It seems that Tony Pearson over at IBM is up to it. Again. Once again (and just about one year later) he has failed to acknowledge the difference between Open Systems virtual tape and mainframe oriented virtual tape. His claim: "Today, IBM is the leader in storage virtualization, both for disk and tape."
I don't think so. It has been a while since we looked at the topic, but to refresh: mainframe and open systems virtual tape are two very different beasts. They have different use cases, attach to different platforms, have different performance objectives, and so on. And while it is true that IBM has done admirably well in the area of mainframe virtual tape (although EMC's MDL continues to gain market share), it is also true that IBM has been a virtual no-show in the area of open systems virtual tape. To claim leadership would be a massive distortion of the facts.
Unequivocally, EMC has shipped more Open Systems virtual tape than any other vendor. And when compared to any other single vendor, like IBM, the disparity is usually about 10:1 in EMC's favor.
Of course, Tony is also claiming a "resurgence" in interest in tape. In the same year that IBM reported a 31% year over year decrease in tape sales revenue. Hmmm.