this is the home page of
leading the way to the new storage frontier .....
military storage directory and news
military SSDs ..
image shows megabyte waving the winners trophy - there are over 200 SSD oems - which ones matter? - click to read article
top SSD companies ..
pcie  SSDs - click to read article
PCIe SSDs ..
SSD myths - write endurance
SSD endurance ..
SSD SoCs controllers
SSD controllers ..
SSD news
SSD news ..
image shows software factory - click to see storage software directory
SSD software ....

.. is about thought leadership in the SSD market.

from - what's in the chips?

to - how will SSDs change the future?

Since the 1990s our readers have accelerated the growth of the SSD market and determined its essence and onward direction.

military SSD from Waitan
military SSD drives with secure erase
encryption and self-destruct
from Waitan

Fast Purge flash SSDs directory & articles
fast erase SSDs
more SSD topics from A to Z

1.8 SSDs", MO-297, slim SSDs
2.5" SSDs - all
2.5" PCIe SSDs, SATAe etc
3.5" SSDs - all

7 silos for enterprise SSDs
11 key SSD design symmetries

2012 - changes in SSD market
2013 - changes in SSD market
2014 - changes in SSD market

About the publisher
Acquisitions in the SSD market
Adaptive R/W & DSP ECC in SSDs

Advertising SSDs - 15 years of SSD ads

Analysts - SSD market
Animal brands in SSD
Articles and blogs - top 50
Architecture guide - storage
ASAPs / auto tuning, caching, tiering SSDs

Backup - SSD enhanced
Bad block management in flash SSDs
Banner ads for SSDs
Benchmarking SSDs
Best SSD for your PC? - sorry I can't say
Big market picture of SSDs
Big versus Small - in SSD architecture
Bookmarks from SSD leaders
Books - citing
Bottlenecks and SSDs
Branding Strategies in the SSD market
Buyers Guide to SSDs

Cache ratios inside SSDs
Caching software and SSD appliances
Calling for an end to SSD vs HDD IOPS
Can you tell me the best way to SSD Street?
Chips - storage interface / processors
Chips - SSD on a chip & DOMs
CIO - a day in the life of
Cloud storage - with SSD twists
Consumer SSDs guide
Consumer SSDs - why are they so bad?
Controller chips for SSDs
What defines the

personality of the SSD?
SSD SoCs controllers

Cost of SSDs
CPU-SSD equivalency

Dark matter users in enterprise SSD
Data integrity in flash SSDs
Data Recovery
When your SSD breaks...

Who do you call?
broken barrel image - click to see the SSD data recovery directory

Decloaking hidden segments in the enterprise
Disruptive tech markets and SSD
DSP in flash SSD controller IP
DWPD ratings in enterprise SSDs today?
Some are much better than others. disk writes per day in enterprise SSDs
Education - re SSDs
Efficiency - comparing SSD designs
Enterprise SSDs - overview
Endurance - in flash SSDs
The risk of flash
wear-out in SSDs is
a kind of "forever war"
which is never really
permanently won.
SSD myths - write endurance
Fast purge / secure erase SSDs
Fastest SSDs
Fibre-Channel SSDs - market timeline
FITs (failures in time) & SSDs
Flash DIMMs
Flash Memory
flash SSD vs RAM SSD
Forecasts for SSD market

Green storage

Hard disk drives
Hard drives in an SSD world
Heresies - SSD fans disagree fundamentals
High availability enterprise SSDs
History of SSD market
History of data storage (all)
Hostage to the fortunes of SSD
Hybrid drives (consumer)
Hybrid SSD appliances (enterprise)

Iceberg syndrome - invisible SSD capacity
Inanimate Power, Speed & Strength Metaphors
Industrial SSDs
If they survive manufacturing they'll survive our industrial customers too. image shows mouse building storage - click to see industrial SSDs article

InfiniBand SSDs
IOPS and flash SSDs
IOPS Comparisons - SSDs and HDDs

Jargon - flash SSD

Legacy SSD
Legacy vs New Dynasty SSDs

M.2 SSDs
size matters M2 SSDs
Market research (all storage)
Market research (SSDs)
Memory channel storage SSDs
military rugged SSDs
Killerbyte had a "no surrender" attitude when it came to attacks on her personal data integrity. military storage directory and news

MLC - in SSD jargon
MLC in enterprise SSDs
Modern era of the SSD market
MRAM, PCM & other threats to flash in SSDs

News page
Notebook SSDs
NVMe - mentions on this site

Oracle articles - Burleson Consulting


Petabyte SSD roadmap
Power loss protection in SSDs
Power, Speed & Strength in SSD brands
Planning a new SSD family?

names matter
branding articles

PR Agencies & SSDs
Price of SSDs - past, present and why?

