You're gonna *love* SnapMirror & SnapRestore!

-----Original Message----- From: Mohler, Jeff [mailto:jeff.mohler@wilcom.com] Sent: Saturday, March 20, 1999 10:36 AM To: toasters@mathworks.com Subject: RE: NetApp/Auspex killer?

You forgot "you cant touch that without an expensive service call". You forgot "How many millions for a 1TB array??"

A year ago I demanded a MIB for the EMC, our local EMC guy waffled for months..never got it. A year ago I demanded an NFS solution from EMC, our regional guy waffled for months..eventually EMC officially backed out.

The -only- reason we still uses -some- EMC, is that EMC does have a better DR concept than NetApp does. When NetApp can deliver a Telco-Reliable remote DR data solution, we'll be replacing EMC there too.

...

-----Original Message----- From: sirbruce@ix.netcom.com [SMTP:sirbruce@ix.netcom.com] Sent: Friday, March 19, 1999 10:18 PM To: Adams_Christian@emc.com; askaquestion@iname.com; toasters@mathworks.com Cc: watson@netapp.com Subject: RE: NetApp/Auspex killer?

On 03/19/99 19:26:02 you wrote:

...

Hey Toasters -

How about: [List of things snipped]

Please excuse the plug, but I couldn't resist.

/Christian Adams Systems Engineer South San Francisco, CA EMC Corporation

Er, I assume this means your claiming EMC can do these things and Netapp can't?

Netapp can do just about all of the things you mention that anyone would *want* to do.

They don't do RAID in hardware, but that's because they do RAID-4 which is better than RAID-5. And they still beat you on performance. Why would you want them to beat you even easier?

When EMC can provide both NFS and CIFS support in a NAS box, on the same filesystem, same files, with coherent locking, which full support of all NT permissions, with a RAID level as easily expandable as RAID-4, with your own OS (not on the back end of a UNIX server), with better throughput *and* response time than Netapp (with published SFS results), for a *lower* price, email me.

Until then, go pick on Sun.

Bruce