Quick Alert: CA Hits a Homerun and Acquires Nimsoft

After a string of questionable acquisitions, CA hits a homerun by acquiring Nimsoft for a cool $350 million.  Nimsoft is a pioneer of “Unified Management” and an emerging competitor to the Big 4 monitoring companies.  Nimsoft gives CA a double-shot-in-the-arm of much needed excitement, product differentiation, and thought leadership.

What does Nimsoft bring to CA?

  • Approximately 800 Enterprise and Managed Service Provider Customers
  • An innovative Unified Monitoring approach spanning Cloud Computing, SAAS, Data Center, Application, Database, and Virtualization Management
  • Unified Reporting including Customer Dashboards
  • Next generation Event Correlation and Analysis
  • Strong Upward Growth
  • Easy to Use, Powerful, and Elegant Software Solutions
  • Unified Monitoring APIs and 3rd Party Extensions to quickly add existing CA solutions
  • Talent, Leadership, Execution, and more

It is great to hear that Nimsoft will not be folded into CA but instead will be run as a separate business unit.  However, instantly CA feels a bit more hip, in-touch, and ready to step-up to the challenges their customers face.  Suddenly the chuckles of “they bought who” at IBM, HP, and BMC gave way to “holey s***, CA just bought Nimsoft!”

If CA can keep Nimsoft’s talent, rationalize their product portfolio, and integrate some key CA assets into a single integrated solution suite, then they will be a force to reckon with.  Additionally, by no means do I think the M&A activity is over for CA or any of the Big 4.

Congrats to Nimsoft for collecting a cool $350 million and building a strong, innovative, and growing business.  Congrats to CA for recognizing all of the above and adding a gem to their cloud computing management portfolio.

3 Ways for Dell to Rise Again

I’m not a big fan “top reasons to do x, or fix y” but I decided to go against my better judgment and publish three ways Dell can shake-up the industry.

One: BE DELL


Dell is a successful company that revolutionized IT by providing equal to superior products at a lower price while providing excellent customer support and service. Dell seized the opportunity to partner with companies like EMC to expand their footprint while continuing pushing costs down. Somewhere along the line, between AMD and Blade Servers, the competition caught-up and began to fight fire with fire. Meanwhile, Dell was left “Dell-less” and flat-footed; no longer nimble enough to change from the cha-cha to the tango.

Dell must make a critical choice; blaze their own path within this datacenter/cloud computing mess or follow HP, Cisco, and others. Currently, Dell has chosen the latter and has aggressively partnered with Juniper, Brocade, and others to attempt to match their rivals (similar to IBM’s strategy minus the power of IBM Global Services). Additionally, Dell continues to evangelize the concept of OPEN IT infrastructure. Ah, the old OPEN vs. Proprietary argument; does it hold water in the enterprise? Finally, Dell purchased Perot Systems as their long awaited entrance into services.

All these moves, while necessary, do not play to Dell’s core strengths. Why not use the vaunted Dell manufacturing capability to commoditize next generation hardware faster than the competition can recoup their costs; Cisco has spent millions on R&D and software development while HP has spent billions on R&D and acquiring complementary technology companies. If Dell could build a UCS-B/Nexus look alike with equal to superior performance at a lower price, then they could dominate the market.

Two: Public Clouds Need Not Apply

While the idea of public clouds is intellectually enticing, the reality is the money lies within private clouds. Does Google build their cloud infrastructure on commercial hardware from Dell, HP, IBM, etc.? By their very nature, public clouds are singular in nature; search, virtualization, CRM, etc. They require fine tuned operating systems and management capabilities that are linked to CPU, memory, power, and disk. In other words, go directly to the component manufacturers and build what you need. If something fails, weigh the cost of replacement vs. leaving it in place.

Private clouds require a delicate balance of performance, reliability, and management. Very few enterprises will entertain the notion of building their own hardware as they want the peace-of-mind and backing of giant corporations such as Dell. To capitalize on private clouds, Dell must blaze of new trail by concentrating on security, performance, reliability, management, and ROI.

How does Dell accomplish this? By calling BS on the current state of private clouds and offering real solutions to current challenges. How? Don’t just take tired old tools form 3rd party ISVs and announce that you have a cloud computing management strategy. Understand that cloud computing requires new paradigms within security, storage, networking, and compute power.

