<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Walking a Fine Line</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.scottlowe.org/2008/03/11/walking-a-fine-line/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.scottlowe.org/2008/03/11/walking-a-fine-line/</link>
	<description>The weblog of an IT pro specializing in virtualization, storage, and servers</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2012 13:34:34 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Duncan</title>
		<link>http://blog.scottlowe.org/2008/03/11/walking-a-fine-line/comment-page-1/#comment-36132</link>
		<dc:creator>Duncan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 11 Mar 2008 20:54:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.scottlowe.org/2008/03/11/walking-a-fine-line/#comment-36132</guid>
		<description>And with the addition of products like Site Replication Manager VMware is more than a light-year ahead of the competition. Stocks went down because of the fact that they missed their targets, but still they almost doubled their revenue and more than doubled their profits... Wallstreet has gone mad in my opinion.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>And with the addition of products like Site Replication Manager VMware is more than a light-year ahead of the competition. Stocks went down because of the fact that they missed their targets, but still they almost doubled their revenue and more than doubled their profits&#8230; Wallstreet has gone mad in my opinion.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike Robinson</title>
		<link>http://blog.scottlowe.org/2008/03/11/walking-a-fine-line/comment-page-1/#comment-36115</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike Robinson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 11 Mar 2008 15:26:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.scottlowe.org/2008/03/11/walking-a-fine-line/#comment-36115</guid>
		<description>I have to say &quot;so what.&quot;  The the other vendors squawk, its really not a big deal.  First, do you really think VMWare (which I *love*) is really going to replace the virtualization technologies for vendors, which is really what storage motion does?  For all the SMB market this comes pretty much de facto, and its only the big vendors that are slow to play.  In another couple years you&#039;ll get some form of in-vendor virtualization standard.  Moot point.

The other way to look at this is to just examine the history of Microsoft vs Symantec.  How many products has Symantec made over the years that Microsoft has integrated into the OS?  And now via various ways improved them so that for the most part people just use that.  Has Symantec died as a result?  No - they made BETTER products that many would buy, and then they SWITCHED product lines to ones that would maintain profitability.  I, as a consumer, benefitted from good stuff free and kept the options open.

Most people outside of SMB will continue to have a large portion of their storage outside a virtualization environment like VMWare for some time.  The vendors need to just get over it, include it in their product, and be done with the argument.  If somehow VMWare does rule the world and everything is there, then the vendors will still make reams of cash on their storage and you could say they&#039;d have one less piece of code to develop/maintain.

VMWare should play nice but I wouldn&#039;t lose sleep over it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have to say &#8220;so what.&#8221;  The the other vendors squawk, its really not a big deal.  First, do you really think VMWare (which I *love*) is really going to replace the virtualization technologies for vendors, which is really what storage motion does?  For all the SMB market this comes pretty much de facto, and its only the big vendors that are slow to play.  In another couple years you&#8217;ll get some form of in-vendor virtualization standard.  Moot point.</p>
<p>The other way to look at this is to just examine the history of Microsoft vs Symantec.  How many products has Symantec made over the years that Microsoft has integrated into the OS?  And now via various ways improved them so that for the most part people just use that.  Has Symantec died as a result?  No &#8211; they made BETTER products that many would buy, and then they SWITCHED product lines to ones that would maintain profitability.  I, as a consumer, benefitted from good stuff free and kept the options open.</p>
<p>Most people outside of SMB will continue to have a large portion of their storage outside a virtualization environment like VMWare for some time.  The vendors need to just get over it, include it in their product, and be done with the argument.  If somehow VMWare does rule the world and everything is there, then the vendors will still make reams of cash on their storage and you could say they&#8217;d have one less piece of code to develop/maintain.</p>
<p>VMWare should play nice but I wouldn&#8217;t lose sleep over it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