Rackmount SSDs
RAID - and SSDs
RAM memory chips
RAM SSDs versus Flash SSDs
Ratio of SSD capacity - server vs SAN
Reliability - in SSD design
Riddle games and enterprise SSD boxes
Can it guess what's in my next magic box? the SSD riddle game

Silos in the solid state datacenter
Software (for SSDs)
Survival guide to enterprise SSDs
Symmetry impacts in SSD behavior

Testing SSDs
Tier zero storage? - groan...

Top SSD companies - 7 years tracker

UlltraDIMM SSDs etc
User value propositions for buying SSDs

VC funds in storage
Videos - about SSDs

Wear leveling
Where are we now with SSD software?
WORM hard drives

Zero RPM SSDs killed 20K hard drives

Zsolt Kerekes, editor -


Just to clarify what I mean.
Almost immediately after publishing the blog you see to the right of this - I knew that some people people who only read it quickly without understanding the concepts would say something like...

Aha - we know what that means! Just as we suspected - the number of enterprise SSD systems companies is about to collapse - so we can expect to see less in the next few quarters than in the past.

Which is not exactly what I meant.

In the medium term... A reduction? Yes.

And in the long term - a 90% reduction / collapse in distinctly different systems boxes - compared to what we see in the market today (in Q2 2015)? Certainly.

But the number of companies participating in the market will get bigger for a short time - for at least a year - before a steady decline followed by a sharp collapse.

That's because some pieces which are needed to lubricate these gritty changes aren't available yet and where they are - the products are naive, the marketing is unsophisticated and the business units are under resourced.

Aside from the obvious vendors which will immediately benefit from the changes (such as software companies of the type mentioned in the article) we can also expect to see new systems companies entering the market too. (Even as we head towards a converging market.)

That's because the TAM is huge and a changing market creates new opportunities.

In one of the many prepublication conversations I had about these concepts the person I was talking to said he was so inspired that he was going to launch his own new rackmount SSD systems company instead of doing something very significant with another vendor. more here


In the summer of 1998, I decided to launch a new web directory, which became

While pondering many ideas, I read a book called "Creating Killer Web Sites".

This book didn't aim to cover direct marketing, and how to get new readers, however it was EXCELLENT at analysing how you could use visual ideas in your site. It also introduced the concept of visual metaphors.

I had seen some of these ideas:- using animals to promote services, some years before in a book called "Services Marketing" by Christopher H. Lovelock which I found useful some years earlier...
click for more info
How did Mice become
the face of Storage?

now consider this...

90% of the enterprise SSD companies which you know have no good reasons to survive.

The main reasons they will hang around a little longer and their ranks may even swell slightly before the big shrink are bad reasons...

Bad marketing and an inefficient market.

by Zsolt Kerekes, editor - April 21, 2015

drivers, mechanisms and routes towards consolidation in the enterprise SSD market along with some other outrageous and dangerous ideas

However you interact with the enterprise SSD ecosystem a useful reference point for judging the relevance of what you see happening around you is some kind of implicit background expectation about the size and structure of the market - which at its simplest level is measured by the number of distinctly different vendors and major product types and economic value of the whole market.

As a commentator on the future of the enterprise SSD market since before the modern era of SSDs I've played an active part in setting expectations about the long term growth prospects in the market - measured by vendor count, significantly different product types, and revenue ceilings.

We're now nearing a pivotal point in the enterprise SSD market where the long held assumptions I helped to encourage (especially how many leading systems vendors there will be in the market at the same time) are about to be change dramatically.

The changes in customer thinking has already begun. But it will take about 5 or 6 years for all the effects to ripple through. That seems like a long way away. But take it from me - users would make these changes more quickly if they could.

That's the impression I've got from prepublication conversations.

The ideas in this article could be a catalyst to speed up the urgency of change in user thinking. If you want to skip ahead - scroll down to the headline - "Now imagine this..."

why now?

Why will the enterprise SSD market change from a game played concurrently on the same wide open range by hundreds of vendors (if you can be bothered to count them) and which yet still manages to satisfy the egotistical aspirations of so many self styled winners (can they all be right?) this beloved wild spirited contact sport of ours (which vendors can't afford not to take part in) maybe it's better to ask not just "why" but also "how" would it ever change into a sedate board game resembling something more like bridge crossed with chess - in which every space on the table will be precisely ordered and precious and the player seats themselves and cushions will have to be reserved years in advance?