Three: Open Source Hardware

Open Source Hardware is a reactively obscure concept. Per Wikipedia, “Open Source Hardware is designed and offered in the same manner as free and open source software.” While HP Labs has dabbled within Open Source Hardware, Dell has the opportunity to take the lead.

Dell could offer a full line of Open Source Hardware publishing full hardware specifications as well as the software that runs these machines. Dell Laps and Open Source Division could work with customers to build cost effective systems. This is very similar to what they have done within their white label division; see Aster Data.

Wait, didn’t you say most customers won’t build their own hardware? Just because it is open source does not mean everyone will take advantage of this nor does it mean a lack of revenues; see Novell, Red Hat, etc. By publishing detailed specs and code, Dell becomes a revolutionary and IT professionals can finally make informed decisions. They may choose to have Dell build the systems, build them themselves, or purchase from a competitor. However, the thought leadership and vision comes from Dell

One area of low hanging fruit for Open Source Hardware seems to reside within storage. Rather than purchase expensive gear from EMC, IBM, etc. why not build a cost effective storage array? Of course, Dell would be cutting into their EMC partnership, but do they really want to work with a company that is dating Cisco?

In conclusion, I find Dell a fascinating company with explosive potential. Given the right vision and strategy, Dell could catapult ahead of the pack.

Quick Alert: Score one for HP as they grab 3Com!

A tip of the cap to the management and M&A teams at HP, as they continue to acquire the necessary pieces to challenge Cisco’s core business.  With HP’s acquisition of 3Com for $2.7 billion, HP has gained a portfolio of modern architected networking products that span switching, routing, and network security.  Additionally, HP expanded access to overseas markets, including the ever expanding market in China, through 3Com’s H3C unit. 

While some will laugh at the reach and capabilities of 3Com, HP understands that 3Com’s products are solid, modern, and good-enough when put under the HP ProCurve brand and backed by the power of HP and their Services Division.  Furthermore, while Cisco continues to date the likes of EMC and VMware, HP is in full control of their destiny.  They have built a strong portfolio that spans storage, servers, virtualization, networking, security, applications, and management.

While Cisco isn’t going to be losing any sleep over this acquisition, they will take note of how aggressive HP is going to be to not only defend their own turf but also to expand into Cisco’s bread and butter.  However, IBM, Juniper, Brocade, and Dell may be tossing and turning tonight as they contemplate the future.  If IBM continues to wait to purchase the necessary pieces to compete with HP and Cisco, their choices will be limited.  If Dell does not shore up their portfolio, then they face the reality of falling further behind and severely limiting their growth potential.  Finally, both Juniper and Brocade must weigh the possibility that organic growth may not be possible as we are nearing a major inflection point for all of IT.

One quick note, don’t underestimate Huawei or ZTE as they are both hungry and flush with cash.  Additionally, Oracle remains a wildcard as they may jump into this race.

IBM: It’s Gut Check Time

Whether large, medium, small, or start-up, there comes a time in the life of every company that shapes both the future of the company itself and the industry at large.  Today, the battle for the datacenter has sent shockwaves throughout the silos of networking, server, storage, and security.  As Cisco and HP have gone “all-in”, it is time for IBM to place its bet.

The stakes are incredibly high and there is little margin for error.  IBM can either purchase the necessary pieces to “unify” the datacenter and compete head-to-head with HP and Cisco, or they can continue to partner with the likes of Cisco, Juniper, etc. to provide a best-of-breed solution fueled by their own services business.  However, consolidation may prove to make the latter unsustainable and doing nothing may lead IBM on a precarious path.

Cisco understands the importance of IBM, HP, and others to their bottom line as both of these giants resell Cisco equipment to their customers.  However, Cisco continues to take steps to diversify their business model and they are one acquisition away from changing the equation.  What acquisition?  How about engineering a purchase of CSC, ACS, or the coup de grace Accenture?  Don’t laugh; ever envision a world without Lehman Brothers or Meryl Lynch?

HP is clearly positioning itself as the answer to Cisco’s dominance.  HP has or is prepared to acquire the missing pieces to reshape IT.  With their aggressive purchases of Mercury Interactive, Opsware, and EDS, HP has shown a keen sense of urgency, vision, and market awareness.  It is no wonder that HP is pondering additional networking acquisitions to strengthen their position within Ethernet switching and storage networking.

