UCS
Caxias do Sul, Brazil
UCS
Caxias do Sul, Brazil

Time filter

Source Type

News Article | February 21, 2017
Site: www.prweb.com

Vista IT Group announced it has been selected by Cisco to join an elite group of resellers in the Cisco Excess program. This achievement makes Vista IT Group one of a handful of value added resellers in North America that is approved to provide refurbished and excess Cisco products that are guaranteed by Cisco to be SMARTnet eligible. Due to ever-changing customer demands and the dynamic nature of today’s IT market, Cisco has been challenged to maintain and manage an increasingly diverse supply-chain. The Cisco Excess program was established so that Cisco could optimize the value of its entire technology portfolio, regardless of where it sits in the product lifecycle. By establishing the Cisco Excess program, a limited number of highly competent technology providers have the unique opportunity to resell inventory that is surplus to Cisco’s supply chain obligations. “The beauty of the Cisco Excess program is that it’s a win for everyone involved. Our customers benefit by receiving a Cisco approved alternative to buying used equipment from open market sources. Cisco benefits by allowing companies like Vista to relieve surplus inventory pressure from its supply-chain.” said Steve Taylor, General Manager of Vista IT Group. The Cisco Excess program supports surplus and refurbished product from Cisco’s vast portfolio of data center products ranging from entry level routers, Catalyst and Nexus switches, to the full complement of UCS blades and servers. All products carry the same Cisco SMARTnet support options as new equipment, at substantially discounted prices. As a Cisco Excess reseller, Vista IT Group is able to help reduce capital expenditures by up to 90% when compared to buying new. Being nominated into this exclusive program means customers can be confident that Vista IT Group will deliver certified, seamless, and SMARTnet eligible solutions that fit both their strategy and their budget. About Vista IT Group: Vista IT Group is a national technology provider serving customers in every state representing multiple industry sectors and verticals. Having over 30 years’ experience as a global technology provider, our unique business model serves as a strategic complement to the conventional global information technology supply chain. Possessing warehouse, logistics, and full integration capabilities, our ability to execute is unheard of in today’s industry where most technology providers are leveraging external resources to provide their value propositions to their customers. To learn more about Vista IT Group, or the Cisco Excess program visit them online at http://www.vistaitgroup.com/cisco-excess or call 888-870-8847.


