresoft, Voyence, and internally developed EMC configuration policy analysis products. It also presents a challenge to EMC, as each of these brings good but disjointed features that need to be reconciled. Will the final policy analysis engine be Configuresoft’s, Voyence’s, or something completely different, maybe a hybrid of all of these? This is a big question that does note necessarily have an easy answer.

Finally, the biggest question of them all is how EMC will parlay this CCM power into a broader, integrated management strategy. We believe the technology acquired with Smarts is a powerful asset that has not been leveraged to its potential within the EMC family. EMC missed a grand opportunity to extend more aggressively into the server and application domains for monitoring and root cause analysis (RCA). It is not too late to revisit this direction. Demand is still extremely high for application RCA. We know such RCA is far from easy, but EMC has many of the right parts to compete well if it gives this market the right attention.

To achieve this, EMC must develop or acquire performance management capabilities in the various domains, including applications. This has been a glaring hole in the EMC portfolio for years and its competitors (especially CA) have been capitalizing on this weakness. It must also present a forceful IT process automation (ITPA) capability to assemble the many CCM pieces involved. Configuresoft and Voyence are great components to this story and Infra has some decent ITPA elements, but it needs better ITPA linkages and flow automation along the lines of Opalis and the run book automation technologies acquired and developed by BMC, CA, and HP.

Forrester applauds the Configuresoft acquisition, as well as the others made by EMC’s resource management software group (RMSG). It is clear that EMC is building a truly powerful CCM story. We hope the company will get more aggressive at building atop this strong foundation. 2009 is proving to be an opportune time for M&A and EMC has some of the better potential to be a major player in IT management software. It must now prove to a skeptical market that it can execute with enough vigor to overtake the competition.

By Glenn O'Donnell

Check out Glenn's research

Free Webinar On Server Virtualization

In my conversations with organizations implementing server virtualization, I've found that there seems to be a gap opening between the number of virtual machines firms are willing to run on a server, and the maximum number that could still reasonably fit on there. It looks like this will be aggravated by newer servers that can run twice as many virtual machines, along with more mature virtualization platforms like VMware vSphere that will support up to a TB of physical RAM. How long will it be before IT is expected to support 50 or 75 VMs per server?

If you want to learn more about this topic, please join my complimentary Webinar, "Forrester’s Top Three Recommendations For Implementing Server Virtualization" on June 11th at 11AM EST. You can register for the session by visiting:

www.forrester.com/virtualizationwebinar

By Galen Schreck

Check out Galen's research.

Optimizing The Branch Part 2: Forrester's Take on Branch Office Consolidation

In the first IT Infrastructure & Operations video podcast, I discuss trends in branch office consolidation as presented at Forrester's recent IT Forum US event, with a lovely backdrop of the Las Vegas strip. Read the accompanying report here.

By Chris Silva

Check out Chris' research

NetApp Shakes Up The Backup Marker With The Acquisition Of Deduplication Pioneer Data Domain

Despite the availability of multiple backup appliances supporting deduplication, Data Domain has continued to win customers at a steady pace. As of March 2009, the company had more than 2,900 customers and recruited hundreds of value added resellers. Its proven deduplication technology, integrated replication, and aggressive campaign to eliminate tape garnered it a tremendous amount of mind share and put it on most customers’ short lists. So it comes as no surprise that they were acquired by a major storage vendor.

That it was acquired by NetApp does come as a bit of surprise. NetApp does have its own successful VTL that supports deduplication. But then again, NetApp didn’t introduced deduplication in its VTL until the Fall of 2008 (the last of the major storage vendors to do so) and it typically sells its VTL into its own customer base. With Data Domain, NetApp now owns one of the toughest competitors in the backup appliance market and it gives the company a system that it (and the hundreds of NetApp channel partners around the globe) can sell into non-NetApp environments.

The largest of the Data Domain appliances, the recent DD690, scales to 35 useble TBs but because of it’s inline deduplication, the effective capacity of the system is much greater. It all depends on the deduplication ratio. If the system achieves 20:1 deduplication ratio, the effective capacity is more than 700 TBs. Throughout is 2.5 TBs per hour. NetApp’s current VTL, which supports post-process deduplication, has a useable capacity of 550 TBs and an effective capacity of 10 petabytes (PBs) assuming 20:1 dedupe. Throughput is 4.3 TBs per hour.

