Ovum Decision Matrix: Selecting a Virtualization and Cloud Management Solution,

Transcription

1 Ovum Decision Matrix: Selecting a Virtualization and Cloud Management Solution, Reference Code: IT Publication Date: 26 Jul 2013 Author: Roy Illsley SUMMARY Catalyst The role and purpose of IT in an organization is undergoing significant change, driven by the need for businesses to become more agile and have greater control over cost levers when using technology. This transformation of IT involves many different aspects, not all of which are technology-related, but the one thing they all share is that IT modernization is about making changes to meet the current and future demands of business. This report provides a side-by-side comparison of leading virtualization and cloud management solutions, looking at IT modernization from a data center infrastructure perspective, with the findings delivered as the Ovum Decision Matrix (ODM). It considers the significance of management in the virtualization and cloud environments and how this influences the way in which technology is deployed, used, and controlled. Ovum view The current state of the virtualization market is characterized by many proprietary technology stacks. This is partially due to a lack of open standards, and the cloud computing market is similarly fragmented with many different standards, platforms, and services. Ovum believes that the management layer is now assuming the responsibility for providing interoperability between technology solutions, while at the same time applying a business perspective. We also believe that as virtualization and cloud computing expands its footprint, it will become increasingly vulnerable to fragmentation within the enterprise unless all the elements can be unified and managed from a single control point. Page 1

2 One of the major benefits associated with virtualization is its ability to accommodate a flexible approach to workload management and service availability. However, this flexibility comes at a price, effectively adding a layer of abstraction that increases the complexity of dynamically managing the delivery of services. The market is still evolving, and is characterized by proprietary technologies that only have a rudimentary ability to support cross-platform interoperability. An often overlooked aspect of managing virtual environments is the need for management tools to operate at a more granular level than their physical environment counterparts. This more granular approach is further complicated by the need to holistically manage the server, network, client, user, and storage elements. When the cloud computing revolution is added to this already complex environment, it can quickly be seen that orchestration becomes the new fulcrum for management and control. This fulcrum is now at the center of a federated and fragmented IT supply chain, where applications, services, and infrastructure are separated by location and ownership. While the nirvana of the cloud world is for any workload to execute in any location on any platform, the reality is that the different standards make this something that is currently only possible between technologies that have established working relationships. Key findings Ovum s technology capability evaluations show that BMC and HP are clear leaders with strong results, while CA Technologies, IBM, and VMware also scored well, giving a total of five vendors classified in the technology capability leaders category. Ovum s execution evaluations showed that only HP and Dell were classified in the leader category, with eight vendors classified in the challenger category. Lifecycle management was the technology capability feature that showed the biggest variation between vendors. Ovum s market impact evaluation identified Microsoft, VMware, and Dell as leaders, mainly due to the combination of revenue growth and market segmentation. All vendors in the report showed a consistent level of agreement in terms of their maturity, with the average being over four years in the market. Ovum identifies infrastructure modeling and analysis as a key area of improvement for all vendors. VENDOR SOLUTION SELECTION Inclusion criteria The IT management market has many vendors that offer solutions to customers of all sizes. However, the criteria to be included in this Ovum Decision Matrix are based on the ability to offer solutions for the specific virtualization and cloud management aspects of data center management. It must be noted that Fujitsu was unable to complete the evaluation process in time to be included, and Symantec declined to take part in this edition of the Ovum Decision Matrix due to a recently announced change in its strategy. In addition, Microsoft did not verify the detailed features matrix that was completed by the Ovum Page 2

