Technology StocksVMware, Inc. (VMW)

Previous 10 Next 10 
From: Ingenious1/18/2012 10:55:56 PM
2 Recommendations   of 318
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 RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (4)

To: Ingenious who wrote (251)1/19/2012 12:53:32 PM
From: Peter Dierks
2 Recommendations   of 318
Wanna bet Goldman is wanting to reduce their VMW holdings? They might like to move some into the accounts of their customers.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read

To: Ingenious who wrote (251)1/19/2012 3:30:50 PM
From: Glenn Petersen
   of 318
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 RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read

To: Ingenious who wrote (251)1/23/2012 5:05:57 PM
From: Glenn Petersen
   of 318
VMW is up by about 5% in AH:

The press release:

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.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read

To: Ingenious who wrote (251)1/24/2012 10:19:00 AM
From: Glenn Petersen
   of 318
Virtualization: Boon In The Datacenter, Bust On The Desktop

Roger Kay
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.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read

From: Mark30004/7/2012 7:40:08 PM
   of 318
4/9/2012 chart and setup

here is my current chart and setup for entry after earnings:

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read

From: Glenn Petersen4/18/2012 5:49:27 PM
1 Recommendation   of 318
VMW is up about 3% in AH trading:

In Play 4:05PM VMware beats by $0.07, beats on revs; guides Q2 revs in-line; guides FY12 revs in-line ( VMW) 111.29 +0.80 : Reports Q1 (Mar) earnings of $0.66 per share, $0.07 better than the Capital IQ Consensus Estimate of $0.59; revenues rose 25.6% year/year to $1.06 bln vs the $1.03 bln consensus. Co issues in-line guidance for Q2, sees Q2 revs of $1.10-1.12 bln vs. $1.11 bln Capital IQ Consensus Estimate. Co issues in-line guidance for FY12, sees FY12 revs of $4.525-4.625 bln vs. $4.56 bln Capital IQ Consensus Estimate.

The full press release:

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read

From: zax4/25/2012 7:56:12 PM
   of 318
In what looks like the IT equivalent of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill disaster, purloined data and documents, including source code belonging to the U.S. software firm VMWare, continue to bubble up from the networks of a variety of compromised Chinese firms, according to "Hardcore Charlie," an anonymous hacker who has claimed responsibility for the hacks.


E-Mail, Source Code From VMWare Bubbles Up From Compromised Chinese Firm

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read

To: stockman_scott who wrote (250)7/17/2012 8:53:08 AM
From: Glenn Petersen
2 Recommendations   of 318
A shakeup at the top:

Paul Maritz Out As VMware CEO And Mentioned As Candidate For Top Spot At EMC Or Cloud Foundry Spin Off

Alex Williams
July 16, 2012

Paul Maritz
is out as the CEO of VMware and will be replaced by EMC COO Pat Gelsinger.

Maritz spent four years at VMware. It’s uncertain what he will do but rumors have swirled all day about about his departure.

CRN has a story that puts Gelsinger in charge of VMware with Maritz taking the top spot at EMC. VMware is a wholly owned subsidiary of the leading storage company based out of the Boston region.

My sources say that Maritz is also mentioned as a candidate to lead Cloud Foundry, the platform-as-a-service (PaaS) started at VMware. Cloud Foundry has had considerable growth since it started a year ago with its popularity as an open source developer friendly environment.

GigaOm reported today that VMware is considering making Cloud Foundry a wholly owned subsidiary of EMC. That has always been the hope of Cloud Foundry’s original developers. Greenplum and Project Rubicon, a joint venture infrastructure-as-a-service involving VMware and EMC, would also be part of the spin off.

But would Maritz lead that effort? GigaOm reports that potential successors include Tod Nielsen, co-president of VMware’s application platform business and Mark Lucovsky, vice president of engineering in charge of Cloud Foundry.

Maritz has roots in the open-source movement. He is a technologist who would like the challenge of developing Cloud Foundry as its own business.

