SI
SI
discoversearch

 Technology Stocks | VMware, Inc. (VMW)


Previous 10 | Next 10 
To: Glenn Petersen who wrote (245)7/19/2011 5:11:28 PM
From: Glenn Petersen
   of 289
 
VMW beats the consensus estimates; the shares are trading about $6 higher in AH.

InPlay 4:09PM VMware beats by $0.04, beats on revs; guides Q3 revs above consensus; guides FY11 revs above consensus (VMW) 106.02 +5.24 : Reports Q2 (Jun) earnings of $0.51 per share, $0.04 better than the Capital IQ Consensus Estimate of $0.47; revenues rose 36.8% year/year to $921 mln vs the $873.5 mln consensus. Co issues upside revenue guidance for Q3, sees Q3 revs of $915-940 mln vs. $898.75 mln Capital IQ Consensus Estimate. The third quarter non-GAAP operating margin is expected to decline sequentially by 260 to 360 basis points. Co issues upside guidance for FY11, sees FY11 revs of $3.65-3.75 bln vs. $3.63 bln Capital IQ Consensus Estimate.

The full press release:

finance.yahoo.com

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read


From: JakeStraw8/10/2011 2:40:57 PM
   of 289
 
VMware, Inc. (VMW) was upgraded today by analysts at FBR Capital to an "outperform" rating.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read


From: JakeStraw8/26/2011 2:59:44 PM
   of 289
 
VMware, Inc.was upgraded today by analysts at Pacific Crest to an "outperform" rating.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read


From: Glenn Petersen10/18/2011 7:59:55 AM
   of 289
 
The third quarter press release:

finance.yahoo.com

VMware Q3 Tops Estimates; But Shares Sell Off After Hours

Eric Savitz
Forbes
10/17/2011 @4:38PM

Virtualization software provider VMware this afternoon posted Q3 revenue of $942 million, with non-GAAP profits of 53 cents a share, topping the Street consensus at $929.4 million and 50 cents. Revenue was up 32% from a year ago, or 30% in constant currency.

“VMware’s third quarter results were driven by growth across all products,”CFO Mark Peek said in a statement. “Demand was especially strong in the Asia Pacific markets and we also experienced the seasonal impact of sales to the U.S. Federal Government.”

For the fourth quarter, the company sees revenue of $1.03 billion to $1.06 billion; the Street has been expecting $1.03 billion.

In late trading, VMW is down $4.03, or 4.5%, to $85.49.

forbes.com

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)


To: Glenn Petersen who wrote (249)12/8/2011 4:11:20 AM
From: stockman_scott
1 Recommendation   of 289
 
The virtualization momentum of 2011 will lead to some interesting trends in 2012, involving pricing, heterogeneity, and a company’s right to choose....

esj.com

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (9)


From: Ingenious1/18/2012 10:55:56 PM
2 Recommendations   of 289
 
Goldman says "Conviction Buy" on VMW with $125 target yet Citi says "Sell"!! Who is right and who is wrong. Both cannot be correct.

Does it matter that VMW has competition or does the competition merely serve to validate the space (ie Microsoft is "reviving" a cancelled project to compete with VMW).

I am long and think this is a true enabling technology for so much yet no one sees what they are doing except at the highest order. Great proxy for all the cloud computing and smartphone apps with 1-2Gb of data.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (4)


To: Ingenious who wrote (251)1/19/2012 12:53:32 PM
From: Peter Dierks
2 Recommendations   of 289
 
Wanna bet Goldman is wanting to reduce their VMW holdings? They might like to move some into the accounts of their customers.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read


To: Ingenious who wrote (251)1/19/2012 3:30:50 PM
From: Glenn Petersen
   of 289
 
VMW may be the best play on the cloud and if EMC did not have a controlling interest if would be a prime candidate for acquisition. While I personally am comfortable with the current valuation, Peter's comments on Goldman may be spot on.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read


To: Ingenious who wrote (251)1/23/2012 5:05:57 PM
From: Glenn Petersen
   of 289
 
VMW is up by about 5% in AH:

The press release:

finance.yahoo.com

VMware Q4 Tops Estimates

1/23/2012 @ 4:51PM

VMware shares are trading higher Monday afternoon on stronger-than-expected Q4 results.

The virtualization software company posted Q4 revenue of $1.06 billion, up 27% from a year ago, or 26% in constant currency, edging the Street consensus at $1.05 billion. Non-GAAP profits of 62 cents likewise topped the Street consensus at 60 cents.

For Q1, the company sees revenue of $1.015 billion to $1.04 billion; the Street has been forecasting $1.02 billion. For all of 2012, VMware sees revenue of $4.475 billion to $4.6 billion, up 20%-23%; previous consensus was $4.51 billion.

VMW in late trading is up $4.13, or 4.8%, to $90.13.

forbes.com

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read


To: Ingenious who wrote (251)1/24/2012 10:19:00 AM
From: Glenn Petersen
   of 289
 
Virtualization: Boon In The Datacenter, Bust On The Desktop

Roger Kay
Forbes
1/24/2012 @ 9:17AM

It may be startling news, but not all virtualization technologies are created equal.