Generally speaking, more competitors in the marketplace is better for customers, more options, better pricing, etc. However, the acquisition does mean the current and future Data Domain customers will have the customer service and support of significantly larger storage company with a global presence. NetApp also plans to continue to sell the Data Domain platforms as is, any future integration between Data Domain and its current VTL will take a very a long time. I expect that NetApp will maintain both platforms for the foreseeable future. Data Domain is the better platform for small and medium businesses and most enterprises. For large enterprises that require more throughput and scale and policy-based deduplication, NetApp can offer its current VTL.

Now that it owns Data Domain and together with the rapid adoption of deduplication in its production FAS storage systems (as of May 13th, NetApp reported that customers has activated deduplication on more than 37,000 of its system), NetApp is now the dominant vendor in deduplication.

The acquisition also speaks to the stress that customers face storing an avalanche of data with stagnant or slow growing storage budgets and how important any capacity optimizing technology (thin provisioning, space efficient snapshots, virtual fulls, compression, deduplication) is to their storage strategy.

By Stephanie Balaouras

Check out Stephanie's research.

Are Big Boxes Better For Server Virtualization?

From time to time, someone will ask me if it makes sense to purchase a large (32+ CPU) server as a big virtualization host running a VMware, Microsoft, or Citrix hypervisor.

In a word, I think the answer is "no".

Here are a few reasons why:

• First, very few virtualization users that I’m aware of have selected anything larger than 4-socket systems. Massive servers with 32 processors simply cost too much on a per-VM basis, and since you end up dividing them up into smaller virtual machines, there’s not much benefit to go with a massive system. Most hypervisors don’t support more than four virtual processors per virtual machine (including VMware -- you have to purchase the top-of-the-line Enterprise Plus to get 8-way virtual SMP).
• Second, many of the HA features in large SMP systems can be provided by clustering or live migration capabilities in software.
• Third, having all that capacity in one box used to make it easier to reallocate resources between partitions -- but live migration across physical boxes makes that unnecessary as well.
• Lastly, some vendors have claimed that virtual environments built on big servers are easier to manage, since there are fewer physical endpoints to worry about. I think this is an older argument that dates back to when people purchased a Sun E10K to run a large number of websites. Ultimately, more automated management tools made it possible to run large numbers of scale-out servers at a similar cost.

Even among modular servers, there is some debate as to how big of a box you need. The recent release of the Intel Xeon 5500 allows you to manage a lot more memory with fewer physical CPUs. In order to provide the maximum amount of memory to their VMs, many companies purchased more processors than they needed -- simply so they could get enough RAM. Systems were still mostly memory bound, so with the release of the new Xeon 5500 that can address more DIMMS, we think that some firms will temporarily swing back towards systems with fewer CPUs. Plus, the CPUs have gotten much faster -- recent demonstrations by Intel are showing the new Xeon 5500-based servers running twice the workload of their prior models.

By Galen Schreck

Check out Galen's research.

Optimizing The Branch, Part 1: Mobilizing IT

Writing on technologies for the branch office often times places me across the domains of mobility and non-mobile network infrastructure. Increasingly, in client inquiry calls, the question of "how do I optimize my branch office infrastructure" comes up and takes many forms. I'll attempt to address the most common of these branch office optimization scenarios in a series of posts. This being the first of such posts, I'll tackle one of the more basic optimization questions; connectivity for the small branch office.

In many organizations, the pure issue of connectivity for the branch can be a headache for IT Ops. When 10 - 20 users, or even fewer in many small or remote offices, are in need of access many organizations seek the most flexible, least infrastructure-intensive solution. In many cases spectre of unmanaged Wi-Fi access points at these branches and the related on-site support they may require is a deal-breaker, outweighing the operational benefit of simple, pervasive Wi-Fi connectivity using commodity hardware. Controller-based solutions, however, can seem overkill from either an infrastructure expense standpoint or in terms of sheer infrastructure complexity when contrast to the lack of or need for reduction in branch office IT staff. So, what does an organization seeking to "light up" its small branch offices with little or no infrastructure do? They outsource connectivity, of course. 

Many firms seeking to replicate "wired equivalent" connectivity speed for users in a small branch have opted for mobile broadband solutions from GSM and CDMA carriers. Based on current offerings, HSPA and EVDO-based offerings provide users ~1Mbit of uplink throughput, and about half that downlink will serve users with roughly equivalent speed to that of a fragmented (read: shared) DSL connection provided by local wireline carriers. A fair solution, but at $50 - $60 per month for high-limit plans, cost quickly becomes a factor.