IBM too has taken steps to answer the unified computing challenge, but their approach has been through partnerships, research and development efforts, and OEM agreements.  With a fragmented industry, this approach made perfect sense.  However, as the industry continues to consolidate, IBM may find their most important OEMs or partners in the hands of their rivals.  One such example of this danger, is with the rumored “for sale” sign that now hangs above Brocade.  IBM recently signed an OEM agreement with Brocade for their network switches.  Would this agreement continue if Brocade is purchased by HP?

It is gut check time for IBM.  IBM has strong plays in services, applications, storage, servers, virtualization, and security with a glaring hole within networking.  Do they continue to fill this hole with Juniper, Brocade, Cisco, and more while accepting the risks associated with this strategy or do they fill it by making a strategic acquisition or two?

Perhaps an alternative strategy would be an even tighter relationship with Cisco.  However, as Cisco aggressively moves into IBM’s home turf (servers, virtualization, storage), this may be untenable.  After all, Cisco’s Chambers realizes the money is in services and eventually he will want a bigger piece of the services pie.

Does IBM want to lead, follow, or get out of the way?  Do they let their vision of autonomic computing slip through their fingertips?  Do they allow Oracle to become a one-stop-shop?  Do they watch while Cisco enters into the services business?  Do they allow HP to continue to grow and extend their reach and capabilities?  Or do they fight?  Do they purchase Brocade and Juniper?  Do they finally unify, via technology not marketing, networking, storage, servers, security?

In-the-end, these decisions will be made deep within IBM’s boardroom and are conditional on Samuel J. Palmisano’s, CEO and Chairman of the Board of IBM, vision for the company.  He’s already reshaped IBM’s software business with the purchase of Cognos and SPSS (pending), why not take a shot at redefining networking, datacenter, and cloud computing?

Why Cisco should fear HP

Earlier this year, Cisco made headlines with their UCS B-Series Blade Servers.  They followed this up with the Nexus 1000v and several other announcements including a partnership with BMC.  At the time I called this announcement a letdown as I hoped that Cisco would re-invent the server market turning it a new “servernet” device.

Today, HP announced the availability of the ProCurve 6120 series Blade Switch integrated with the BladeSystem cClass infrastructure.  This is a significant announcement from HP and one that heightens their war with Cisco.  Doesn’t Cisco make a 3200 for HP c-Class BladeSystems?

In yet another fracture between HP and Cisco, HP now has the capabilities and product offerings to steal Cisco’s UC thunder.  In fact, one could argue that HP has a stronger position within this market as they have servers, storage, networking, management, and service capabilities all wrapped in an HP bow.

To date, Cisco has been battling smaller rivals for dominance in the Enterprise; Juniper, Brocade, Enterasys, 3Com, and more.  However, this fight has been on Cisco’s turf; networking.  Today, Cisco is fighting equal or larger rivals in the Enterprise; HP, IBM (OEMs), and others.  However, this fight is on foreign soil that Cisco has no base of operation; servers.

Until IBM decides to get back into networking by purchasing Juniper, Brocade, or both, HP remains Cisco’s number one challenge.  Cisco relies on HP on many fronts of which I’ll highlight two points; to re-sell Cisco hardware and to OEM HP’s Network Management Software called Network Compliance Manager.  The importance of re-selling of Cisco hardware is self-evident but what about the OEM relationship?

The key to UC is management.  In fact the key to cloud computing, virtualization, PAAS, SAAS, or whatever you want to call it is management.  While HP has a strong offering of management software, Cisco continues to rely on OEMs or partnerships to fill this gap.  What’s wrong with this strategy?  Simply put, if you are going to push a vision you better be able to support the vision.  VMware has awoken to this fact and is finally pushing aggressively into virtualization management.  So too will Cisco, as they cannot continue to make management the “red-headed step-child” of their billion dollar empire.  Eventually, Cisco will need to either purchase BMC or home-grow a real solution.

Mark Hurd, CEO and Chairman of the Board of HP, has definitely proven to the world that he plays to win.  As Hurd and his team aggressively integrate HP into a Unified Powerhouse (UP), Cisco’s Unifed Communications (UC) is well within their cross-hairs.  With any infection point of technology comes a changing of the guard, will UC be Cisco’s un-doing?

As a reader of Platen, you know the respect and admiration I have for John Chambers and his leadership.  However, if I were Cisco I’d stop battling Apple and Kodak and start making their UC strategy a reality.

