Simon Phipps On Thumper - Maybe Love Is Blind
(Update: be sure to read the comments section, for some useful points by Simon Phipps)
A couple of days ago, Sun Microsystems released details of their long-awaited Thumper product - aka the X4500. Simon Phipps is in love (as is Tim Bray). I’m a big fan of Simon, but I wonder why he can’t understand why others maybe aren’t so in love. On his blog, Simon says:
People on Slashdot have been bleating about how anyone could make one of these with just a 4U case and a stack of disks, and the price would come out less, but they’re wrong - this thing is an engineering feat that will take quite some cloning, what with the 4U size, the drawer-format so you can open the thing out on rails to replace disks, the air flows to keep it all cool, the sleeves for the drives, and so on.
Of course, those of us used to paying for “Enterprise” disk storage have long been paying through the nose for spinning disk. However, as Jonathan Schwartz says, with the ability of commodity hardware (x86 processors, RAM, SATA disks) to do amazing things when you combine it with clever software (ZFS), we poor customers should expect prices to be falling like stones. In other words, we should be expecting the computer companies to truly deliver on the promise of RAID i.e. producing Redundant Array of Inexpensive Disks.
So, to explain why at least some people are disappointed in Sun’s pricing of Thumper, let’s examine Simon’s comments a little:
this thing is an engineering feat that will take quite some cloning
This may well be true. The problem is that, to the non-expert, it’s not obvious this is the case, given that you’ve actually been able to buy 4U cases of 48 SATA drives for over a year now.
But let’s assume there’s some complex engineering in there. Simon says this complex engineering is:
4U size, the drawer-format so you can open the thing out on rails to replace disks, the air flows to keep it all cool, the sleeves for the drives
To the non-expert, this sounds like some bits of metal and some fans to blow air through the bits of metal.
This, I think, gets to the heart of why some people think Thumper is rather over-priced. Again from the non-expert’s point of view, it seems that Thumper comprises: an X4200 server with 16GB RAM; 48 500GB SATA disks; plus the case for the disks.
How much should all this cost? Well the price of the relevant X4200 server from Sun is $10,375. The price of a good (Seagate) 500 GB SATA disk from a store is $240, which comes to $11,520 for the 48 disks. Which makes a total of $21,895.
How much does Thumper actually cost? The answer - $69,995.
So it seems that customers are paying $48,100 for the bits of metal that make up the case (yes, I know there are extra components in there e.g. SATA power and data cables, and SATA connectors). The problem is, people who build computer boxes are used to paying a few hundred dollars for high-tech cases with “sophisticated” cooling designs (airflow, zoning etc). That’s a few hundred dollars for the bits of metal, not tens of thousands of dollars.
So… how come these bits of metal - the 4U case, the drawer, the spaces for the air to flow - cost $48,100? Seems strange, doesn’t it.
The answer is - the bits of metal can’t possibly cost that. Doesn’t make any sense. And actually, I know this for sure? How? Well, it turns out that you can buy Thumper boxes with less storage… The price? $32,995! That’s the 16GB X4200, plus 48 (smaller disks), and the “sophisticated bits of metal”.
Which leads me to my point in the title - maybe love is blind. Why? Because the special engineering Simon Phipps talks about is a red herring. The real question is: why is Sun charging its customers so much for buying 48 500GB good quality SATA drives? See, the difference in price between 48 250GB drives and 48 500GB drives should be less than $7200 - whereas, Sun is charging an extra $37,000 i.e. about $625 extra per disk. That’s more than four times too much.
Simon said:
People on Slashdot have been bleating about how anyone could make one of these with just a 4U case and a stack of disks, and the price would come out less, but they’re wrong.
I think that’s missing the point. The point is, from the outside, it looks very much like Sun could sell a 24TB Thumper for $40,000 and make the same profit it will make on a 12TB Thumper. If they did that, I don’t think so many people would be complaining about the price.
I may well be missing something here. But if I am - I really don’t think it’s obvious…
Simon Phipps wrote:
I’d not want to get into detail about all this as I am not an expert - I am sure that ultimately there will be ways to haggle over price, there always are. And I’m not sure I’d argue with your analysis a whole lot, although there’s a bit more to it than you paint. I don’t buy memory for my Mac from Apple though, just so you know
My point was that the Slashdotters I had seen were also criticising that base price, not allowing for quality drives, were not considering the additional engineering (the indicator lights and the control electronics that went with them, and were assuming that the whole deal of getting it professionally built was not a value. Pressure on margin is one thing; believing two cans and some string is the same as GSM phone is another.