His talent as a technologist led him to Intel where he developed tools for developers to build on the then new x86 platform. According to Wikipedia, he then moved on to Microsoft:

From 1986 to 2000 he worked at Microsoft, leaving as executive vice president of the Platforms Strategy and Developer Group and part of the 5-person executive management team. He was often said to be the third-ranking executive, behind Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer. He was responsible for essentially all of Microsoft’s desktop and server software, including such major initiatives as the development of Windows 95, Windows NT, and Internet Explorer. While at Microsoft, Maritz was credited for originating the term “eating your own dogfood” also known as Dogfooding.

EMC CEO Joe Tucci is planning to retire. A successor has not been named. Gelsinger is not considered to be a replacement which opens the question about Maritz. Will he be named CEO of EMC? That’s the question of the day.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read

To: stockman_scott who wrote (250)7/17/2012 12:23:52 PM
From: Glenn Petersen
2 Recommendations   of 318
VMware plans cloud spin out to keep up with Microsoft, Amazon and Google

By Om Malik & Stacey Higginbotham
Jul. 16, 2012, 1:32pm PT

VMware, a Palo Alto, Calif.-based virtualization and software company, is planning a corporate shakeup. GigaOM has learned that VMware hopes to spin out some of its cloud assets, including its Cloud Foundry platform-as-a-service division and parent company EMC’s Greenplum assets into a separate company, according to sources close to the deal. The new company will also include assets of Project Rubicon, an infrastructure-as-a-service joint venture between VMware and EMC.

The move would help VMware, which is majority owned by storage vendor EMC, offer a competitor to cloud computing services offered by Google, Microsoft and Amazon. All three of those players are building out the infrastructure and platform layers to become the IT departments for developers and enterprise customers.

The plans for VMware’s cloud asset spin-out are said to be at an advanced stage and some of the pieces are already in place, but the spin-out isn’t yet complete. VMware declined to comment on the spin-out plans.

The scoop. Our sources say we might hear more about these developments on July 23 when VMware announces its second-quarter earnings, although there is a chance that VMware could wait until late August when it hosts its annual VMworld user conference in San Francisco. From what we have learned, this new company would include the following pieces:

    Cloud Foundry: This is VMware’s platform-as-a-service offering that lets developers easily deploy applications built using a wide variety of programming languages, frameworks and other components. Thus far, Cloud Foundry’s associated open-source project has attracted more attention than VMware’s paid service, serving as the platform for AppFog, Iron Foundry (a .NET implementation) and ActiveState’s Stackato on-premise PaaS software.
  • Greenplum + Chorus: Greenplum is EMC’s big data division, which sells its namesake analytic database as well as two Hadoop distributions and analytics collaboration software called Chorus. Greenplum also sells preconfigured appliance, called the Big Data Appliance, on which to run all its software. Project Rubicon: This is the name of an EMC and VMware joint venture created earlier this year and appears to be the IaaS play. Rubicon has an independent board, but people working for it are paid by VMware or EMC. At its creation, the Rubicon employees consisted of the technical team behind Cloud Foundry, but not the marketing or operational staff. The venture was designed to help give the sense of independence from EMC and VMware for Cloud Foundry customers. Project Rubicon includes IaaS-type technology developed by the Mozy team. Mozy was a storage company acquired by EMC in 2007 and taken over by VMware in 2011.
We’ve heard two possible names to head the new company — both former Microsoft executives. One is Tod Nielsen, who is the co-president of VMware’s applications business and was previously the VP of Microsoft’s platform group. The other name we’ve heard bandied about is Mark Lucovsky, who is the VP of Engineering in charge of Cloud Foundry and was a Microsoft employee who helped build Windows NT.

Why a spin-out makes sense.

While VMware is a public company, EMC owns about 80 percent of its stock. That causes many to question how independent VMware can really afford to be, especially as it builds out services such as Cloud Foundry that might reduce overall sales of EMC gear to customers.