Makes me feel a little sad and nostalgic even thinking about it.

As to the why? Whatever you may think about mergers and acquisitions and suchlike behavior that's got very little to do with it.

The real pressure for change comes from 3 sources:-
  • changes in user behavior

    It's always been true that SSD users change their behavior as they learn from their own experience in deploying SSDs. The lessons they learn after 2 or 3 deployment generations help them to conceptualize for themselves what they can expect to get done better from SSDs.

    In earlier phases of the enterprise market (2007 to 2010) it was difficult for users to disentangle the individual contributory causes of successes and failures as there were too many changing variables in technology.

    When it came to performance modeling for examples - users couldn't be certain how much of the disruptive changes such as memory types (RAM to SLC to MLC etc), computer architecture (including placement of SSDs in server vs SAN), and successive software generations (emulation of HDD arrays, caching of legacy storage, bypassing legacy application stacks) etc could be considered as a onetime improvement as opposed to being part of a predictable and scalable activity. Most vendors didn't know either. Or if they thought they did - they didn't necessarily agree about what had been achieved, the best way to do it or the direction of future change. And comparisons between vendors were problematic for users in the early days flash arrays when there were too few products to compare.

    growing user awareness from experience of similar things

    The educational makeup of the SSD user base has changed.

    It has moved away from being a market in which most users had little or no experience of using mission critical SSDs towards one in which most users already have had several generations of deployments with SSDs. Or they can read about others like them who do have this experience.

    Users are applying the lessons they have learned - the good about the technology along with the bad about the predictability and reliability of vendor continuity roadmaps.

    Users now realize that in their own self interest they have much to gain from abstracting the benefits they get away from the diverse feature sets of any single supplier towards a minimalist set of common must-have features in 2 or 3 distinct SSD box types which will satisfy all their needs while giving them independence from failed or greedy suppliers.

    Web scale companies have been following these types of abstraction strategies for years as many were already well down the road to double digit Nth generation SSD deployments. At their scales their economic options included creating some of the missing links in software for their own uses and their own special applications needs.

    For most enterprises - IT is a tool and not their primary business - so the investment in home grown SSD virtualization and management tools would be nuts - given the massive degree of risk and changeability in the market. But software is a part of the solution.
  • the emergence of new software solutions which can satisfy common management functions in a scalable fashion and in a way which is credible over multiple product generations.

    It's reasonable to ask why isn't there already a better availability of industry wide useful enterprise software which can replace and abstract away the mish mash of different chaotic patches, tools and feature sets which arise in the systems products of SSD box makers and which are sometimes as different to other products from the same supplier in different product generations as they are different to those from other suppliers.

    The reasons are...

    The enterprise SSD software market started chaotically with independent parallel developments in multiple places, and without a common core idea of unification or longevity related roadmaps.

    It hasn't been going long. The first useful enterprise SSD software products emerged in 2009.

    Most early SSD software vendors didn't accomplish very much before they got acquired. The SSD makers who acquired them were in most cases looking for simple tools to make their current product lines easier to sell rather than as the basis for industry-wide platforms which cut across multiple product types and generations. There were some exceptions - but there's more to SSD software than caching and virtualizing different types of SSDs.

    Until recently the entire enterprise SSD market hasn't been big enough to attract the scale of investments needed to deliver industry-wide abstraction tools. So the business case for this type of solution has been risky.

    Where will such solutions come from?

    Some of the solutions may come from the future work of companies like FalconStor and Primary Data while another center of gravity is in the application server type of SSD box and the mainstream SDS market which includes companies like Maxta. But the application server is only one orbit in the enterprise architecture solar system not the whole big bang.

    SDS vendors who want to take advantage of this consolidation trend will have to extend their data reach to support other box types (not just more of their own).

    Other possible entry directions for newcomers into this market include existing box companies - who may determine that abandoning their original business plans as systems companies and morphing into software business entities (or spinning off their software divisions) is a better option than retaining the characteristics of a combined systems business in which the software side is unable to leverage from user experiences and revenue contributions from outside the core box brand.

    And other directions from which we may expect to see newcomers enter this aspect of the software market are:- the productization and repurposing of cloud and webscale software which already exists, and of course - new start ups. But the funding of pure play startups will likely have to be billion dollar plus - because it takes a lot of software to support enough different products and functions to be useful.
what limits the shape of the future consolidated market?