Posted 13 Jul 2006 at 10:10 pm ¶
simon wrote:
I get the points you’re making, Simon. And I take your points pricing - reseller discounts, and volume pricing etc.
To be honest, though, it looks to me like there’s something wrong with Sun’s supply chain, if the company can offer a 12TB Thumper for $33K and not make the same profit selling a 24TB Thumper for $40K (unless there’s something different between the two models, aside for plugging in different disks - if there is, it’s not obvious).
Slashdotters might quibble at a base price of $33K for a 12TB model - and you’re right - that’s partly because they’re not valuing the system that Sun’s put together properly. I think I am, though. I’m well aware of at least some of the challenges. We’ve been putting our own small 2TB versions of “Thumpers” (multi-core AMD chips, lots of RAM, Solaris with ZFS, SATA disk, nice case with sophisticated cooling) into customer sites recently [Solaris 10 U2 shipped just in time for the first one moving from testing into production!] - for high-resolution, high frame-rate video storage and analysis. And they work great. I also know I wouldn’t want us to build larger versions ourselves, because of the engineering challenges. So, I’m a big believer in the Thumper model.
Bottom line, I really would be surprised if *anyone* - not even a Slashdotter - would quibble at a price of $40K for a 24TB Thumper. It would truly change way people use storage inside many businesses.
Posted 13 Jul 2006 at 11:02 pm ¶
mike wrote:
I’m not sure that a lousy 100% margin (over materials cost) for a well engineered warantied part is all that bad. Particularily for something that simply won’t benfit much from any economies of scale. Especially when, as noted, it’s priced rather competitively within it’s market.
Posted 14 Jul 2006 at 6:29 am ¶
simon wrote:
Mike,
I’m not sure where you get the 100% from. A 100% margin over materials cost is no problem. However, my back of the envelope calculations suggest that isn’t even close to the pricing of the 24TB model. It’s more like 400-500% margin on the disks. That’s too expensive… if you want to be taken seriously about wanting to change the economics of storage; deliver on the “I” in RAID; and change the way companies use storage.
Posted 14 Jul 2006 at 2:51 pm ¶
Alex Hiralde wrote:
I think you’re both missing the point - if it’s that simple to replicate, someone will - with general purpose parts, anyone can. If Sun has a time to market advantage, they’ll collect the early returns which, in a competitive market, will come down over time. This is a good thing, it incents innovation.
Now secondarily, I work in a place that was on the early access roles - ZFS on Thumper is absolutely incredible. That we can service them in 10 mins once every few months is not simply “a savings,” it’s near priceless. One storage admin costs us way, way more than some whitebox dense-pack could ever save us. Sun focused on *total* cost, and in my humble opinion, they absolutely nailed it.
Posted 14 Jul 2006 at 3:16 pm ¶
simon wrote:
Alex,
I agree with you 100% about the design looking fabulous in terms of maintenance costs. And that Thumper looks like a great product. However, there’s no getting around the fact that it’s a mystery why Sun is looking to charge $70,000 for a 24TB Thumper stuffed with 500GB SATA disks, when they’re charging $33,000 for a 12TB Thumper stuffed with $250GB SATA disks.
Posted 14 Jul 2006 at 3:52 pm ¶
Simon Phipps wrote:
I’ve been asking internally about those SATA drives. The product manager says: “We are single sourced for these highest quality and highest speed disks. They
are not the sort of SATA disks you buy at Fry’s for $200 each. They come
with special features that reduce vibration (increase speed as vibes cause
head settling delays), increased write performance, and other added
value not present in cheaper disks. Measured performance is more than
of 70GB/sec per disk read, 60+ for writes, with MTBF over 1M hours.” He also comments that the 500GB drives are at a premium right now and are thus priced higher in the short term.
Posted 14 Jul 2006 at 8:18 pm ¶
Sun Exec... wrote:
Because we’re steering demand to the lower capacity systems - that are easier for us to build. And look, you can build a car out of parts, too - but most folks would rather pay Toyota for the quality, reliability and serviceability.
