The ESS runs very well. It is built around SSA-160 architecture. We have both fiber and SCSI running to it. Same with the EMC.
EMC is very expensive with upgrade pricing. IBM is a bit more flexible.
The ESS is quite large (2 1/2 racks wide). The EMC is 1 rack wide.
Both boxes offer call-home capability in the event of errors.
To move/add storage around on the ESS, all you need is a web browser. To move storage around on the EMC box, you need to have EMC reconfigure a BIN file, which is not cheap.
BJVERSAL, thanks for the info, do you feel the ESS is easier to 'live' with regarding day to day operations? Have seen that EMC's pricing is a bit steep, do you have any Total Cost Ownership figures for both devices, say over three years?
Hello Davemak,
ESS is cheaper and TCO over 3 years is very cheap.
If you attach host system says RS/6000 with ESS and use more then one Fiber channel adapter. you get multiple path. if one adapter is busy another adapter is used.
ESS includes the software that does this.
if you use EMC then they have software call powerpath. The cost for powerpath is 80k.
Thanks for your replies. As we are now getting to the point of making a descion i can say that i would never buy an EMC device, even though the ESS and EMC are fairly evenly matched the ESS TCO is far less than the EMC and there are no HIDDEN charges, what you see is waht you get. With the EMC it is a minefield and if you are not careful you will end up with a BIG software maintenance bill that may have not been made to clear from the outset. IBM have recently announced the ESS 800 which is the one i am going for if EMC were more honest and up front with regards there pricing then the Symetrix would be worth considering.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.