VMware and SpringSource; Getting Warmer

VMware announced the acquisition of SpringSource for a total of around $420 million. SpringSource provides a opensource Java development platform but they also own Hyperic an opensource management platform; a fact that is being virtually ignored by the mainstream media.

While SpringSource’s Java development platform is “interesting”, nobody gets rich selling or supporting a development environment. However, what’s more interesting is SpringSource’s vision of Building, Managing, and Running applications; one of the driving forces behind their purchase of Hyperic.

Take this vision and expand it into VMware. SpringSource will build the applications, vShere will run the applications, and a combination of Hyperic and VMware will manage the applications. Sadly, Hyperic will not solve all of VMware’s management problems, but it’s a move in the right direction.

There are two fundamental risks with this strategy; VMware’s continued reliance on Java (Oracle) for Platform-as-a-Service (PAAS) and VMware’s commitment to opensource. While Java is a wonderful platform, there are questions regarding its future as well as new and more modern platforms that are challenging its dominance.

While VMware claims to maintain a long history of support for opensource, its more of a self-serving position. With this acquisition, VMware has not only acquired a company but a community of users and developers. With a strong opensource challenge from Oracle/SUN, VMware would smart to harness this community asset rather than turn them into a newfound liability.

Aside from the fact that VMware may have overpaid for SprngSource (especially in this economy), SpringSource/VMware makes sense for both companies. VMware is getting a little warmer on their quest to becoming a datacenter powerhouse.

One word of caution: all companies, VMware, Oracle, Sun, Citrix, IBM, BMC, HP, CA, and more are vulnerable until a new paradigm of management is brought forward. Management cannot continue to be an afterthought and a “central brain” is needed to make cloud computing a reality.

Will Cisco Succeed Where Cassatt Failed?

If you read most mainstream blogs or publications, then you would think we were in the midst of the most significant shift in computing since its invention.  Virtualization and Cloud Computing have become the buzz words of analysts, writers, and old/new/start-up companies looking to catch the wave.   While the technology is interesting, for as many issues that are solved, more are created.  “New” architectures are really a re-hash of old technology and management/security are still an after-thought.  To put it another way, the adoption, integration, and application of this technology will not come at the cost of revenue; hardware or software.

Those that attempt to challenge the status quo should look no further than the now defunct Cassatt (acquired by CA).  Cassatt attempted to break down the silos between hardware and software thereby redefining the datacenter.  Cassatt viewed the datacenter as hundreds of servers with thousands of applications all with their own criticality and SLAs.  They challenged the “sticky note” mentality of purchasing new hardware for every application and labeling its name/IP Address and ownership.  Cassatt may have been the first vendor to realize that virtualization was not the answer to everything, that the walls between networking, servers, and applications needed to be broken, and that virtual sprawl is a real problem.   In the end, Cassatt did not have the market power or presence to change the industry; Cisco is a different story.

On the surface, Cisco entering the datacenter server and virtualization markets is uninspiring.  I wrote that, “Perhaps the innovator’s dilemma has finally caught up with Cisco because I expected more from them then simply launching a blade system with the Cisco badge on the bezel.”  Over the past few weeks, I have been wondering if Cisco’s current strategy is really a Trojan horse designed to attack the status quo.  After all HP, IBM, Dell, Intel, EMC, and Microsoft have much to lose.  What if Cisco redefined the datacenter back to its components; CPU, memory, storage, networking, etc.  They could create new devices that resemble the CRS-1 Multi Chassis System ala the trusty old mainframe that offers superior value and computing power for the price.  Also, they’ll need to redefine security and management, but that is only a BMC acquisition away.

Cisco’s challenge is marketing makes everyone look the same.  HP, IBM, SUN, Cisco, and more have all rolled out new datacenter strategies that feel eerily similar.  All this marketing FUD (fear, uncertainty, and doubt) makes a paradigm shift more difficult.  Cisco’s grown up from an obscure networking company to a DOW Jones Component Powerhouse.  Can Cisco redefine the datacenter and bring about the titanic change within computing the industry craves?  And, will Cisco succeed where Cassatt failed?

Is Cisco’s UF and UCS enough?

Cisco likes to refer to themselves as a software company, but this week they showed that perhaps marketing is their real forte. After-all, only Cisco could create such hype around a blade server. While the product announcement was strong on theater, it was weak on substance. Not to worry, they’ll tell us what they really meant at the end of the month.