3 analyst, although Microsoft was given the opportunity to comment on the final evaluation included in this report. The criteria for inclusion of a vendor in the Ovum Decision Matrix for Virtualization and Cloud Management, 2013 are as follows: The vendor must be a global vendor and have customers in at least all three regions: Asia-Pacific, EMEA, and North America. The vendor is a solutions vendor, and it must offer virtualization and cloud management capabilities that enable management of platforms/infrastructure other than its own technology. If the vendor is a software vendor, the solution must be capable of managing more than just server virtualization, and must cover at least three of the four main areas (server, storage, network, and client/desktop). The vendor must have at least 500 customers, and they must be a mixture of mid-sized enterprises (between 1,000 and 4,999 employees) and large enterprises (more than 5,000 employees). Exclusion criteria The virtualization and cloud management market is considered a sub-category of the wider infrastructure management market, and although Ovum accepts that for some vendors this is how they have entered this market, it is not universally the case. Vendors and products excluded from the analysis are determined according to the following criteria: The vendor s solution is only applicable to five of 10 different classifications in the features matrix (performance monitoring, virtualization management, cloud management, infrastructure modeling and analysis, financial management, delivery scale and manageability, security and backup, provisioning and automation, lifecycle management, and reporting and integration). The vendor s solution is more than 50% made up of partner solutions or third-party solutions. The vendor has no direct contact with end customers, with everything done through the channel partners. Methodology Technology analysis Vendors were invited to complete a virtualization and cloud management features matrix, comprising a comprehensive spreadsheet listing product features that Ovum believes are required and desirable in a virtualization and cloud management solution. However, because the coverage is so broad, Ovum does not compare a single product in this Ovum Decision Matrix, but instead compares a vendor s capability across all its products in the virtualization and cloud management space. The features matrix is a comprehensive technology questionnaire developed by Ovum analysts and containing hundreds of different criteria. Ovum then applied weights to the entries by individual row and by section, based on the importance of each criterion. The final ranking of vendors in the technology dimension of the Ovum Page 3

4 Decision Matrix for Virtualization and Cloud Management is based on the scores vendors achieve from this analysis. The criterion for a vendor to answer yes to a feature is that it must be available out-of-the-box in any product within its range of products that are applicable to cloud and virtualization management. A third-party provider, custom integration, or partnership is not sufficient to merit a yes. All vendors were made aware of this prior to completion of the questionnaire, and before the publication of the report, vendors were given the opportunity to review their submissions again to ensure there were no discrepancies. Execution In the execution dimension, Ovum analysts review the capability of the solution around the several key areas: Maturity: We assess the stage that the product/service is at in the maturity lifecycle, relative to the maturity of the overall technology/service area. Interoperability: We assess how easily the solution/service can be integrated into the organization s operations, relative to the demand for integration for the project. Innovation: Innovation can be a key differentiator in the value that an enterprise achieves from a software or services implementation, and this is assessed in this criteria. Deployment: Referring to a combination of assessed criteria and points of information, Ovum analysts provide detail on various deployment issues, including time, industries, services, and support. Scalability: Points of information are provided to show the scalability of the solution across different scenarios. Enterprise fit: The alignment of the solution is assessed in this dimension, and the potential ROI period is identified. Market impact The global impact of a solution is assessed in the market impact dimension where it is measured across five categories, each of which has a maximum score of 10. Revenues: Each vendor s global virtualization and cloud management technology revenues are calculated as a percentage of that of the market leader. This percentage is then multiplied by a market maturity value and rounded to the nearest integer. Revenue growth: We use this parameter to show the fastest growing solutions in the market. Each vendor s revenue growth is calculated as a percentage of the growth rate of the fastest growing company in the market. The percentage is then multiplied by 10 and rounded to the nearest integer. Geographical penetration: Ovum determines each vendor s revenues in three regions: the Americas; Europe, Middle East, and Africa (EMEA); and Asia-Pacific. We assign three weightings to the geographies (Americas, EMEA, and Asia-Pacific) where a solution has a presence. These revenues are calculated as a percentage of the market leading solution s revenues in each region, multiplied by 10, and then rounded to the nearest integer. Page 4

5 Vertical penetration: Ovum determines each vendor s revenues in the following verticals: energy and utilities; financial services; healthcare; life sciences; manufacturing; media and entertainment; professional services; public sector; retail; wholesale and distribution; telecommunications; and travel, transportation, logistics, and hospitality. These revenues are calculated as a percentage of the market leader's revenues in each vertical, multiplied by 10, and then rounded to the nearest integer. The solution s overall vertical penetration score is the average of these three values. Size-band coverage: Ovum determines each vendor s revenues in three company size bands: large enterprises (more than 5,000 employees), medium-sized enterprises (between 1,000 and 4,999 employees), and small enterprises (fewer than 1,000 employees). These revenues are calculated as a percentage of the revenues of the market leader in each region, multiplied by 10, and then rounded to the nearest integer. The vendor s overall company size-band score is the average of these three values. Ovum ratings Leader: This category represents the leading solutions that we believe are worthy of a place on most technology selection shortlists. The vendor has established a commanding market position with a product that is widely accepted as best-of-breed. Challenger: The vendors in this category have good market positioning and are selling and marketing the product well. The products offer competitive functionality and good price-performance proposition, and should be considered as part of the technology selection. Follower: Solutions in this category are typically aimed at meeting the requirements of a particular kind of customer. As a tier-one offering, they should be explored as part of the technology selection. Ovum Decision Matrix Interactive To access the Virtualization and Cloud Management Ovum Decision Matrix Interactive, an online interactive tool providing you with the technology features that Ovum believes are crucial differentiators for leading solutions in this area, please download the Ovum Decision Matrix Interactive tool from the Ovum Knowledge Center. This tool allows Ovum clients to apply their own weighting of importance to the Virtualization and Cloud Management feature list Ovum has defined, presenting information on a tool that is best suited to their individual needs. MARKET AND SOLUTION ANALYSIS Ovum Decision Matrix for Virtualization and Cloud Management 2013 The Ovum Decision Matrix provides a summary of the market standing of the major virtualization and cloud management vendors based on a quantitative assessment of their technology capabilities, market impact, and ability to execute. It provides vendor selection guidance for enterprises looking to deploy virtualization and cloud management solutions, and advises them about whether a vendor should be Page 5

