main
Report a problem

IBM surpasses HP in storage hardware sales

Slimy   on 07 March 2007 - 15:03 · 3 comments & 1239 views

Advertisement (Why?)
According to a Tuesday Gartner industry report, IBM has surpassed Hewlett-Packard in 2006 global external-controller disk storage market, though it still trails industry leader EMC Corporation. IBM's market share based on revenue, grew from 14.5% in 2005 to 15.8% in 2006, while HP's share dropped to 13.1% from 14.7%. EMC gained market share to 24.8% last year from 23.4% in 2005. "I think the records will reflect that it's been about 10 years since we passed HP," said Andy Monshaw, general manager of IBM storage. Monshaw credited a refreshed product line, a focus on selling systems rather than individual products and increased selling to the small-to-medium business market for IBM's results.

The rest of the storage sellers in the report, ranked by 2006 market share, are the following: Hitachi Data Systems, at 9.6%, Dell at 7.6%, Network Appliance at 7.2% and Sun Microsystems at 6.1%. Gartner noted that the storage market is increasingly dominated by the top players and is driven by industry consolidation, more effective marketing and strong channel partnerships.

News source: InfoWorld

Post a comment · Send to friend Comments · There are 3 additional comments
#1 Shane Pitman on 07 Mar 2007 - 15:48
Ugh, I used to admin a large database storage system for a fiber optic component manufacturer and we had a tremendously larger percentage of drive failures from IBM than any of the rest of our equipment. We swapped them out so frequently that we had close to 10% capacity in new drives sitting in storage at all times just waiting for the next failure.
#2 ahhell on 07 Mar 2007 - 15:55
"based on revenue"

Flawed argument right there. IBM's stuff is WAY more expensive than other companies.
#3 lbmouse on 07 Mar 2007 - 16:07
It would be nice to see someone give EMC a little competition. Maybe they'll bring the prices down and start making their licensing a little more friendly.

Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!

Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.

Advertisement (Why?)