News Article | March 2, 2017
Site: www.marketwired.com

Companies to Provide Validated Docker Solutions on Cisco UCS and Container Automation with Open Source Cisco Contiv SAN JOSE, CA--(Marketwired - Mar 2, 2017) - Today, Cisco ( : CSCO) and Docker Inc. announced a strategic alliance for worldwide engineering, sales and support to deliver essential container capabilities for application-centric data center and cloud infrastructure. Customers can modernize applications using Docker Enterprise Edition (EE) with Docker Datacenter, and deliver them securely and efficiently across Cisco Unified Computing System (UCS) and Cisco validated Converged Infrastructure solutions with Cisco partners. Cisco and Docker will deliver unified and certified solutions for the entire application journey, whether organizations are containerizing traditional applications, refactoring applications to microservices, or creating new applications. Docker EE with Docker Datacenter running on Cisco UCS will provide application developers a seamless way to deploy, iterate, re-deploy, and monitor applications onto production infrastructure. This worldwide initiative between two industry leaders will deliver: "The powerful combination of Cisco's leading UCS product line for Cloud infrastructure and Docker's containerized technology will offer customers high levels of security, manageability and scale," said Liz Centoni, Senior Vice President and General Manager, Cisco Computing Systems Product Group. "Developers and IT, working together, can now build ship and deploy container applications anywhere." "Enterprises are increasingly looking to Docker to modernize their traditional applications so their investment in Linux and Windows Server applications can achieve major operational efficiencies while making these applications more agile, cloud-ready and more secure," said Ben Golub, CEO, Docker. "This strategic partnership brings even more opportunity for these enterprises by running Dockerized applications on a validated Cisco UCS infrastructure that is optimized for security, availability, performance and scale." Docker EE is the leading container platform for enterprise developers and IT teams that are looking to converge a diverse set of application pipelines under one uniform packaging format, API & tooling for all their applications across the entire application lifecycle. Docker EE establishes the foundation for a Containers as a Service (CaaS) model that becomes the framework for an enterprise software supply chain where any applications (traditional and microservices) can be managed centrally and uniformly across any infrastructure. Joint sales and support programs across Docker, Cisco and Cisco channel partners ensure that Docker EE works seamlessly for applications deployed across hybrid cloud, converged infrastructure, converged storage, hyperconverged infrastructure, and Cisco servers. Enterprise customers have the assurance of Cisco-supported Docker platform as part of this strategic relationship. Cisco and Docker plan to deliver joint solutions, which will be available through Cisco's partner channels with full support: Cisco has a proven history of working with partners to develop solutions that deliver business value. The Cisco Unified Computing System (Cisco UCS™) and Cisco Application Centric Infrastructure (Cisco ACI™) are open infrastructure frameworks supported by broad, mature partner ecosystem. The alliance with Docker will extend benefits of Cisco's data center architectures to container environments, and the two companies will collaborate going forward to bring additional solutions to the marketplace. Contiv is available now at http://contiv.io and can be downloaded from Docker Store and GitHub Cisco Validated Design (CVD) for Docker Data Center is available now. The Cisco Validated Design (CVD) for Converged Infrastructure is available now. Additional Resources Learn more about: Cisco Data Center and Virtualization Learn more about: Cisco Unified Computing System Learn more about: Cisco Data Center Services Learn more about: Contiv Read Cisco Contiv blog: Contiv 1.0 About Cisco Unified Computing System™ (Cisco UCS®) Generic servers run generic businesses but digital transformation demands more: it requires critical applications to be delivered with industry-leading performance, availability, and security. Cisco created a revolutionary computing architecture designed for IT innovation and business acceleration. Cisco UCS isn't just a server, it's a radically simplified solution for advanced application performance, increased operational velocity, and superior economics. UCS customers tell us that UCS has helped them: Cisco UCS. It's not a server. It's a system.™ About Docker Docker, Inc. is the company behind the Docker open source platform, and is the chief sponsor of the Docker ecosystem. Docker is an open platform for developers and system administrators to build, ship and run distributed applications. With Docker, IT organizations shrink application delivery from months to minutes, frictionlessly move workloads between data centers and the cloud and can achieve up to 20X greater efficiency in their use of computing resources. Inspired by an active community and by transparent, open source innovation, Docker containers have been downloaded more than 10 billion times and Docker is used by millions of developers across thousands of the world's most innovative organizations, including ADP, GE, the BBC, Goldman Sachs, Groupon, ING, Yelp and Spotify. About Cisco Cisco ( : CSCO) is the worldwide leader in IT that helps companies seize the opportunities of tomorrow by proving that amazing things can happen when you connect the previously unconnected. For ongoing news, please go to http://thenetwork.cisco.com. Cisco and the Cisco logo are trademarks or registered trademarks of Cisco and/or its affiliates in the U.S. and other countries. A listing of Cisco's trademarks can be found at www.cisco.com/go/trademarks. Third-party trademarks mentioned are the property of their respective owners. The use of the word partner does not imply a partnership relationship between Cisco and any other company. Availability Disclaimer: Many of the products and features described herein remain in varying stages of development and will be offered on a when-and-if-available basis. This products and features are subject to change at the sole discretion of Cisco, and Cisco will have no liability for delay in the delivery or failure to deliver any of the products or features set forth in this document. This press release may contain forward looking statements relating to future events or future financial performance that involve risks and uncertainties. Such statements can be identified by terminology such as "may," "will," "should," "expects," "plans," "anticipates," "believes," "estimates," "predicts," "potential," or "continue," or the negative of such terms or comparable terms. These statements are only predictions and actual results could differ materially from those anticipated in these statements based upon a number of factors including those identified in the company's filings with the SEC.