Posted 14 Jul 2006 at 9:25 pm ¶
simon wrote:
Simon, many thanks for this clarification over the characteristics of the SATA drives. I think that’s really helpful. Although, to honest, it would nice to have the option of some cheap Seagate 500GB drives in there (e.g. a Barracuda 7200.9 which you can pick up for $250 retail) - they have similar characteristics to the ones you describe in terms of performance and failure rates.
Posted 14 Jul 2006 at 9:56 pm ¶
simon wrote:
@Sun Exec
Interesting point about steering demand. Does this mean that the 24TB Thumpers have issues that the 12TB don’t e.g. in terms of cooling? I’d be interested to hear more about what the issues are that make the 24TB model more difficult to build that the 12TB.
I don’t think your Toyota analogy works though. I wouldn’t rather pay Toyota for anything. And I don’t call having an interior swathed in plastic, “quality”
I drive a Porcshe 911… and there’s a huge modding community among 911 owners (even if it is just putting aluminium pedals in, in place of the plastic ones Porsche so generously supplies). Oh, and plenty of 911 owners *wish* they could do some other upgrades themselves e.g. upgrading the firmware on the GPS Sat Nav/Phone/Sound System unit - the prices the Porcshe centres charge are completely outrageous considering all that’s involved is inserting a CD into the slot on the unit. Porsche like to think that people that can afford to pay $140K for a car shouldn’t mind forking out a thousand here and a thousand there for nothing. They’re wrong. People don’t like getting ripped off.
And yes, 911s are less reliable than Toyotas. But I still prefer the 911.
But that’s not the real reason the analogy doesn’t work. The real reason is that assembling a computer from off-the-shelf components is several orders of magnitude simpler that assembling a car. The truth is, anyone that’s capable of installing an OS, can build a better quality, more serviceable, more performant PC than say, Dell offers, in about two hours, and get equal reliability. You barely even need a screwdriver these days, and there are only a handful of components to put together.
Now, I’m not comparing Thumper to a Dell PC. As I said, Thumper looks great. Dell PCs don’t. I really wish Dell weren’t so damn to easy to buy from - else I’d be able to justify stopping buying the bloody things!
Posted 15 Jul 2006 at 5:39 pm ¶
Wes Felter wrote:
IIRC, Thumper uses the Hitachi 7K500, which is indeed higher quality and more expensive than el cheapo SATA drives, but it’s still only $250 retail.
Posted 15 Jul 2006 at 5:58 pm ¶
simon wrote:
Interesting comment Wes! I wonder who’s correct - Simon Phipps, who was told that Thumper uses drives that cost a lot more than $200; or, you, suggesting the drives Thumper uses are Hitachi 7K500s than can be picked up for $250 at retail?
You can’t both be!
Posted 15 Jul 2006 at 6:23 pm ¶
MikeP wrote:
simon, even if I *can* put together PCs from parts, that doesn’t mean that I *want* to, or that my bosses want me to. I’d have to put together an awful lot of computers for the price savings to match my salary + benefits + office + everything else it takes to keep an employee going. I could put together more of these things and the cost savings per unit would match my salary, except we don’t need very many - one would be sufficient. I don’t think you’re putting very much value on being able to pick up the phone and ring somebody up to come fix things either.
Posted 16 Jul 2006 at 1:04 pm ¶
simon wrote:
Mike,
I probably wasn’t clear in the comments. I wasn’t meaning to suggest that everyone working in a company goes and build their own PCs. Rather, in my response to Sun Exec’s car analogy, I was simply trying to say that there isn’t much skill, time or effort required to put high-quality PCs together these days; compared to there being a huge amount of skill, effort, time and investment required to put a car together.
That’s the reason why there is such an enourmous market for computer cases, motherboards, CPUs, fans, power supplies etc. at the moment - lots of people and lots of companies *do* see value assembling their computers themselves from parts. Google chooses to do this, for example.
Now that doesn’t mean it makes sense for *most* companies to put their own computers together. It just means that it makes sense for *some* companies to do that.
As for assigning value to being able to pick up the phone and ring somebody up to come fix things, well, we haven’t discussed that - either the value, or the cost. Actually, I do assign value to that. Sun’s hardware and software support is something that I’ve been very impressed with over the years - it’s actually one of the reasons I have bought so much Sun kit.
Posted 16 Jul 2006 at 2:45 pm ¶