We often talk about trying to make capital acquistions cost neutral in less than eighteen months; a reduction in Opex to offset the capital cost. Vendors are often complicit in this, as I mentioned in my previous entry, inflated maintenance costs mean that is often cheaper to refresh and take the bundled maintenance offered with a new system than to continue to pay maintenance on the legacy kit.

Many companies are working on a three-five year refresh cycle, but should this be increased to seven? What needs to happen to make this so?

Depending on the age of the arrays and depending on the software sitting on the arrays and especially if the arrays were out of warranty periods; the maintenance costs are generally so high that it simply does not make economic sense to keep them around.

Understanding the reasons for migration is a great place to start in developing a strategy. Seasoned IT professionals will know that change for change’s sake is not a good thing; “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” – the old adage says, for good reason. Data migrations will introduce change into an environment and with change comes risk. However there are practical reasons to perform migrations.

Stephen has a post here about pricing, about getting close to your vendor and developing a relationship with just a few trusted partners. Nice idea but in any relationship there needs to be some tension to keep it fresh and alive; otherwise you find yourselves doing something because you have always done so, it becomes comfortable.