News Article | March 2, 2017
Site: www.businesswire.com

BAAR, Switzerland--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Veeam® Software, the innovative provider of solutions that deliver Availability for the Always-On Enterprise™, has expanded its work with Cisco by launching the direct snapshot integration with the Cisco HyperFlex hyperconverged infrastructure (HCI) platform. The integration of Veeam Availability Suite™ with the software-defined networking and computing power of Cisco UCS with the Cisco HyperFlex HX Data Platform is designed to deliver simplicity and enhance efficiency in the modern hybrid cloud era, with Veeam enabling enterprises to reduce backup and recovery times and improve overall operational performance. It is increasingly understood that digital transformation is a critical imperative for enterprises worldwide, irrespective of size or vertical market. Organizations that fail to create value, growth and competitive advantage through new digital offerings and business models risk major consequences including long-term business irrelevance. At the heart of this transformation is the hybrid cloud. IDC forecasts that public IT cloud services revenue will exceed $203.4 billion by 2020, recording a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 21.5 percent — almost seven times the rate of overall IT market growth.1 In 2019, public IT cloud services will drive a fifth of the $716 billion aggregate revenue generated by the need for applications, development and deployment tools, infrastructure software, storage, and servers. By 2018, more than half of enterprises' IT infrastructure and software investments will be cloud based (private and public), reaching 60 to 70 percent of IT spend by 2020. Organizations are now reassessing their data centers and embracing a hybrid cloud strategy to meet the challenge of digital transformation. However, maintaining Availability across a hybrid cloud environment is not easy. Which is why today’s news, seeing Veeam operate deeper on the Cisco HyperFlex platform, means businesses can realize not only the increased efficiency and adaptability benefits of Cisco HyperFlex and the computing power of Cisco UCS, but with the integration of Veeam, ensure data remains available 24.7.365 across a multi-cloud environment. “Reducing recovery time for data and applications is paramount for businesses, that’s why today’s announcement is so important for the market,” said Peter McKay, President and Chief Operating Officer, Veeam. "By combining Veeam’s proven Availability solutions with Cisco’s next-generation HyperFlex platform, we can offer customers unmatched data and application availability. This means a business can realize its investment in IT, without the production downtime that stifles its ability to execute and deliver innovative products and services to customers.” Today’s news builds on a successful collaboration between Veeam and Cisco, which began in 2013 with joint solutions based on Cisco UCS server technology and Veeam Availability Suite. Now, as businesses place more critical data and systems online to reap the benefits of digital transformation and utilize data to make better, more informed business decisions, management of that data has become more critical. “Digital transformation is driving explosive growth for Cisco HyperFlex,” said Kaustubh Das, Cisco VP, Product Management, Storage. “Veeam’s data protection solution is now deeply integrated with HyperFlex. This integration helps our customers realize the full potential of a next-gen, hyperconverged infrastructure while allowing for rapid business adaptability, minimizing risk, and decreasing downtime for today’s 24.7.365 operations.” Veeam’s direct integration with Cisco HyperFlex will be available globally in Q2 CY2017. “Enterprises leveraging Cisco Hyperflex got a nice win today with the announcement that Veeam can now do direct snapshots of their infrastructure,” said Dan Thompson, Senior Analyst, 451 Research. “With this new, tighter integration, backups take place lower in stack, freeing up resources and saving precious time in those ever-shrinking windows. This improvement brings with it the possibility of a shorter RPO (recovery point objective), which gives organizations more options within their backup and disaster recovery plans.” “Veeam has enjoyed a long-standing relationship with Cisco, and I am delighted that we are further deepening this relationship with native snapshot integration for Cisco HyperFlex,” said Andy Vandeveld, VP of Alliances at Veeam. “This is another example of Veeam working tightly with best of breed storage and server vendors to deliver greater performance to ensure data availability. Customers have made it clear they want us to partner with the major storage and server vendors to deliver flexible solutions that work and meet their growing demands for Availability. That’s what we’ve done here. Cisco’s HyperFlex offers a significant differentiation for customers looking to scale storage and compute capacity. Now those same customers can benefit from our new direct integration, which delivers market-leading Availability.” “Akris is an international fashion brand with store locations worldwide,” said Thomas Kaeser, CIO, Akris, a leading fashion retailer based in Switzerland. “When we needed a flexible, scalable and secure infrastructure to support our operations we chose, together with our partner Ceruno AG, Cisco HyperFlex and Veeam Availability Suite. Now with deep snapshot integration with HyperFlex, our backups and recoveries will be even faster helping us deliver 24x7 operations.” “Betta Pharmaceuticals Co., Ltd. is undergoing dramatic growth, and the variety of applications used is rapidly increasing. Traditional backup solutions are not scalable and hence are not able to meet the growing needs of the business,” said Chao WANG, IT Manager at Betta Pharmaceuticals Co., Ltd., a high-tech pharmaceutical firm in China. “Veeam’s integration with Cisco HyperFlex solution is highly flexible, scalable and easy to implement. The Veeam snapshot integration makes backups much faster so there is less impact to the production workloads (VMs) when the backups are taken. It only requires the addition of nodes to increase performance and capacity, reducing total cost of ownership (TCO) which meets the demands of our growing business, and showcases the development trend of industries.” “Our goal is to help customers take full advantage of technology and our customers are looking to us to provide them guidance as they navigate the digital transformation,” said Costa Diamandis, Uplinx Advanced Services, a business partner based in Perth, Australia. “Cisco HyperFlex based on UCS servers and Veeam combine to help us fulfill that promise by offering best in class hyperconverged and availability solutions.” Veeam® recognizes the new challenges companies across the globe face in enabling the Always-On Enterprise™, a business that must operate 24.7.365. To address this, Veeam has pioneered a new market of Availability for the Always-On Enterprise™ by helping organizations meet recovery time and point objectives (RTPO™) of less than 15 minutes for all applications and data, through a fundamentally new kind of solution that delivers high-speed recovery, data loss avoidance, verified recoverability, leveraged data and complete visibility. Veeam Availability Suite™, which includes Veeam Backup & Replication™, leverages virtualization, storage, and cloud technologies that enable the modern data center to help organizations save time, mitigate risks, and dramatically reduce capital and operational costs, while always supporting the current and future business goals of Veeam customers. Founded in 2006, Veeam currently has 45,000 ProPartners and more than 230,000 customers worldwide. Veeam's global headquarters are located in Baar, Switzerland, and the company has offices throughout the world. To learn more, visit https://www.veeam.com. Cisco and the Cisco logo are trademarks or registered trademarks of Cisco and/or its affiliates in the U.S. and other countries. A listing of Cisco's trademarks can be found at www.cisco.com/go/trademarks.