6 shortlisted, considered, or explored further. The Ovum Decision Matrix is a three-dimensional chart representing vendors scores in technology, market impact, and execution. Technology scores are represented on the x-axis, with execution scores on the y-axis. The size of the bubble represents market impact score relative to the market leader. This edition of the Ovum Decision Matrix includes 11 vendor solutions. Figure 1: Ovum Decision Matrix: Virtualization and Cloud Management 2013 Source: Ovum Page 6

7 Figure 2: Expanded view of Ovum Decision Matrix: Virtualization and Cloud Management 2013 Source: Ovum Table 1: Ovum Decision Matrix: Virtualization and Cloud Management 2013 Market leaders Market challengers Market followers BMC ASG Red Hat CA Technologies Citrix HP Dell IBM Microsoft VMware NetIQ Source: Ovum Market leaders: BMC, CA Technologies, HP, IBM, and VMware The market leaders BMC, CA Technologies, HP, IBM, and VMware all scored an average of over seven out 10 across all three dimensions. HP was the clear leader with an average of 8.04, and the separation between second and fifth in the leaders was very narrow, at just over 0.5 points. This group also recorded an average of five category-leading scores across all the categories compared to the whole group average of four, demonstrating that the leader category was consistently above average. The leaders all shared one key attribute: all five were the only five vendors in the technical features Page 7

8 dimension (shown on the X axis) to score an average of over seven out of 10. It should be noted that the performance of these vendors in the other dimensions (execution and market impact) was less clearly defined, and this will provide an opportunity for the challengers to target developments to close in on, or even overtake, the current leaders. Market challengers: ASG, Citrix, Dell, Microsoft, and NetIQ The market challengers ASG, Citrix, Dell, Microsoft, and NetIQ were separated by just over 1.0 point and were a mixture of vendors with some strong categories and others that were comparatively weak. ASG, for example, recorded six category-leading scores, and NetIQ recorded five. The other group of vendors demonstrated a performance that was consistently in line with the whole group average. Microsoft and Dell only recorded three category-leading scores, and Citrix recorded one, for example. Ovum believes that all the vendors in this category have the potential to become a market leader, but to do so they must either address the capability gaps, or improve their overall performance in line with scores achieved by the market leaders. Overall the challengers were nearly one point on average behind the leaders, but were 1.5 points above the average follower s scores, so are definitely positioned in the middle grouping, and clearly show that the market remains a three-tier market. Market followers: Red Hat The (only) market follower in the Ovum Decision Matrix: Virtualization and Cloud Management report is Red Hat. Ovum believes Red Hat to have some excellent features and strengths but it lacks the comprehensive capabilities across all categories, and this was demonstrated by the fact that Red Hat scored only one category-leading score, compared to the whole group average of four. Ovum recognizes that Red Hat is developing its solution sets in this market, but overall it scored an average of just below five out of 10, which was over 1.5 points below the whole group average of Page 8

9 MARKET LEADERS Market leaders: technology Figure 3: Ovum Decision Matrix: Virtualization and Cloud Management 2013 market leaders: technology Source: Ovum In the technology features dimension, BMC and HP were the clear leaders with both scoring an average of over eight out of 10, and both being the only two vendors to score in every category within the dimension above the category average. VMware and IBM complete the leader s category, both averaging just above 7.6 for the technology features dimension. There were only six vendors that recorded category-leading scores, and four (BMC, HP, IBM, and VMware) were the overall leaders as well as the technology features dimension leaders. However, ASG recorded three category-leading scores, and NetIQ recorded one. This dimension also saw four maximum scores for NetIQ in performance monitoring, HP in financial management, and ASG and VMware for security and backup. Page 9

10 Market leaders: execution Figure 4: Ovum Decision Matrix: Virtualization and Cloud Management 2013 market leaders: execution Source: Ovum The execution dimension shows one clear leader: HP, with three category-leading scores, and IBM a close second, with two maximum leading-category scores. However, NetIQ, which was less than one point behind the leader, achieved three category-leading scores overall. CA Technologies and Dell performed strongly, although they only achieved one category-leading score each, with both vendors average score placing them close to NetIQ in a small group that was less than one point behind the leaders. The interoperability dimension has five vendors with the maximum category score (HP, NetIQ, IBM, Citrix, and ASG), while the maturity, deployment, and enterprise fit dimensions have only a single vendor with the leading score. Ovum believes that execution was a relatively high-scoring dimension, with the average score at 6.45, and the difference between the top score and the second lowest score at just over 25 percentage points, making execution the closest dimension from a scoring perspective. Page 10

11 Market leaders: market impact Figure 5: Ovum Decision Matrix: Virtualization and Cloud Management 2013 market leaders: market impact Source: Ovum The market impact dimension was the only dimension where every vendor recorded a category-leading score. It showed CA Technologies as dimension leader with an average score of 8.04, but it only achieved one category-leading score. VMware and Microsoft achieved three category-leading scores, while HP, Dell, and ASG each recorded two category-leading scores. These vendors all recorded an average score of over seven points. Five vendors recorded the top score for revenue, with only HP generating a leading score for both revenue and revenue growth. Page 11

12 VENDOR ANALYSIS ASG: Ovum recommendation: Challenger Figure 6: ASG radar diagrams Source: Ovum Ovum SWOT Assessment Products part of this evaluation CloudFactory Strengths ASG scored consistently well in all categories and was market leader in six of the 21 individual categories. ASG scored three of these leadership positions in the features dimension where it has a particular strength in the security and backup sector, scoring 100%. Ovum believes that security will increasingly become a differentiator in the cloud management space. In this report, this capability had a Page 12

13 standard deviation of 2.8, and at least one vendor was below one standard deviation, while ASG was more than one standard deviation above. The other key strengths of ASG were in automation and lifecycle management, both of which are fundamental capabilities that both cloud and virtualization technologies exploit. In terms of execution, ASG was leader in the interoperability section. ASG has a mature offering that shows good examples of innovation and showed an average rating in terms of scalability. In terms of market impact, ASG shows good revenue growth, and an excellent geographic and vertical market split. Weaknesses In terms of execution, ASG was the weakest in the enterprise fit category, where compared to some of its rivals, the ROI was longer. In the features dimension, ASG scored low in the cloud management section, which was mainly due to its lack of external capabilities in terms of monitoring and managing public cloud providers. Opportunities Ovum positions ASG in the challenger category because its overall performance was solid, and although it scored six leadership scores across all categories, it did not rank in the leader category for any one of the three dimensions. Ovum believes that if ASG can strengthen some of its weaknesses in the features dimension (cloud management and delivery, scale, and manageability) and continue its revenue growth, then its total revenue will increase. This combination could move ASG in to the leadership category. Threats ASG was the weakest in the IT revenue section, which can in part be explained by ASG s lack of marketing of its capabilities in this area. ASG is well known for its governance, risk, and compliance management but less so for virtualization and cloud management. Page 13

14 BMC: Ovum recommendation: Leader Figure 7: BMC radar diagrams Source: Ovum Ovum SWOT Assessment Products part of this evaluation Cloud Lifecycle Management, BMC Cloud Operations Management Strengths BMC is the clear leader in the features dimension, and while it only scored three leading scores in all the individual categories, two of these were in the features dimension. BMC s second lowest score in the features dimension was in delivery, scale, and manageability, but this was the sector s leading score so cannot be considered a weakness. BMC had a maximum score in the cloud management feature, which demonstrated the breadth of integration BMC has with public cloud platforms as well as private Page 14

15 cloud technologies. Ovum believes that this feature will become of increasing importance, particularly as we do not expect a single cloud standard to be agreed within the short to medium term, if ever. Weaknesses BMC s area for improvement is in terms of infrastructure modeling and scenario analysis. While its performance was solid, it was nearly two points below the leader s score. BMC s weakest dimension was execution, where on average it was over two points behind the dimension leader. Opportunities Compared to its main rivals, BMC demonstrated an average execution capability, which was supported by the fact it did not score any leadership scores or any category lowest scores in the execution dimension. However, BMC s average score for the execution dimension was slightly below the average for all vendors, by 0.5 points. Market impact was another solid performance, with one leadership score in terms of revenue growth and a slightly above average total score (approximately 0.4 points). BMC recently moved from a public company to a private company and Ovum believes this will allow it to develop its solutions with a more long-term vision. However, Ovum is waiting to hear what BMC s new owners plans are for the company. Threats BMC did not obtain many individual category leadership scores, but its overall performance was one of a solid, all-round capability. BMC excelled in the features dimension where it was the clear leader with an average score of 8.41 out of 10, and two individual category-leading scores (out of 10 in total). BMC s performance in execution and market impact was less spectacular and more in line with the average. However, on balance, BMC has been categorized as a leader because it provided two solid dimensions and one clear leadership dimension. Ovum believes that BMC must be mindful that execution and market impact represent the biggest threat to its leadership position. Page 15

16 CA Technologies: Ovum recommendation: Leader Figure 8: CA Technologies radar diagrams Source: Ovum Ovum SWOT Assessment Products part of this evaluation Converged Infrastructure Management Strengths CA Technologies performed consistently across all three dimensions and recorded three leading category scores, one of which was a maximum score. CA Technologies was particularly strong in security and backup, infrastructure modeling and analytics, lifecycle management, and financial management in the features dimension. CA Technologies other category-leading scores were in enterprise fit, size band, and revenue, which Ovum believes is partially due to the impact of the Nimsoft acquisition, which has given CA Technologies a more balanced reach. Page 16

17 Weakness CA Technologies did not have any major weaknesses, and it was more a case of comparative weakness alongside the other leading vendors. Its performance was solid and above average overall, but was over one point behind the leader in the features dimension. Opportunities CA Technologies appears to have all the ingredients required for a virtualization and cloud management solution, but appears to be slightly behind the major competitors in terms of advanced features capability. Ovum understands that CA Technologies has recently appointed a new CEO and some major transformations are under way in the company. We also believe that CA Technologies has an excellent roadmap to develop its solutions capabilities. Threats CA Technologies recently began to report its performance in a different way, splitting out the mainframe business from the x86 business. Ovum thinks this a brave move because the mainframe business is a solid, dependable, if slow, growth market that contributes much of CA Technologies revenue. The threat for CA Technologies is that if it fails to deliver growth above the sector average in the x86 business, the financial markets will consider it a mainframe business and this could impact the perception of x86 buyers. Page 17

18 Citrix: Ovum recommendation: Challenger Figure 9: Citrix radar diagrams Source: Ovum Ovum SWOT Assessment Products part of this evaluation CloudPlatform Strengths Citrix scored well in virtualization management and financial management, coming in with above average category scores. Citrix scored considerably better in the execution and market impact dimensions where it recorded two leading scores: a maximum for interoperability and a high score for revenue growth. Overall, Citrix s performance in these two categories was in line with the average. Page 18

19 Weaknesses Citrix s features dimension average score was three points below that of the category leader and nearly one point behind the average score. Ovum identified its overall features dimension score as being impacted by not having any capability for lifecycle management. Ovum believes that Citrix has the ingredients to address these weaknesses, and understands many of these concerns are in the process of being addressed through the integration and development of acquisitions Citrix has made. Opportunities Citrix demonstrated its solutions were developed in line with other vendor solutions available in the market. Its overall performance was patchy, showing some areas with good capability and others below average. Ovum believes that Citrix needs to complete the integration of its recent acquisitions and fill the gaps in its cloud and virtualization capabilities exposed in this report. Threats Citrix exhibits some positive capabilities in certain key areas, but is let down by gaps in its current offering and a reliance on third-party products in certain categories. Overall, Citrix s average score was within the 5.5 to 6.5 range identified as the challenger category. Citrix exhibited some common traits of the challenger category, such as its features and capabilities being over two points behind that of the leaders on average. However, Citrix scored better in terms of execution and market impact, where it was in line with the average. Ovum believes that Citrix is in transition and while its current solutions are broadly in line with the market average, we understand that work is in progress to close this capabilities gap with the market leaders. Page 19

20 Dell: Ovum recommendation: Challenger Figure 10: Dell radar diagrams Source: Ovum Ovum SWOT Assessment Products part of this evaluation Foglight, ASM (Active System Manager), AppAssure, NetVault, vranger, Sonicwall, WSM (Microsoft Windows Server Management), KACE, vworkspace, OpenManage, and Enstratius Strengths Dell s performance was one of a solid balanced performance across all three dimensions. It was slightly below the average score for the features dimension, above average for both execution and market impact, and recorded three category-leading scores overall. Dell did not have any leading category scores in the features dimension but showed a particular strength in provisioning and automation where it was nearly two percentage points above the average score. Dell was also strong in performance Page 20

21 monitoring and virtualization management. Ovum believes that all three of these are essential management capabilities in a cloud and highly virtualized environment. Weakness Dell s area for improvement was in terms of its cloud management capabilities, particularly how it integrates to the many different public cloud providers. This has been addressed by its recent acquisition of Enstratius. Dell has rebranded its Multi-Cloud Manager and the product enables organizations to deploy and manage private, public, and hybrid clouds across more than 20 leading cloud providers. Its current area for improvement is its reporting and integration with service management, which Ovum expects to be resolved in due course. Opportunity In terms of execution, Dell performed very well with an overall average score of seven, which meant it was second in the vendor rankings for execution. While it only achieved one leading score for its capability in delivering innovation, it was consistently appearing as number two or three in the other categories. In the market impact dimension Dell scored two leading scores for revenue and size band, and its average score was above the average by over half of one percentage point. Ovum believes that Dell needs to build on these strengths to fully exploit its opportunity. Threat Ovum places Dell in the challenger category because its features dimension average score was 2.5 percentage points behind the leader, and while its execution and market impact were both above average, it was felt that Dell needs to address a couple of areas of its features capability before it can be considered a potential leader. Page 21

22 HP: Ovum recommendation: Leader Figure 11: HP radar diagrams Source: Ovum Ovum SWOT Assessment Products part of this evaluation CloudSystem Matrix Strengths HP scored seven individual category leader scores across the three dimensions and was a clear leader in one dimension, second in another, with a slightly below average score in the third. In terms of the features dimension, HP recorded three leading scores and was above average in the other seven categories. HP was particularly strong in financial management, with a maximum 10 out of 10, but also had leading scores in virtualization management, and reporting and integration. Ovum believes these to demonstrate a strong bias toward understanding the business perspective of cloud and virtualization Page 22

23 management, and using its solution to articulate that value. HP scored an impressive 8.21 average for the features dimension which gave it a ranking of second overall in this dimension. Weaknesses HP was weakest, but still above average, in terms of delivery, scale, and manageability in the features dimension. HP s weakest dimension was market impact, where it was slightly below average and nearly two points behind the market leader. Opportunities HP was the clear leader in the execution dimension with three leading scores out of the six categories. HP was a leader in the interoperability, innovation, and scalability categories, scoring above average in the remaining three categories. The weakest category for HP was its revenue growth, which was significantly lower than many of its competitors, but this was the only cause for concern. Threats As the overall leader on combined scores, HP is classified in the leader category. While it was strong in both the execution and features dimension, its average performance in market impact reduced the gap between it and its next closest competitor. Ovum believes that HP s growth in this market will be a significant factor in its maintaining its leadership ranking. Page 23

24 IBM: Ovum recommendation: Leader Figure 12: IBM radar diagrams Source: Ovum Ovum SWOT Assessment Products part of this evaluation IBM includes many of its individual solutions under the SmartCloud Orchestrator suite, but also markets the individual solutions as best-of-breed. The IBM list therefore includes the main SmartCloud Orchestrator as well as the individual products. IBM SmartCloud Orchestrator 2.2, IBM Tivoli Network Manager v3.9, IBM Tivoli Business Service Manager v6.1, IBM Endpoint Manager for Lifecycle Management v9.0, IBM SmartCloud Virtual Storage Center v5.1, IBM Tivoli Netcool Configuration Manager v6.4, IBM Virtual Desktop v6.6, IBM Endpoint Manager for Lifecycle Management v9.0, IBM Systems Director Active Energy Manager v4.4, IBM SmartCloud Application Performance Management v7.6, IBM SmartCloud Provisioning v2.1, IBM Tivoli Omegamon XE for z/os v5.1, IBM Tivoli Monitoring for Virtual Environments for Citrix Xenserver v7.2, IBM Tivoli Storage Manager Suite for Unified Recovery v6.3, IBM Tivoli System Automation for Multiplatforms v3.2, IBM Security Virtual Server Page 24

25 Protection v1.1, IBM Endpoint Manager for Mobile Devices v9.0, IBM Endpoint Manager for Software Usage Analysis v9.0, IBM Endpoint Manager for Lifecycle Management v9.0, IBM Endpoint Manager for Mobile Devices v9.0, and IBM SmartCloud Control Desk v7.5. Strengths IBM scored five individual category-leading scores, which included two maximum scores. IBM was strongest in the features dimension where all its scores were above the average, and it recorded three leading scores. IBM was also strong in virtualization management, infrastructure modeling, and lifecycle management. Ovum believes that these three aspects make IBM particularly robust in the private cloud management market. Overall, IBM s features dimension score was 0.7 points behind the dimension leader s score, but over one point above the average score. Weaknesses IBM was weakest in terms of delivery and cloud management. In both of these IBM still scored more than the average, but its weakness in cloud management is due to its only supporting three public cloud offerings: IBM s own public cloud, AWS, and OpenStack. Ovum believes that while this meets most of the needs of customers, IBM is missing other cloud platforms that organizations may be using: Microsoft Azure, Google, and CloudStack. Opportunities IBM scored less well in the market impact dimensions where it was over 1.2 points behind the dimension leader and scored one maximum score. IBM was strongest in interoperability and maturity, but scored less well in scalability for the execution dimension. In terms of market impact, IBM scored a maximum for revenue and enterprise fit. It also scored highly in how its business is split by vertical, but scored less well in revenue growth and size band. Threats IBM was a leader in the features dimension, with an average score of almost eight out of 10, but did less well in the market impact dimensions. Its overall performance placed it in the leader category. Ovum believes IBM has a strong private cloud management and virtualization solution, with an average rating in terms of the public cloud. Ovum believes that IBM must equal the degree of public cloud integration of its main rivals if it is to retain its leadership rating. Page 25

26 Microsoft: Ovum recommendation: Challenger Figure 13: Microsoft radar diagrams Source: Ovum Ovum SWOT Assessment Products part of this evaluation System Center 2012 Strengths Microsoft scored three category-leading scores in the market impact dimension and none in the other two dimensions. Microsoft was strong in terms of financial management, security and backup, and lifecycle management in the technology dimension, where it scored above average, but achieved an overall technology dimension score of just below average. Microsoft scored well in terms of revenue, revenue growth, and geographic split in the market impact dimension, where it was a clear leader. Page 26

27 Weaknesses Microsoft s biggest weakness was the comparative lack of breadth of support for management of public cloud solutions. Ovum believes that the ability to manage an enterprise s federated cloud environment from a single console is an objective of many CIOs. Opportunities Microsoft s performance was mixed, with two average performances and one well above average. Ovum believes that Microsoft has the ingredients to become a leader in virtualization and cloud management, but needs to address interoperability issues, with partners providing capabilities in the storage management area where is particularly weak compared with its competitors. Threats Microsoft has been undergoing a major reorganization of its operating businesses over the past few years, and Ovum believes that it now needs to communicate its new vision to its core management audience. While we do not see Microsoft s position being threatened in the short term, the increasingly heterogeneous nature of the IT supply chain means Microsoft cannot rely on its traditional customer base in the long term. Ovum believes that Microsoft must embrace more interoperability and position its self as the supplier of heterogeneous cloud brokerage solutions. Otherwise, its competitors will begin to capture some of its market. Page 27

28 NetIQ: Ovum recommendation: Challenger Figure 14: NetIQ radar diagrams Source: Ovum Ovum SWOT Assessment Products part of this evaluation Cloud Manager Strengths NetIQ performed solidly across all three dimensions with five category-leading scores in total. However, approximately 50% of its scores were on or below the category average. Overall, NetIQ was just below the average in the features dimension, but it did record a leading maximum score in the performance monitoring category. Ovum believes that NetIQ has some excellent individual capabilities, such as performance monitoring, security and backup, and infrastructure modeling. Page 28

29 Weaknesses Market impact was NetIQ s weakest dimension, with one leading category score: geographic split, but its overall score for market impact was over two points behind the dimension leader. NetIQ was also weak in the features dimension in the financial management and cloud management category. Opportunities NetIQ was strongest in the execution dimension, where it had three category-leading scores in interoperability, deployment, and enterprise fit, and was less than one point behind the dimension leader s score. We believe that NetIQ could build on this and develop a significant point of difference between it and the other major vendors by marketing its cross-technology integration capabilities and its service provider heritage. Threats NetIQ is categorized as a challenger: it performed solidly overall and demonstrated some market-leading capabilities, but it also exposed some comparative weaknesses. Ovum believes that NetIQ represents a good all-round performer and is worthy of inclusion in any vendor shortlist for a virtualization and cloud management solution, and is particularly strong in the virtualization management market. Page 29

30 Red Hat: Ovum recommendation: Follower Figure 15: RedHat radar diagrams Source: Ovum Ovum SWOT Assessment Products part of this evaluation CloudForms Strengths Red Hat was a new entrant to the Ovum virtualization and cloud management report, replacing some larger well-known vendors. Overall Red Hat showed some good individual capabilities but lacked the maturity and depth of some of the longer established vendors in this space. Red Hat achieved one category-leading score and seven category scores over or equal to the average. The features dimension demonstrated that Red Hat s strengths were in virtualization management, financial management, and integration. Page 30

31 Weaknesses Red Hat was particularly weak in security and backup as well as infrastructure modeling. Overall, Red Hat s average score for the features dimension was over two points below the average, but this was adversely affected by some categories where Red Hat does not have comprehensive solutions. Ovum understands that Red Hat has developed a clear roadmap for CloudForms and plans to address these gaps. Opportunities Ovum believes that Red Hat is a potentially disruptive vendor in this space with its open source heritage, and is committed to developing its capabilities or integrating third-party solutions to strengthen its offering. Red Hat was below average in the execution dimension but scored well in terms of interoperability and maturity, with scalability its lowest score. Red Hat s strongest dimension was market impact, where it achieved one category-leading score for size band coverage, with its overall score in line with the average. Threats RedHat showed some good capabilities, but this was interspersed with capability gaps, which reduced its overall performance. Ovum classifies Red Hat as a follower, but understands that there is a development plan to address many of the gaps. If this plan does not materialize, Ovum believes that Red Hat s market growth will be impacted as organizations look to adopt hybrid cloud computing principals. Page 31

32 VMware: Ovum recommendation: Leader Figure 16: VMware radar diagrams Source: Ovum Ovum SWOT Assessment Products part of this evaluation vcenter, vcloud Director, vcenter Operations Manager, vcenter Configuration Manager, vfabric Hyperic, vcenter Infrastructure Navigator, vcenter Chargeback Manager, and Horizon Strengths VMware scored five leading category scores and was in the leader category for two of the dimensions: features and market impact. VMware is particularly strong in terms of performance monitoring, financial management, reporting and integration, and security and backup in the features dimension. VMware was strong in terms of revenue growth, geographic split, and vertical split in the market impact dimension, and achieved a maximum score in maturity in the execution dimension. Ovum believes Page 32

33 VMware is a leader in the private cloud market, and the vendor has recently launched its public cloud offering. Weaknesses VMware did not have any specific weakness, and any weaknesses identified have been of a comparative nature. These areas include the level of interoperability with public cloud solutions. VMware has stated that capabilities to address the cross-platform management of cloud environments are on its roadmap. Opportunities VMware recently launched its public cloud offering based on its successful private cloud technology. Ovum believes this is a long overdue entrance to this market where many enterprise customers are looking to adopt hybrid clouds with an ability to elastically expand resources from those constrained within the enterprise to secure public resources as and when needed. Threats VMware is a very strong competitor in the private cloud, and a new entrant to the public cloud market. Ovum believes that OpenStack in particular represents a significant threat to VMware, alongside, in more general terms, the ability to manage other public cloud offerings. Many of VMware s major competitors have developed broad multi-platform management support capabilities that provide CIOs with a single tool for the fragmented and federated cloud environments they need to manage. VMware has recognized this and has a strategic plan to become a multi-technology cloud management provider. APPENDIX Author Roy Illsley, Principal Analyst, Software roy.illsley@ovum.com Ovum Consulting We hope that this analysis will help you make informed and imaginative business decisions. If you have further requirements, Ovum s consulting team may be able to help you. For more information about Ovum s consulting capabilities, please contact us directly at consulting@ovum.com. Disclaimer All Rights Reserved. Page 33

34 No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior permission of the publisher, Ovum (an Informa business). The facts of this report are believed to be correct at the time of publication but cannot be guaranteed. Please note that the findings, conclusions, and recommendations that Ovum delivers will be based on information gathered in good faith from both primary and secondary sources, whose accuracy we are not always in a position to guarantee. As such Ovum can accept no liability whatever for actions taken based on any information that may subsequently prove to be incorrect. Page 34