What will limit the shape of the future consolidated market? An underlying architectural pull due to the clumpiness of data gravity within a belly girdled tightly by cost economics with recognizable internal SSD organs which are maintained by the heartbeat of software.

I'm kidding. We know exactly what it will look like. We've known for years.

All future needs in the enterprise can be satisfied by a small number of distinctly different SSD products determined by latency and distance from the application server.

I described the basic product types in my 2012 article - an introduction to enterprise SSD silos.

If you haven't read that article - the simple summary is that there are only about 5 types of SSD box or appliance needed to satisfy all requirements. (And most organizations can get by using as little as 3 of these.)
  • The application server. (That's the server or cluster of SDS servers which run your app.)
  • The SAN box. (That's a storage box which sits outside the apps server).

    There are 3 main types of SAN box - which are different by virtue of latency and the related cost of their raw capacity. The 3 types are:- fast, fast-enough and archive.
  • The SSD ASAP (auto tiering / caching appliance - sometimes integrated in a hybrid and even as a micro hybrid inside the apps server) is a box or software layer which intermediates between any 2 vastly different latencies which are in your environment.
Within every one of these top level box products there is also the business possibility to differentiate these latency based product segments by internal SSD controller architecture.

There are only 2 types of SSD controller architecture which are relevant in this market transition context.

Big controller - in which the base level controller management assumptions can be sure of working with large numbers of flash devices (hundreds or thousands). Examples of such products being Violin's VMEM, IBM's FlashSystem, EMC's Extremio, Skyera's skyHawk, Virident's FlashMax, Fusion-io's ioMemory etc.

When they can keep pace with memory advances these controller architectures typically outperform arrays of standard SSDs. But the difficulties of supporting new memory types (in particular the demands of adaptive DSP) has meant that all but one of the big architecture controller makers have given up the challenge of native support for cheapest memories and instead rely on more expensive memory - typically some kind of branded eMLC. The market result has been for most of these controllers to congregate at the faster end of the speed segments in SSD box space.

Small controller - in which the base level controller management assumptions can only be sure of working with small numbers of flash devices - typically in the region from 3 to 10. Examples of such products include most (but not all) of the SSDs which you would regard as "standard" commercial off the shelf (COTS) SSDs - having SAS or SATA interfaces.

The benefits of this approach ffrom the user perspective is that arrays of such products benefit from "crowd based intelligence" re advances in flash memory design. This group of SSDs tends to be among the earliest to be able to deploy cheaper kinds of memory within enterprise boxes.

The main disadvantage of arrays of small architect SSDs used to be intrinsically lower utilization efficiency. This was because the controller is unaware of what is happening in flash chips in other SSDs which are outside its own reach but within the same array. An emerging trend in software pioneered by webscale entities has been to switch off some of the flash management done in the SSD's controller and. by using custom application specific APIs to manage some key functions from the applications server. These techniques can reduce the original gaps in efficiency between small and large controller arrays.

So for each main box type the core flash array can be either small or large controller type (standard COTS array or proprietary array if you prefer). No one type appeals to all users.

And the market has developed with multiple similar designs competing in each product type (overlaid with many different shapes of the SSD ASAP intermediation products).

And each of these came with their own software. These are some of the reasons the market has been complicated and tolerated (you might say suffered) many different designs upto now. And we will still need the same number of distinct box types in the future.

But even if you allow for the diversity of having 2 or 3 different key suppliers dominating each SSD box type in the future with maybe a couple of cost differentiated #2, #3 companies in each latency segment - then by the time we get to 2021 (which is about the time it will take for the new software to enable consolidation) the total of distinctly different suppliers in an efficient market will be a lot less companies than we have now.

warning! - boundary analysis meets consolidation

In the discussions I had with readers to test my ideas about understanding the transitions towards a consolidated market I talked through some simple thought exercises.

I use a simple trick I call boundary analysis - which helps me understand and predict market behavior in future markets even when the products being analyzed and the architecture use cases don't yet exist.

Now imagine this... you're considering a new alternate supplier of enterprise SSD storage

You're the top level person who decides what type of SSD boxes your organization buys. Maybe your job title includes words like "logistics", "systems architect", and your industry could be banking, cloud infrastructure, broadcast, manufacturing. Doesn't matter. These conversations go the same way.