Employees and volunteers help feed the hungry using virtual desktops powered by Cisco HyperFlex City Harvest, which rescues surplus food from grocers, farms, restaurants, and manufacturers and distributes it free of charge to New York City food pantries, soup kitchens and other community food programs, looks to utilize cutting-edge technology to better serve its community partners. City Harvest recently selected Cisco HyperFlex System to host virtual desktops and enhance operations. As City Harvest continues to expand its anti-hunger programming, creating a secure environment is a key consideration, and virtual desktop infrastructure was chosen because of its ability to isolate the environment. After researching several converged and hyperconverged infrastructure solutions to host virtual desktops, City Harvest selected the Cisco® HyperFlex System, which allows the organization to create hundreds of virtual desktops in minutes and easily add additional processing power using Cisco UCS® blades. In addition, troubleshooting and support are handled with a single call to Cisco to resolves any issue: servers, networking, or storage. City Harvest was one of the first nonprofits in the United States to adopt this new technology. "Information technology plays an important role in City Harvest's food rescue and delivery operations," says James Safonov, head of Technology and Information Security for City Harvest. "Consider the intricate planning required to schedule 22 trucks averaging 360 food pickups and deliveries a day. We've developed smart algorithms that update truck routes and delivery instructions in real time based on storage space, preferred delivery days and types of food, and the specific food items we have available." Flexibility for Employees and Volunteers Cisco HyperFlex and the Cisco Nexus switches were up and running in just one day, and the City Harvest IT team built hundreds of virtual desktops in minutes. Employees and volunteers can now log in to their personal virtual desktops from anywhere. "With other options, we would have had to replace our existing platform to support VDI, but with Cisco we could blend UCS and HyperFlex technology into a hybrid data center environment and continue using our older storage technology," said Safonov. Increased Efficiency The new thin clients cost 75 percent less than new desktop computers, and City Harvest no longer needs to keep spare computers in inventory. If a virtual desktop develops problems, the organization can now build a new one in less than a minute. City Harvest also chose Cisco Unified Computing System™ (UCS) to run its business applications: by moving 100 virtual machines from traditional servers to Cisco UCS, they eliminated an entire rack. Scaling to Do More Food insecurity -- the lack of access to adequate, nutritious food -- remains persistently high in New York City. "Cisco HyperFlex gives us the opportunity to scale as City Harvest grows to feed more people," said Safonov. "Cisco HyperFlex and Cisco UCS help make our truck routes more efficient and more securely run our desktops and our applications." In addition to Cisco UCS and HyperFlex, City Harvest utilizes Cisco UCS Manager, Cisco ASA 5500 Series Firewall with FirePOWER Services, Cisco Umbrella for Security, Cisco Meraki Wireless Solution, Cisco Unified Communications Manager, and Cisco WebEx. Additional Resources Learn more about: City Harvest Read: City Harvest Case Study View video: Cisco HyperFlex Learn more about: Cisco HyperFlex System Learn more about: Cisco HyperFlex at Cisco Live Berlin Learn more about: Cisco UCS Learn more about: Cisco Data Center and Virtualization About Cisco Cisco ( : CSCO) is the worldwide technology leader that has been making the Internet work since 1984. Our people, products, and partners help society securely connect and seize tomorrow's digital opportunity today. Discover more at thenetwork.cisco.com and follow us on Twitter at @Cisco. About City Harvest City Harvest pioneered food rescue in 1982 and, this year, will collect 55 million pounds of excess food to help feed the nearly 1.4 million New Yorkers struggling to put meals on their tables. Through relationships with farms, grocers, restaurants, and manufacturers, City Harvest collects nutritious food that would otherwise go to waste and delivers it free of charge to 500 soup kitchens, food pantries and other community food programs across the five boroughs. In addition to helping meet the immediate need for food, City Harvest developed long-term Healthy Neighborhoods programs which partner with low-income communities to increase access to fresh produce and help residents shop for and cook nutritious, budget-conscious meals. To learn more about food rescue, Healthy Neighborhoods and fighting hunger in New York City, visit cityharvest.org. Cisco and the Cisco logo are trademarks or registered trademarks of Cisco and/or its affiliates in the U.S. and other countries. A listing of Cisco's trademarks can be found at www.cisco.com/go/trademarks. Third-party trademarks mentioned are the property of their respective owners. The use of the word partner does not imply a partnership relationship between Cisco and any other company. Availability Disclaimer: Many of the products and features described herein remain in varying stages of development and will be offered on a when-and-if-available basis. This products and features are subject to change at the sole discretion of Cisco, and Cisco will have no liability for delay in the delivery or failure to deliver any of the products or features set forth in this document.