If VMware and EMC do spin out Cloud Foundry, as we hear they plan to do, it may be because they want to help alleviate the perception that EMC and VMware are heavily tied to Cloud Foundry. For many in the developer and enterprise community, the concept of cloud computing is built on the idea of virtualization and commodity hardware. EMC’s expensive storage boxes, which were used in building out Cloud Foundry, are at odds with that vision. Others are concerned that VMware’s ties to Cloud Foundry will mean that users get locked into the VMware ecosystem if they use the service.

Cloud Foundry was launched in April of 2011, and so far has attracted a lot of partners. But as it grows, the focus seems to be on helping developers build apps in Cloud Foundry that will be able to run on a variety of clouds. Thus, having Cloud Foundry under a separate company independent of VMware and EMC makes more sense.

The competitive picture. Most likely, the new company would focus its efforts on corporate customers and corporate developers. And that makes sense, as this is the big pot of gold for cloud companies. According to a recent estimate by research firm Gartner, companies will spend as much as $207 billion on public cloud computing in 2016 versus the $91 billion they spent in 2011. Amazon chief technology officer Werner Vogels, in a conversation at our Structure 2012 conference, pointed out that AWS, an early leader and pioneer in cloud services, is already in deep conversations with enterprises.

Despite near ubiquity in corporate data centers thanks to its flagship server-virtualization software, VMware needs to firm up its cloud strategy. It has all the pieces — vCloud, vFabric, PaaS, Cloud Foundry, Mozy and a suite of software-as-a-service applications (including from recently acquired big data startup Cetas) — but they haven’t yet coalesced into a cohesive offering. And now people are leaving.

Meanwhile, Microsoft has shaped Windows Azure into a fully functional cloud platform that includes IaaS, PaaS and hybrid capabilities, as well as a Hadoop service and a data marketplace. There’s also OpenStack, the open-source cloud software backed by companies such as HP, IBM and Red Hat, that aims to displace VMware’s cloud-management software in private-cloud deployments, and on which HP and other companies are already building their public- and private-cloud offerings.

Of course, Vogels’ AWS remains absolutely dominant in the IaaS world (it even lets users port VMware-based VMs to its cloud) and is always adding new features and services to suck in even more workloads. It’s also the go-to cloud for developers wanting a relatively easy way to get virtual resources on which to run their applications. This is true even indirectly because so many PaaS offerings (e.g., Heroku, AppFog and DotCloud) are hosted in Amazon’s cloud and pay a bill to AWS every month.

Big data big daddy.

With the new entity, though, EMC’s big data analytics platform from Greenplum could hold the keys to the kingdom. While analysts predict that spending on cloud computing will increase sharply, they predict even faster growth for spending on big data software and services. And as those two trends converge, with big data workloads moving increasingly into the cloud, the expected EMC-VMware spinout would seem poised to capitalize because of its internal knowledge base in both areas.

And if success in IT is all about who gets the most developers, EMC has been active on that front too. It acquired Pivotal Labs, and at the time of the acquisition, Greenplum boss Scott Yara pointed out that Greenplum was open-sourcing its Chorus software, which is a Facebook-plus-style platform for sharing data and data models within a company, to help build a community of developers that can create apps atop the platform.

Seen in that light, spinning out the Greenplum and Cloud Foundry assets makes sense. It gives EMC and VMware a platform that could tempt corporate users in a way Amazon Web Services or Google’s Compute Engine might not. With a big data play associated with its PaaS it has something corporate customers are increasingly interested in, on a platform that may even span multiple clouds. This spin out could help EMC capitalize on the cloud even as it cannibalizes its hardware business.

Additional reporting by Derrick Harris.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read
Previous 10 Next 10 

Copyright © 1995-2018 Knight Sac Media. All rights reserved.Stock quotes are delayed at least 15 minutes - See Terms of Use.