We're talking because you're thinking about switching to a new supplier. Maybe you've got a strong candidate in mind, or maybe you've got a list of 10 possibles which you want to refine down. If you've got a strong candidate of one company, I add some more to make it more like a list.

Why are you looking at alternatives? You tell me. But there are many possible reasons.

Maybe you don't think your current supplier offers the best fit for what you do. Maybe you like the products you're buying now but anticipate changes in your supplier which might not be guaranteed to go in the direction which suits you. Maybe your supplier has been acquired. Maybe they're greedy and bundling in things you don't value or feel you should be paying for. It doesn't matter. You've bought lots of SSD boxes before. They're essential for your IT infrastructure. But you don't want to be exposed to the whims of the enterprise SSD next product casino. You want to take control of your own future.

So we're looking at a list of 10 well known suppliers of flash arrays. For simplicity let's call them SAN boxes. (IP SAN or FC SAN doesn't matter. The point is they're not the servers which run your apps.) They are all used by sane, sensible enterprise customers - so we're not worried about them not working.

Probably you've spent days already (or weeks) going through the features, which types of SSDs are inside the arrays etc, etc.

Now line them all up again in your mind.

Now imagine that every single one of these products is actually the same hardware. And when I say the same - I mean the same. Exactly the same hardware box - just a bunch of COTS SAS SSDs, or SATA SSDs or array of something else. They are all exactly the same. In one discussion like this we also replaced Violin and IBM proprietary arrays too.

Now what are the differences you see? And why would you buy from one vendor rather than another?

At its simplest - the main differences are:-
  • software
  • services
  • marketing activation
But I haven't finished yet.

Remember those SSD boxes from all those different vendors?

Let's put them back to their original state. So the boxes from Pure, or IBM or HP or EMC or Nimbus or Violin or (the lists I've discussed with real users include a longer cast of well known characters)... these boxes are all different again.

Sigh of relief from some of you out there in SSD vendor land.

Now line them up in your head.

Now imagine that they all come with exactly the same software.

Now what are the factors which would lead you to preferentially choose one supplier over another?

It's good to start thinking about this. But I don't want you to spend too long on it because I forgot to mention that you also have to pretend - they all use the same hardware too. Oh and you can get the same services for all of them too - either branded by the company you buy from - or from a well known third party.

Where does that leave us- when nearly all the hardware boxes you buy are actually the same box inside, and all the software and services which you find useful (as opposed to being thrown into the feature set) are the same too?

You don't need hundreds of different products. You never did - it's just that they looked different because every vendor was doing something very similar but keeping you captive with their different software, services and marketing.

You still need the small double digit number of different products which are differentiated by latency and distance from the apps server. But you don't need 10 different versions of each one. You only need:- a standard array, a proprietary array, and some cost differentiated #2 and #3 companies in each segment. That's it.

The hardest to source missing piece to get us to that state of the market are (as described above) is software.

But you say - what about the hardware?

Oh yeah. Well here's the interesting thing. When I started having these discussions which imagined replacing all the different SSD boxes with the same box - it was months before SanDisk launched its InfiniFlash system. BTW The no frills, standard array of COTS SSDs isn't a new idea. But the market is different now. And the big difference is user education and the confidence of experienced users to abstract their own needs away from the plethora of junk which gets attached to many product lines in the deluded idea that more technical features make a better product.

When I having these conversations after the InfiniFlash launch it gave me a convenient reference point - but it made no real difference to how users thought about their future plans - compared with a "hypothetical" array replacing all the branded boxes.

Users I spoke to liked the idea and were already starting to make plans about a hypothetical white box style of enterprise SSD being in their futures. That didn't mean they would run out and buy an InfiniFlash box to replace an EMC or Pure box today - but it did mean that they now regarded all branded boxes as white boxes with proprietary bits added. And they were actively engaged at looking how they could use minimal branded feature sets in future deployments so as to ease their own transitions towards infrastructure in which the software, and services would be distinct products sources elsewhere - and not just a mash of bundled things which accidentally came with that product from that supplier.

And that means, incidentally, that they're not willing to pay the same high prices to their existing suppliers - because they are viewing them in a different way.

The enterprise SSD market is now big enough as an ecosystem to enable software and services vendors to think viable and sustainable thoughts about creating products which disentangle the bundles which have been appearing in SSD storage boxes in the past 6 years.

