« A Data Protection Taxonomy | Main | The Cost of Backup: Soft and Hard Costs »

July 07, 2009

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

W. Curtis Preston

I have my concerns with their paper as well. I don't think that DoubleTake (or any disk-based backup system) takes 10% of the time to manage that a tape-based system does. I also agree that the remote recovery they cited was rather bogus. But those are nits compared to what I think about your analysis of the paper.

Their $37K number was obviously a complete setup price. The paper said it is the cost of replacing one with the other. Your Avamar price is only counting the incremental price of adding those 20 remote offices. There is no such thing as an $800 Avamar solution. If you're going to use your incremental cost, you should use their incremental cost. To use their full cost and your incremental cost makes your comparison worthless.

Scott Waterhouse

Curtis;

With this and your other comment, it is like you are asking me to defend Double Take's numbers and reasoning. Which aren't, in my opinion, really defensible at all.

Having said that: in this case the admin numbers do have some logic. If you have backup systems at each of those sites, with physical tape, you do have some costs associated with managing those systems (which would require greater effort than just managing a remote client) and some costs associated with physically loading, unloading, and tracking tapes.

I don't know what $37k number of theirs you are referring to.

"To use their full cost and your incremental cost makes your comparison worthless." Well full points for being as diplomatic as always, Curtis.

While I am not about to engage in a conversation on price, DT has set forward theirs, and I have set forward a reasonable cost for an equivalent Avamar solution. Full stop. But that is missing the point. The point of the exercise is how we go from A to B. The journey is the reward in this case. The post is not an attempt to prove that Avamar is cheaper. It is an attempt to describe how a simple business case works and some of the issues to think about as your build one or analyze one. So say Avamar costs $5k for hardware, software, and support (that would be a non incremental cost) if that makes you happy. Whatever. The point is how do we get there? What components are included? And so on.

W. Curtis Preston

I mistyped. I meant $31.7K number.

I am not asking you to defend their numbers. I was merely showing you how I agreed with you before I mentioned how I don't agree with you. That's called diplomacy. ;)

My point is that their price is OBVIOUSLY a full replacement price where as yours is an incremental replacement price, and you cannot compare the two.

"The point of the exercise is how we go from A to B."

Exactly. And how you go from A to B is you buy an all new Avamar or DoubleTake system. But your pricing included only the incremental cost of adding 40 GB of protected data to an existing Avamar system, not the cost of BUYING an Avamar system. You are therefore comparing apples and oranges. (BTW, you have no idea how many LESS-diplomatic things I deleted before I settled on "worthless.")

Are you saying in your comment that a NEW customer can spend only $5,000 on Avamar and be ready to backup these 20 offices?

Scott Waterhouse

I think (although I tend to stay as far away from EMC pricing discussions as possible here) that $5k would not be an unrealistic figure for a large customer who was interested in a net incremental AVE server to protect the hypothetical 40 GB total. That would be a rough stab at licensing plus 1/10th of a ESX server on which to run AVE (I just picked $30k out of a hat for that... ymmv).

So I think that gives us $12.3k total?

Final caveat: I said large customer. That means that normally we license AVE (and Avamar generally) in 1 and 2 TB increments. We can go smaller (as would be appropriate in a case like this) under special circumstances.

If you don't like that, I think (and no, I haven't actually looked it up) the license for a 1 TB edition at list price is about $18k? But that would allow you to protect 500 remote offices, not just 20, at the size discussed.

I guess you could adjust the maintenance too, as to simplify I just used 25% of list price of the license as the maintenance. This is actually high, but again, this blog isn't an EMC price catalog, so it is close enough for this discussion.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Search The Backup Blog

  • Search

    WWW
    thebackupblog