In the past decade, CIOs and other IT managers had a fantastic experience using virtualization to consolidate their servers, sometimes ending up with one-tenth the number of machines. The fully virtualized servers were bigger, but they also ran near capacity, which the old physical servers rarely did. Costs were reduced, efficiencies gained, and service levels increased.

After such a great experience, who could blame IT people for thinking they had found a panacea for every ill? Unfortunately, while virtualizing servers is a no brainer, doing the same with desktops just leads to a sinkhole of complexity, unforeseen costs, and little return on investment.

And CIOs are catching on. Four or five years ago, these empowered employees had just come off the most successful IT implementation in history: using VMware to turn thousands of servers into hundreds. They wanted to do the same thing with unruly desktops.

The primary vendors of virtualized desktop infrastructure (VDI) — VMware, Citrix, and Microsoft — told everyone that VDI would reduce ownership and security costs. It made sense on paper. With everything kept in the datacenter, IT could update a single copy of Microsoft Office and push it out to all the thin clients on everybody’s desktop.

But it turns out that those benefits accrue to something called “network computing,” of which VDI could be considered a subset, not VDI itself.

What’s wrong with VDI?

Well, first of all, the hardware involved costs 40-80% more than just replacing a desktop with a new one. The economics of PCs are so well trodden that it’s difficult for any other hardware configuration to deliver as much value at the same price.

Then, there’s the question of service level. When one desktop goes down, a single worker (two, if you count the deskside IT help) becomes nonproductive. But if there’s a glitch at the server end, 10,000 workers could be down for an unknown period of time. Building in redundancy might be a solution, but then VDI costs 100-200% more than the simple PC alternative.


ClearCube, a Texas-based specialty PC hardware and VDI software OEM, has made a decent niche business out of a form of VDI that involves a mix of PC client types that live in a rack in the datacenter. On the desktop sits a keyboard, mouse, monitor, and a “puck” (a small thin client that communicates over an IP link with the datacenter). ClearCube’s connection broker assigns requests from the desktop to either a particular rack-based client, maybe with a video accelerator operating between the two for workstation-class service, or to the next client available.

Although ClearCube has addressed many of the complexity issues that plague VDI, this elegance doesn’t come cheaply. ClearCube’s customers (e.g., the military) are more than averagely price insensitive.

And if the user doesn’t have one of those neat video-accelerator channels, he or she often must contend with irritating latency and a lack of responsiveness. A movement of the mouse is followed agonizing seconds later by a change in cursor position.

VDI also has a problematic value proposition: if the IT manager spends a big pile of money today, he or she will see an unquantifiable savings in operating expense in the unknown future.

Meanwhile, there’s a lot of work the organization must do to prepare for VDI. For example, it must take its own image of, say, Microsoft Office and publish it as a unique application.

But people need and want networked computing. And the answer may lie with the cloud, with solutions coming from Web-based applications rather than published applications or terminal services.

Web interfaces are friendlier, which fits well with the overall move toward the consumerization of IT. And everybody has a browser: PCs, phones, tablets, even the Nintendo Wii and smart TVs. By making the browser the thin client, the cloud service can address the entire world’s devices.

Using application virtualization, IT managers can take an application and wrap it in an envelope, which can talk to any OS (e.g., Google‘s Android, Apple‘s OS X, Windows Vista, Windows XP, any service pack). Most IT shops manage a corporate image, a string of bits containing a tested compilation of OS, drivers, and applications that, when laid down on a fresh hard drive, just runs. The problem is, every time Microsoft releases a service pack, the image has to be tested all over again, a process that often takes weeks or months. In the Web-based envelope model, all that has to be updated and tested is the envelope itself, a solution quite pleasing to IT, which would love to get off the validation treadmill.

This type of application streaming is available from Citrix as XenApp, from Microsoft as App-V, and VMware as ThinApp (formerly Thinstall — I guess they didn’t like the implications of the word “stall”).

These application virtualization packages are a good way to pull in regular old PCs as well as VDI.

Unfortunately, complexity doesn’t go away. It just gets shifted elsewhere. Images get bigger. There’s more to maintain, and then there’s resource contention on the network or at the server level.

So, we’re back to browsers, which ultimately offer the best solution. Browsers will get smarter and more ubiquitous and will manage and take advantage of inexpensive local resources on the endpoint (i.e., PC, phone, game console, washing machine). HTML5 will make Web applications easier and more powerful.

With the exception of expensive, integrated solutions like ClearCube, which will remain quite limited, VDI is dead meat. Many large companies that started pilots a few years ago have halted deployments. They don’t have enough bandwidth or servers. The environment doesn’t scale.

© 2012 Endpoint Technologies Associates, Inc. All rights reserved.

forbes.com

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read
Previous 10 | Next 10 

Copyright © 1995-2014 Knight Sac Media. All rights reserved.Stock quotes are delayed at least 15 minutes - See Terms of Use.