Bad marketing and an inefficient market

Going back to the "imagine this" scenarios above - the main reason we have so many products in the market today is that the enterprise flash market has been a very inefficient market up to now. Most vendors do things badly from the user interest point of view (and from the viewpoint of their own investors).

Despite that many have done OK as SSD businesses despite being bad at marketing for the simple reason - they didn't need to be any better to get where they are now.

Even a badly marketed and suboptimal fit enterprise SSD deployment could deliver outstanding user value propositions for users whose infrastructures mostly comprised traditional HDD array and servers.

Most enterprise SSD revenue until recent years has come from SSDs replacing something else. It hasn't been necessary for SSD box makers to be good at SSD vs SSD marketing wars.

Getting the marketing right from the user perspective is difficult for a disruptive market like enterprise flash. I've discussed some aspects of this in Decloaking hidden segments in the enterprise for rackmount SSDs but that article describes symptoms rather than causes.

why bad marketing?

Bad marketing is the absence of good marketing. And bad enterprise SSD marketing is the norm seen nearly everywhere in the market today. It's diiifuclt for me to pick our the good examples becaue they're intertwined with bad even in the same product launches.

The root cause is it takes years to construct a marketing organization which works well at large scale.

And the pipeline of activities which need to be done to create the right products, educate and motivate the people inside your own organization and outside who have an influence, and factor in all the business impacts on your current products and competitors and partners is a very complex science. I call it a science because a lot of research and analysis has been done on what works and why.

It costs a lot of money to invest in training, and it takes a lot of time and commitment to make good adaptive marketing work. Hardly surprising you don't see much evidence of this in our industry.

Most big vendors in the market today have strategic SSD product lines which were sourced from outside by licensing or acquisition. The marketers they acquire from small companies may be good at technical marketing or good enough to manage startups but lack the product management skills to activate the mammoths which acquired them.

And the current start ups in the business lack the marketing skills and the financial success they need to scale up their ambitions.

You already know it takes many years before a new enterprise software product becomes safe and useful to use in big scale rollouts. Now consider that the creation of that software and the idea of where it would fit in with the ecosystem 5 years after the version 1.0 launch are all actually a subset of a product management portfolio which someone should have been thinking about years ago. But of course that didn't happen.

It never could have happened in our industry.

The next thing in a disruptive market is not just a predictable follow-on from what happened before. But as the market gets more predictable - it will become more sensible to make such investments.

how much is better SSD marketing worth?

I often write about the contributions to efficiency that can be obtained from different types of design tricks.

The same goes for marketing.

In an inefficient market like we've had until now it didn't matter if a vendor sold a few percent more or less of a new system. It was easy to get sales and the total market size was small. But we're moving towards a market in 2020/21 where it will harder to get sales without being good at marketing and where each 1% difference in outcomes could be worth around $1 billion of revenue. That will be the reward for those who are still in the game at that time.

I'm not going to make any prediction about where the "good marketing" in enterprise SSD will come from. But one day when the technology differences don't matter anymore and when it's as easy for users to change their enterprise SSD box infrastructure as it is to change their PCs the SSD market will be very different.

We've got interesting times ahead though as we try to spot where the enterprise SSD software decoupling platforms are coming from.


The enterprise SSD systems market is entering a phase where easy revenue growth opportunities which vendors experienced before due in large part to displacing older technologies will disappear. Future competition will be more like SSD on SSD.

The user base will change in the way it views SSD vendors as the market moves towards an ecosystem in which most user organizations have experience and confidence in deploying flash and managing it.

As a result of those experiences the traditional enterprise will adopt some of the strategies which we have already seen in the earliest big SSD adopters - a willingness to abstract their own needs and best interests away from dependence on solution types which they will increasingly view as being variations around a small group of possible white boxes which vary simply according to latency and distance from the application - as bundled architecture samples rather than as architecture types.

Meanwhile the size of the enterprise SSD ecosystem will encourage the emergence of new types of suppliers who offer software products which can support the long term vision of users and help migrate them away from the dependencies they don't feel are worthwhile.

footnote - re InfiniFlash

In the article above I mentioned that I used SanDisk's InfiniFlash as a convenient example of a white box in some of my prepublication conversations about this article. And in the months before the InfiniFlash launch I was just talking about a white box SSD with similar characteristics.

It didn't make any difference to the willingness of the users I spoke to when it came to their engagement with the ideas. What was interesting though was how willing some users were in thinking about an InfiniFlash style of box in their plans as replacements a branded storage system. If not now then soon.