Fundamentally, Cisco’s proposed architecture and solutions are not new. Cisco themselves have been reselling re-bezeled HP servers within their VOIP solutions. Server vendors such as IBM and HP have offered networking within their respective blade servers. Finally, most networking hardware companies sell appliances that are basically locked down servers running specific applications.

What is new is Cisco’s attempt to control the interaction between networking and virtualization. In a classic Cisco move, they have introduced a new proposed standard to the IEEE called VN-Link. I am hearing echos of EIGRP. Will other vendors support this effort?

Finally, is Cisco overestimating their influence over current datacenter design and thinking? The datacenter is a salad bowl of politics, equipment, and priorities. Sure, Cisco’s core networking equipment is key to many datacenters, but you’ll also find “speciality” gear from F5, Brocade, Woven, Force10, and more. Cisco will need to broaden their influence beyond traditional networking to gain application, storage, and management credibility. Simply launching a new architecture, releasing a blade server, and offering a band-aid approach to management combining Cisco, BMC, and VMware’s offerings is not enough.

Cisco UCS: Let the war begin

Over the past few days, I’ve been reading about the revolutionary nature of Cisco’s datacenter 3.0 strategy. I’ve read everything from “a sharp turn” to “Cisco will shake up the market.” The reality, is Cisco has crossed the demilitarized zone between hardware and server vendors and the war has just begun.

It is clear that BMC is Cisco’s new management vendor of choice displacing HP (Opsware). While BMC has tier I products such as Remedy and BladeLogic, they aren’t particularly strong in network or storage management. Furthermore, it is not clear what are the capabilities of Cisco’s new UCS Manager nor to what degree BMC has integrated their offerings.

Additionally, Intel is walking a fine line by throwing their considerable weight behind Cisco’s UCS-B blade server. After all, who pays the bills at Intel; Cisco or HP, Dell, and IBM. While the Nehalem servers are set to anchor Intel’s push into the datacenter, they’ll need more than Cisco to reap the rewards of such an innovative design.

In the short-term, HP is clearly positioned to be a thorn in Cisco’s side. HP has awesome server products, a full line of storage products, decent networking capabilities, full management functionality, and EDS. In the long-term, IBM’s deep pockets combined with smart M&A activity could derail Cisco’s plans. Juniper may be a tantalizing pick-up, but IBM could yield positive results by purchasing smaller players such as Brocade, Woven Systems, or Arista Networks.

Finally, what will happen to Dell and Sun? Could Dell be shut-out of the next generation datacenter? How does an already weakened Sun survive Cisco’s attack? Will they seek shelter or come out swinging?

Cisco has fired the first shot that started the great datacenter war of 2009. It may take three years or more to declare the winners and losers, but one thing is for sure; IT will never be the same again.

Cisco UCS: A Let Down; All eyes on Big Blue

Today Cisco launched the third piece to their datacenter 3.0 strategy by unveiling Unified Computing System (UCS). UCS is a essentially a fancy name for a blade server built upon Intel’s new Nedhalem processor platform. Cisco believes by wrapping the datacenter in a web of UCS, Unified Fabric, and good old fashioned networking all managed by the UCS manager will redefine scalability, flexibility, and TCO within a a datacenter and beyond.

Perhaps the innovator’s dilemma has finally caught up with Cisco because I expected more from them then simply launching a blade system with the Cisco badge on the bezel. Why not truly unify switching, routing, server, and storage under a single chassis? Why not unify the backplane for speed and efficiency while offering breath-taking performance and value on a per square foot basis?

Instead it looks as if the old one-stop-shopping theory of purchasing is in full effect. Of course, you’ll be able to manage everything from the UCS Manager. If that was the case, why is BMC in the picture? As Cisco doesn’t have a great track record of software, is this any different?

Cisco is an amazing company with an extremely talented executive management and engineering teams. They are in a truly unique position to change the world as networking, storage, servers, applications, and transport all become one. However, the challenge is how to make this transformation without opening the door for their competitors as they move from the Catalyst to the Nexus. This announcement and product launch is too cautious for the risk taking Chambers we’ve all come to love or hate.

Now, let’s wait and see what IBM’s got up their sleeve to combat his new entrant to the blade market. Do they have another SNA up their sleeve?

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 270 other followers

%d bloggers like this: