Cisco quietly slips out new all-flash arrays – perhaps it doesn't want EMC, NetApp to notice

The competition gloves are almost off: Cisco has made available two Invicta solid-state arrays that integrate into the unified computing system (UCS) fabric but are not converged server-storage systems. The two systems, which had a low-key launch on Friday, will compete with Cisco partner EMC’s own XtremIO all-flash arrays. …

[Matt Bryant]

All credit to CISCO....

....they haven't given up, and bundling in their own AFA is a pretty ballsy statement of intent. It will be interesting to see how this works in practice, for exampe can they have a flash and disk option for autonomic tiering or does that still need an external EMC array and two sets of management tools?

[M. B.]

Re: All credit to CISCO....

Interesting times. Possibly ViPR will act as the management piece in that scenario, possibly orchestrating data movement between flash-enabled VNX and all-flash Invicta arrays? Maybe even managing the movement onto XtremeSF cards?

You'd have the cards installed in specific hosts as per application requirements, have a large pool of Invicta flash available for all hosts to use as-needed, and back-end that with FAST-enabled VNX or VMAX storage. (I don't see why it has to be EMC but it does make sense with ViPR in the mix, FusionIO/Invicta/NetApp could work just as well as long as there was an orchestration engine working in there to tell arrays where to move which blocks).

[Anonymous Coward]

Cisco is now, in your humble hack's view, in competition – at best – with EMC and NetApp. Once either of those suppliers move into servers then the filing of partnership divorce papers can be expected; the gloves will be fully off.

Cause it's not like either Cisco or NetAPP both already have OEM agreements with other companies they compete with?... oh hang on...

[Bobsbuddy]

Agreements don't matter when you play in the channel

Regardless of what Cisco/EMC or Cisco/Netapp agree on from a competition point of view is meaningless as both companies have a very large channel sales model. And in the channel we sell what the solution requires, and couldn't care less what the venders and their swinging d**ks agree to.

[Matt Bryant]

Re: Bobsbuddy Re: Agreements don't matter when you play in the channel

"....And in the channel we sell what the solution requires, and couldn't care less what the venders and their swinging d**ks agree to." I had a very amusing example of that the other week. One of the resellers we work with has suddenly got the hots for Lenovo, not because they sell lots of Lenovo laptops or desktops, but because their Lenovo agreement has a low barrieir to entry and gives them access to EMC devices they can sell into UCS deals cheaper without it infringing their CISCO partner agreement.

[StorageFan]

"it appears there's no longer any notion of a no-compete agreement, unless Cisco and EMC have agreed that: one, Cisco UCS servers are no-go areas for XtremIO arrays and, two, Cisco will not sell Invicta arrays outside of UCS server-connect situations or not into EMC accounts, and, three, VCE converged systems will have no AFAs at all or a choice of both Invicta (Cisco) and XtremIO (EMC) all-flash arrays."

VCE has a AFA option with XtremIO..

[jtarrio]

Links to data sheets dead?

Is it a coincidence that the links to the data sheets on http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/ps13644/products_data_sheets_list.html now redirect to the main UCS page (http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/ps10265/index.html)? Does Cisco not want people to know more about these systems?

Also, there seems to be no way to find these products under their UCS product page. Or at least, nothing that I can find here: http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/ps10265/products.html

[Anonymous Coward]

Feb 27th

"Join us for an exciting first look at the new Cisco UCS Invicta Series solid-state systems and learn more about how it can change your business"

http://tools.cisco.com/gems/cust/customerSite.do?METHOD=E&LANGUAGE_ID=E&SEMINAR_CODE=S19502&PRIORITY_CODE=000325419