The transition strategy would involve reducing their future dependence on bundled software features in branded systems - even if all the ingredients aren't available now to move everything to white box. So they're already thinking of the branded systems as supersets of white boxes.

I'm not saying that the InfiniFlash product is a good or bad product.

It's just a well known example in a trend which will grow.

And if you ask me about how good or bad the marketing of this product was? I have spoken to various marketers at SanDisk about this aspect.

Their enterprise marketing has improved a lot in recent years but it's still closer to the norm which is bad rather than anywhere near approaching good. This is due to their newness of being in the market and the other common factors I mentioned above. I could give you a list of other companies which have been in the enterprise storage market for a very long time and which and are also bad at marketiing enterprise SSD systems too.

any questions?

Some vendors may be unhappy with the ideas expressed in the above article - especially the dangerous notion that almost everything they do from a technology point of view and all the treasured things they stuff into their boxes don't equate to flash array heirlooms which their customers will continue to care about.

Before you send me such emails and complaints let me just say that adapting to the changing needs of your customers and anticipating what they need next, and next and after next, is part of what good marketing is about - and if you were doing it well - you'd be the ones who wrote this article - not me.

comments related to the above article

"Always thoughtful Zsolt. Few have the credibility to write this" - Woody Hutsell, IBM.

"Zsolt, this is an insightful article that shows your vast experience and unique position in the industry" - Morgan Littlewood, Founder at Kodiak Data

Hmm... it looks like you're seriously interested in SSDs. So please bookmark this page and come back again soon.
"That user selectable power envelope - in graduated steps - seems like a really useful design attribute."
re OCZ's new hot swap 2.5" NVMe PCIe SSDs
The simplest way for vendors to signal to the world that they are masters and commanders of the enterprise flash array high seas - rather than merely floating barges of chips which can be swept along in any direction by the latest technology gust of wind - is to hoist new colors of SSD pricing.
Exiting the Astrological Age of Enterprise SSD Pricing

SSD ad - click for more info

hold up capacitors in 2.5" MIL SSDs?
image shows Megabyte's hot air balloon - click to read the article SSD power down architectures and acharacteristics
I've been looking at different aspects of power loss data integrity schemes in mission critical non volatile memory systems for over 30 years.

But every time I revisit this vast topic and compare fresh examples from the market - I learn something a little bit new.

My new blog - Zero to three seconds - demonstrates the extreme range of hold up times now in the market inside leading edge 2.5" military flash SSDs. the article

SSD ad - click for more info

If memory channel SSDs cost nothing - would there still be a market for PCIe SSDs? and conversely - if PCIe SSDs cost nothing - would there still be a market for MCS?
PCIe SSDs versus MCS
are these really different markets?

In some embedded markets - the rackmount SSD is simply viewed as a dumb component - much like a 2.5" drive.
12 key SSD ideas which changed in 2014

New generations of SSD centric software will shrink the amount of flash needed to replace all enterprise hard drives.
utilization rates, revenue crashes and other consequences of the enterprise SSD software event horizon

"What is/should be comforting for your newer readership is your capability to make seemingly outrageous claims years ahead of them possibly becoming reality...

...these and other predictions that were followed by pipedreams eventually converting to tangible reality, continually drive the ubiquity of Flash-enabled systems across Data Centers."
Marius Tudor in an email thanking the editor of for 12 years of thought leadership on the subject of enterprise flash.

DWPD - what's good enough?
DWPD - examples from the market

"For reasons which were obvious to systems architects 10 years ago - and haven't changed today - you will always get better control of performance and cost by designing a hybrid storage array with distinctly separate HDDs and SSDs compared to combining both these functions in a single type of drive."
Toshiba's new 3.5" GbE hybrid drive? (May 18, 2015)

We haven't reached stability yet in reference enterprise designs and use cases.
what kind of SSD world can we expect in 2015?

how fast can your SSD run backwards?
11 Key Symmetries in SSD design

"The winners in SSD software could be as important for data infrastructure as Microsoft was for PCs, or Oracle was for databases, or Google was for search."
all enterprise data will touch an SSD

$1 billion may not be enough
but $5 billion may be too much.
VCs & SSDs

For many enterprise Users - the question - can you guess what will my next SSD box will look like? - bears a striking resemblance to the unfairness of Gollum's question - when he says - what has it got in its pocketses - Precious?
playing the enterprise SSD box riddle game

"Don't place too much faith in what SSD companies tell you about the present or the future of the enterprise SSD market."
Survivor's Guide to Enterprise SSDs


The user mood is changing from - can I afford to use SSDs? to a realization that - I can't afford not to.
where does all the money go?

