The Register, NetApp and IDC Lose About All Credibility with This
-
Absolutely totally flaming horse pucks. This is total garbage and why IT gets a bad name. NetApp makes a totally non-converged system, must like Pure and Cisco did, going right back to traditional SAN based IPOD design, call it hyperconverged or as El Reg says "even more converged than hyperconverged" and think that everyone will just fall for it (and of course they do.) IDC gets thrown on the fire here for making their definition of HCI include CPU specifics that obviously cannot be part of any architecture definition - paid off by the processor makers you think?
El Reg is starting to claim that IT and technical stuff isn't part of hyperconvergence and "easy of use" is all that matters. WTF. This is quite possible the most blatantly paid off, unprofessional, no journalistic integrity reporting I've seen in IT. For this to have been a fake vendor whitepaper it would have been shameful. For The Register to be associated with it is a serious problem.
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/06/29/netapp_hci_converged_or_hyperconverged/
-
This is more of why vendor sponsored reporting and anything involving NetApp is a bad idea. When you have to resort to these levels of dishonesty to make products look acceptable, you know you are selling garbage. Gartner would be proud of this.
-
I posted about their lack of credibility on The Register directly, but it has no appeared yet. I no longer accept quoting The Register as a valid reference to anything. Unless they post a retraction, I can't take them seriously in any context again. This isn't a simple mistake, this is a travesty of reporting and unprofessionalism. I'm not sure which would be worse, if the author was actually this technically inept and reported on tech anyway, or if he was paid off to specifically try to mislead his readers. And how did any editor let this get onto the website?
-
What's amazing is that we called out Pure and Cisco for trying this just two weeks ago. But those were marketers obviously out to scam out. This is someone claiming to be a journalist in on it this time, so much worse.
-
@scottalanmiller said in The Register, NetApp and IDC Lose About All Credibility with This:
I posted about their lack of credibility on The Register directly, but it has no appeared yet. I no longer accept quoting The Register as a valid reference to anything. Unless they post a retraction, I can't take them seriously in any context again. This isn't a simple mistake, this is a travesty of reporting and unprofessionalism. I'm not sure which would be worse, if the author was actually this technically inept and reported on tech anyway, or if he was paid off to specifically try to mislead his readers. And how did any editor let this get onto the website?
Just now reaching that conclusion? I wondered when you'd see the light with them.
-
@travisdh1 said in The Register, NetApp and IDC Lose About All Credibility with This:
@scottalanmiller said in The Register, NetApp and IDC Lose About All Credibility with This:
I posted about their lack of credibility on The Register directly, but it has no appeared yet. I no longer accept quoting The Register as a valid reference to anything. Unless they post a retraction, I can't take them seriously in any context again. This isn't a simple mistake, this is a travesty of reporting and unprofessionalism. I'm not sure which would be worse, if the author was actually this technically inept and reported on tech anyway, or if he was paid off to specifically try to mislead his readers. And how did any editor let this get onto the website?
Just now reaching that conclusion? I wondered when you'd see the light with them.
I've not found them pulling this kind of stuff in the past. Certainly not to this degree!