Enter Novatel Wireless. a vendor primarily known for USB, PCMCIA and Express Card dongles for connecting existing hardware such as laptops to carrier networks. Novatel has harnessed the power of 3G EVDO for backhaul and Wi-Fi for access distribution in one device. The Novatel MiFi 2200, announced yesterday by US CDMA carrier Sprint for availability in June and also announced this month by US CDMA carrier rival Verizon Wireless for availability next week changes the dynamic of 3G as a connectivity option for the branch. As many reviewers have expounded, the ability to share 3G signal using commodity Wi-Fi is a dynamic-changer for power users on the go, but the real benefit will be seen by small groups of users able to establish and share ad-hoc connectivity anywhere 3G signal is available. This solution can extend the reach of the 3G many organizations are already using to connect branch office workers to the WAN while cutting costs of maintaining multiple data subscriptions.

In the case of Sprint, the potential to support branches of 10+ users using a MiFi device becomes more intruiging as future device roadmaps show the next generation sporting a two chipsets (WiFi and WiMax) capable of connecting to the carrier's WiMax network (co-operated with Clearwire and other partners) which will allow the WiMax network (offering upwards of 6Mbit uplink) to provide backhaul for and entire branch office while still being priced at the cost of 1-2 of the aircards that it will replace.  

The promise of WiMax to solve connectivity ills has been long promised and, at present and in all fairness, the Sprint-Clearwire Clear network is limited to few geographic locations. If aggressive roadmaps are to be believed, though, cost-effective connectivity for branch sites is not far in the future. In the meantime, for small (sub 10-user) branch sites that are supporting multiple aircards for basic connectivity have a new, economy-friendly ally in the MiFi2200.

By Chris Silva

Check out Chris' research

Oracle Enhances VM Management With Virtual Iron Acquisition

The rumors are true. Oracle has finally announced that its intent to acquire Virtual Iron for its virtual server management capabilities.

It's a nice fit for Oracle, which has its own Xen-based virtualization platform called Oracle VM. Up until now, Virtual Iron has been selling its management tools on its own Xen-derived hypervisor. The net result is that Oracle gets dynamic resource management, power management, and better virtual server capabilities. And since Virtual Iron was built to manage Xen-based systems, the integration should be done by lunchtime on the day of the acquisition.

The acquisition brings up some larger questions, however, such as how Oracle will integrate Oracle VM, Oracle Enterprise Manager, and Virtual Iron Sun's xVM Server and xVM Ops Center. Now that it will supply hardware and virtualization platforms, Oracle will need to build out a stronger system management and automation portfolio.

Today Oracle's virtualization tools don't have much traction in the market when compared with VMware or Microsoft. Prior to the acquisition of Sun, I would have said it was unlikely Oracle would become a general purpose virtualization platform, with a few die-hard Oracle customers using it for their Oracle apps. Combining three Xen contenders may position Oracle as the strongest Xen player, to the detriment of Citrix. Now, it seems more likely that Oracle can become a true platform vendor -- especially if it uses virtual appliances to distribute its products. We think virtual appliances make it easier to consume operating environments that you aren't accustomed to managing. You don't have to be a Linux expert to boot a VM with a preconfigured Linux OS and Oracle running on it. If done properly with automatic updates and a web interface, you would never even have to know what was running underneath.

More information can be found on Oracle's web site: http://www.oracle.com/virtualiron/index.html

By James Staten and Galen Schreck

Check out James' research and Galen's research.

IT Forum EMEA 2009

Forrester's IT Forum EMEA 2009 -- to be held 3-5 June at the Maritim Hotel in Berlin -- focuses this year on "redefining IT's value to the enterprise". As with our research, Forrester's focus is on providing credible and actionable advice, so all attendees will have the opportunity to meet individually with Forrester analysts to discuss the issues most important to you. In addition, we have terrific featured speakers to provide case studies and best practices:

Guest speakers
Edouard Odier, AF-KLM Executive Vice President, IT, Air France
Brian Franz, Chief Information Officer, Diageo
Martin Burvill, Group Vice President, Verizon Business
Xavier Rambaud, Group Vice President, Information Systems, Rhodia

Forrester speakers
Bobby Cameron, Vice President, Principal Analyst
Thomas Mendel, Ph.D., Vice President, Research Director
More than 50 Forrester analysts

The best way to get the full experience and peer networking opportunities is to attend. If you will be joining us in Berlin (and I hope you will), we'll provide multiple opportunities to engage with the event and your peers:

• This blog will feature in-depth updates from keynotes and track sessions.
• RSVP on our IT Forum EMEA 2009 Facebook page and network with attendees.
• Participate on Twitter by following us and using the #itfe09 hash tag for the event.