Even in its infancy - endurance management was a complicated technical subject - but if we look back from the perspective from the ultra-complexity of today - it was much easier to manage and understand.
SSD endurance - the forever war - now in 3D

You don't have to understand the internal details of how these individual techniques work. And with hundreds of patents already pending in this topic there's a high probability that the SSD vendor won't give you the details anyway (not even under NDA). It's enough to get the general idea.
Adaptive flash care management & DSP ECC IP in SSDs

"...Application-unaware design of memory controllers, and in particular memory scheduling algorithms, leads to uncontrolled interference of applications in the memory system"
Are you ready to rethink RAM?

Dinosaurs eat whatever they want...
Who's Been Eating Whom in the Storage Market?

Smaller nuances of user behavior (which are easier to discern as patterns in a stable market) easily get lost under the noise created by headline technology changes and the market's apparent willingness to slaughter and discard once loved past industry leaders.
Decloaking hidden SSD segments in the enterprise

"A critical test of whether you really understand the dynamics of a complex market like enterprise SSDs - is whether you can predict what rational buyers might do when offered new product options at the extreme limits of - for example - price."
Boundaries Analysis in SSD Market Forecasting

Like cosmological dark matter - the SSD dark matter will be bigger in mass than anything which we can currently see or foresee.

I often say to enterprise SSD marketers - it's easy to create a list of the top 10 oems or user sites which already use SSDs - but no one's got more than a small fraction of the list of future SSD user heavyweights - because they don't exist yet - or if they do - they're in stealth mode. But they can see us.
The big market impact of SSD dark matter

"A new generation of enterprise SSD rackmounts is breaking all the rules which previously constrained price, performance and reliability."
exciting new directions in rackmount SSDs

Here's the real problem for the big companies. They can lose tens of billions of dollars of revenue by not participating in the SSD market.
Hostage to the fortunes of SSD


usable versus raw flash capacity
what you see isn't what you get.
the iceberg syndrome



"...the SSD market will be bigger in revenue than the hard drive market ever was."
How will hard drives fare in an SSD world?




"You'd think... someone should know all the answers by now. "
what do enterprise SSD users want?




SSD makers are different in the efficiency of their system designs - even when they have access to exactly the same pool of chips.

What's important at the systems level is that some companies can build the same usable capacity, performance and reliability for the user's app - even when using 20, 30, 40% and even 50% less chips which come from the same memory generation as their SSD competitors who have less efficient architecture and don't have the same technical or market knowledge
Efficiency as internecine SSD competitive advantage




"responding too slowly
is equivalent to transaction failure."
will SSDs end my bottlenecks?





For many of them a single customer like that is bigger than their whole business plan.
what can you infer when all flash array startups compare themselves to EMC?





Skyera is putting a lot of effort into joining something which looks a lot like an old fashioned English gentleman's club

(think- Forsyte Saga or Sherlock Holmes).

But we know that the current members of the club are so old they will die soon anyway.

So is it worth it?
unified storage and gentlemen's clubs (October 2014)





True archive SSDs using switched power management may be able to pay for themselves by saving on electrical costs, disk replacement and datacenter space - even if the competing hard drives are free.

More data is better - not worse. Data volumes wll expand due to new intelligence driven apps.

The data archive will be seen as a profit center - instead of a cost overhead. (Provided the data can be repurposed at competitive latency and cost.)
this way to the petabyte SSD (March 2010) is published by ACSL. © 1992 to 2015 all rights reserved.

Editor's note:- I currently talk to more than 600 makers of SSDs and another 100 or so companies which are closely enmeshed around the SSD ecosphere.

Most of these SSD companies (but by no means all) are profiled here on the mouse site.

I learn about new SSD companies every day, including many in stealth mode. If you're interested in the growing big picture of the SSD market canvass - StorageSearch will help you along the way.

Many SSD company CEOs read our site too - and say they value our thought leading SSD content - even when we say something that's not always comfortable to hear. I hope you'll find it it useful too.

Privacy policies.

We never compile email lists from this web site, not for our own use nor anyone else's, and we never ask you to log-in to read any of our own content on this web site. We don't do pop-ups or pop-unders nor blocker ads and we don't place cookies in your computer. We've been publishing on the web since 1996 and these have always been the principles we adhere to.

Some pages which have Google site search boxes do insert cookies from Google (not from us).