Storage Monkeys

I agree with Tim - Gartner should disclose who their sponsors are when putting together analysis of multiple vendors.

As if being part realist, part relativist and contrarian isn't enough, I have been told on at least one occasion that I am an incorrigible cynic when it comes to some aspects of human behavior and motivations. Not exactly a glowing endorsement, but I prefer reality to fantasy.

What makes my particular brand of "cynicism" different IMO is that I apply it equally and consistently to everyone with rare exceptions. Chris, I was wrong to make the statement that buyers (and to be fair, sellers) aren't idiots. I don't genuinely believe that. I have attended far too many meetings in which I sat wondering how the participants ever made it past grade school. 'Intellectually lazy' is, perhaps, a more accurate and politically-correct epithet. And no single group of human beings has a monopoly on intellectual laziness

Tim, I believe we're on the same page. You call it a crutch and I chose to use the word "justification", however I believe we're both saying the same thing - that research is used as a form of CYA and it can be a crutch for those too lazy or "busy" to take the time to dig a little deeper. What was the old saying? "“Nobody ever got fired for hiring IBM" It is only reasonable to assume that some managers use MQs in the same way to safely push their agendas. It is not, in my opinion, much different from a manager printing out blog articles from well-known and respected bloggers and using those articles to push their own agendas. Poh-tay-toh, poh-tah-toh.

I'm not going to say a particular report from a particular firm has no value, but I would suggest that it be viewed as just one data point among many. In context, stray data points become obvious.

Joe Martins: I disagree, slightly. I think there are MANY CIO/CTO's that use Gartner as a crutch to cover their asses in case they make a bad buying decision ("Well, Gartner said..."). Worse then the Magic Quadrant are the analysts that talk with their paid end-user clients and many time those analysts work off of end-user survey results, not first hand knowledge of products or solutions.

Most of the time they aren't idiots but don't give humans too much credit. Shortly after I started here at good ole Clackamas County an IBM SAN showed up. I was the senior field tech at the time so it wasn't my decision but I did later learn that the selection of said storage nightmare came from a couple of meetings with IBM and some consultant from someone like Gartner (may have even been them). There was no technical research. No evaluations of competing products. It was totally a "magic quadrant" selection made by a couple of non technical managers who did not feel the need to include technical staff in the process. After it arrived I inherited responsibility for the system and before it was even fully paid for (after a few years of FC fun) I replaced the whole thing with a solid iSCSI solution and haven't looked back - well except to giggle at the wasted tax dollars. Go public sector!

Gartner should be required to disclose who their paying clients are when they release a Magic Quadrant or any analysis. I'm happy they are being sued although I don't give this particular lawsuit much of a chance: http://bit.ly/TipX2

Enterprise buyers aren't idiots. They might read reports as part of their investigation to identify available solutions, but they don't seem to take much of it at face value. Instead, they seek out research and professional opinions that support their agenda and that's what they use to justify their decisions to those who control the purse strings.

Airbrush... really? I'll assume it was some form of digital brush but still... really? Who does that?

And with regard to Gartner... no I don't really pay that much attention to them. They make some interesting charts and graphs (and sometimes even publish documents worth reading) but I can't say I've ever been in a purchasing situation where Gartner material had much influence on the final decision. I think I'd be disappointed in myself if I ever said, "Well gee it's pretty much a tie between widget A and widget B... widget A even fits our business needs a tad better buuuut lets go with B since it's listed in the magic corner."

Do people really do that?