While I can't say that I have any confidence in Big Blues, line. For them to be lying, based on your argument, you have to assume that IDC is telling the truth. Pointedly say 'assume' because IDC is not adverse to shifting things around to suit whatever the author of the report wants. That holds true of all media journalist, and I for one have less & less confidance in that fact.
And at the end of it all, for such a nebulous thing as 'storage market share' who of us really carries. The reality is the only ones who care about such statements are the corporate MBA's, because they have no actual business talent, and yourselves, because you have to find something to write about.
Bottom line is that the rest of us don't give a .......

Believe it: "Market share" is indeed a very important metric to a large number of people -- especially Wall Street, anybody who invests in storage companies, and all the companies who compete for it on a daily basis. There's really no other way to tell how well a company's doing relative to others within a particular sector. That's why we write about newsy market reports; we certainly do not write about every such report that crosses our desks.

As for companies bending the truth and even lying in public statements: It does happen, but not that frequently. When it does, and we catch it -- especially for such a major company as IBM -- the public should know about it. It says volumes about a company's culture. For a company like IBM to think it has to stoop that low is beyond me.

/cp

You wrote "But IBM could care less." Actually should it not be "But IBM couldn't care less"?

You are right, according to Kenneth G. Wilson of the "Columbia Guide to Standard American English." I will simply avoid using that line in the future. Thanks for writing and have a great holiday.

/cp

According to Webster's a leader is:

Main Entry:
lead�er
Pronunciation:
\ˈlē-dər\
Function:
noun
Date:
14th century

1: something that leads
2: a person who leads
c (2): a first or principal performer of a group

Therefore, if we say the top 3 are the leaders of the would they not be correct? I know this is all about word play and both companies and the media are experts at this. Well perhaps we could ask the experts at turning words around like a lawyer.

Without looking at all the factors such as reliability, speed, flexibility, cost, and other factors one cannot say one is better than the other in all of these areas. Also what are the placing the leader positions on? Revenue, market share, or Customer base? If based on revenue has there been adjustment based on cost to keep the playing field even? If it is the number of customers are these new or current customer base? Finally, if it is market share what is the market or markets reviewed?

Unless you can answer all of the above with an objective analysis how can one say they are not a leader in one of these above aspects.

But to follow on what Peter stated, most of us do not care besides the cost, ease of implementation, and if the company will be around for the next 5 years. EMC may have the lead on current customers but IBM may have the lead on new customers. I cannot say either way without looking at the reported data by all of the companies involved. None the less something to think about anyways.

Codexena

IBM rebrands NetApp and resells it as an IBM part number with more software features turned on in the IBM hardware/software bundle. The market share number spinning and potential double counting of revenue is a problem on several levels. Dell sells EMC software. There is no clear demarcation line established. What about the market share of how many 'seats' or 'total TB' of storage sold? It is further confusing as EMC & NetAPP separately sell upgrade software like storage multi-pathing licensing software, and IBM & Microsoft typically include this in the enterprise solution. Revenue from services and software maintenance are more valuable because it is repeated every year. The storage hardware refresh occures every 3-5 years. IBM & Microsoft use the honor system and other vendor's disable the storage software after an expiration date, like Symantec.

Storage is hardware to hold data: not software. The storage software is value add to manage, provision, and monitor the hardware and data only. The more interesting numbers would be the storage hardware growth and tracking those trends including yearly delta in TB and seats.

You can't spin away the lie. They LIED. First, IDC's report does not have to be true. It could be a complete lie and IBM is still lying. IBM said that "according to the IDC report" which may or may not be true "IBM is the leader in storage software." So whether the report is true or not is irrelevant. They said that according to the report, they were the leader.

As to Codexena and the definition of a leader, they didn't say they were A leader. They said they were THE leader. In any common usage, that means they are in front. They're not in front, so they are LYING.

It's one thing to spin. You emphasize the positive and de-emphasize the negative. You say that the report "demonstrated your continued leadership in the space," or "continues to be one of the market leaders." You don't say you are the leader if you're not.

Amen, brother.

/cp

It is sad to see that the IBM PR storage idiots are not accountable to their own company. This is not an isolated instance for their BS. Why are they still employed? Perhaps that department has been outsourced and functions independently?

In my 40+ years in the "mainframe" business, most of the PR people, from most the major players, are completely disconnected from factual reality.

That's why us old guys appreciate blogs like yours!

Public image and positioning strategies are far too important for companies to outsource. Most of them have agencies to act as intermediates and handle the media contacting and secretarial work, such as scheduling interviews and emailing press releases written by higher-ups.

IBM's agency, Text 100 in New York City, is a well-functioning operation but does not make strategic image or positioning decisions. The lies and spin originate directly from Armonk, N.Y., IBM's headquarters.

I'm still waiting for a phone call from Mister Chief IBM Imagemaker, and he knows who he is; we've talked before. Received one from Text 100, but not from headquarters. Perhaps no one there wants to -- or cares to -- defend this mischief. Probably because he can't.

Anyway ... thanks for writing, and happy holidays!

/cp