If you have any questions about the IT Forum EMEA 2009, please leave a comment. I hope to see you there!

Citrix C3 – Where are the partners?

Citrix put some significant new meat on the bones of its Citrix Cloud Center (C3) offering this week but left behind one crucial element. Who are the partners delivering this offering?

At its annual customer get together, Citrix Synergy 2009, the company fulfilled our prediction of the true value of its XenSource acquisition in 2007 – an enabling technology for Presentation Server (now XenApp) and its desktop virtualization efforts (now XenDesktop). By adding these capabilities to its C3 platform for Internet service providers (ISPs) it has significantly differentiated its Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS) play from VMware vCloud, 3Tera AppLogic, and the other platform efforts in the market today. Instead of an ISP getting a relatively generic IaaS platform, they now get a robust set of service offerings – IaaS, Windows application hosting (somewhat of a SaaS offering) and desktop as a service.

But the announcement left me a little concerned when it wasn’t coupled with a list of brand name ISPs who have signed on to deliver this service to enterprise customers. Anyone out there? Perusal of Citrix’ C3 web site and Citrix Service Provider partner pages offer no insights either (Ingram Micro? Softcat? ExpressData? Not exactly ISPs). The technology without the partners looks a little incomplete. Citrix has started a timeclock on the credibility of this effort that it will need to fulfill soon.

Further confusing was its announcement of C3 Lab. This offering that lets you test drive XenApp and XenDesktop in the cloud uses the standard Amazon Machine Images rather than XenServer. While both are based on the Xen open source hypervisor, they aren’t compatible – you can’t manage AMIs with Citrix Essentials and you can’t deploy XenServer VMs into EC2. The company will need to address this point of integration quickly or it will hurt the C3 value proposition.

Citrix’s C3 strategy has three thrusts. In addition to courting ISPs to deploy C3, it is also trying to convince other cloud providers to upgrade from the open source free Xen hypervisor to its commercial XenServer and to get enterprises to use XenServer in house. For the cloud community it offers a revenue sharing license model that may entice many of the midsized players to move up, but C3 is a far more compelling value proposition. For the enterprise, expect to see a C3 for internal clouds in the next year. Strong ties to XenApp and XenDesktop will fuel its appeal in much the same way. Let’s hope the enterprise customer references are ready at launch, though.

By James Staten

Check out James' research

Leveraging Cloud Computing For New Business Enablement

In yesterday’s Forbes.com HP VP and CTO Russ Daniels wrote a short commentary on how cloud computing can help reignite the global economy and his focus is what makes the difference. Where Russ differs from many others on cloud computing in that he is talking about the vision from a higher, business level than most others, who are down in the IT weeds most of the time. Where Nick Carr talks about cloud computing sending corporate data centers to the trash heap, Russ is looking at what new business opportunities can be enabled by the cloud.

It’s important to be careful, though, in articulating new business enablement that truly is leveraging the key differentiators of cloud computing (pay per use and elasticity) from the normal outgrowth of the Internet. MagCloud is a good example, Snapfish is not (but Animoto is). The key difference is that cloud computing is logic processing on the Internet that is paid for only when it is activated and can scale as large or small as needed at the time it is needed. And this logic processing is your applications – not mashups, SaaS or leveraging others’ work. Sure you can use SOA to string together other people’s logic but it’s the business process you design in SOA that is cloud computing.

The key to building the ideal business model for cloud computing is the tight correlation to revenue generation. If you have to do a lot of logic up front – before you get paid for it – cloud computing may not be the best fit. This is especially true if your business model results in a heavy persistent logic footprint. Pay per use models are never cost effective if constantly consumed. Variability is what makes them attractive.

What new business models are you bringing to the cloud? Forrester is actively researching enterprise case studies of cloud computing and wants to hear your story. Contact me if you have a good story to tell or come meet with me at Forrester’s IT Forum in Las Vegas, May 19-22.

By James Staten

Check out James' research