News Article | February 16, 2017
Site: grist.org

This story was originally published by the New Republic and is reproduced here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration. Later this week, the Senate is expected to hand over control of the Environmental Protection Agency to environmentalists’ worst nightmare. Scott Pruitt, the Oklahoma attorney general, has spent his career waging legal battles against clean air, climate, and water regulations. He has sued the EPA more than a dozen times, participating in what The New York Times described as “an unprecedented, secretive alliance” with fossil fuel companies to fight Obama-era environmental regulations. He has helped collect millions in political donations from the very industries he will be tasked with regulating. He’s called climate science a “religious belief,” and his official biography even boasts that he’s “a leading advocate against the EPA’s activist agenda.” Given all this, liberals ought to be as furious about Pruitt as they were about Education Secretary Betsy DeVos and Attorney General Jeff Sessions, two other cabinet picks whose expressed ideologies are at odds with agencies they were chosen to head. (DeVos, who is in charge of America’s public education system, is best-known for her support of private school vouchers; Sessions, whose job it is to protect Americans’ civil rights, has spent much of his career disenfranchising voters in the name of non-existent voter fraud.) And yet, in terms of public interest and outrage, Pruitt has not risen to the level of his controversial cabinet colleagues. This observation is apparent to anyone who regularly consumes political news, and Google Trends backs it up. Pruitt spiked only once, on Dec. 8, when President Donald Trump announced his nomination: Pruitt didn’t even spike on Jan. 18, the day he testified before the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works. Perhaps this is because he survived the hearing largely unscathed. Contra Trump, he acknowledged that climate change was not a hoax, though he did question the degree of humans’ responsibility for it. Or perhaps his hearing got little attention because, in a hearing a day earlier, DeVos made her infamous remark about schools needing guns as protection from grizzly bears. Environmental advocates lament the lack of DeVos-scale opposition to Pruitt. Ken Kimmel, president of the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS), said his organization and others have made opposition to Pruitt’s nomination a top priority over the last few months. “It’s certainly not for lack of issues, or lack of trying,” he said. “There’s been press releases, TV ads, letters to the editor … We’ve been doing outreach to a targeted group of Republican senators in the hopes that we can turn this around.” The failure of this campaign to gain traction could be related to a longstanding challenge that green groups face on a national scale: how to make climate change a personal matter. While some Americans do live in areas directly impacted by sea-level rise and other climate-related maladies, “most people go through their whole lives never having any interaction with the Environmental Protection Agency,” said John Coequyt, director of Sierra Club’s climate campaign. That, along with a Trump-saturated news media environment, is why anti-Pruitt messaging has struggled to break through, Coequyt says: “People want a strong EPA, but they don’t know about it the way that they know about the Department of Justice and their childrens’ schools.” Thus, climate change is perceived as a less immediate issue than DeVos’s threat to their kids’ education or Sessions’ threat to their voting rights. UCS’s Kimmel disagreed with that premise and instead criticized the press — particularly what he described as a lack of media attention on Pruitt’s close relationship with the fossil fuel industry. He cited dismal coverage of a pending court case against Pruitt that seeks more than 3,000 emails between Pruitt’s office and numerous fossil fuel companies and conservative groups. Those emails were requested by the liberal watchdog group Center for Media and Democracy (CMD) two years ago. Pruitt’s office has only provided 411 of those 3,000 emails, and has not yet explained why. CMD Research Director Nick Surgey, who filed the lawsuit against Pruitt and has been tracking his fossil fuel industry ties for more than two years, said he’s seen “a tripling” of media interest in the email controversy over the last week. But otherwise, he’s been disappointed in the reaction to Pruitt’s nomination. “I don’t think it has been covered adequately,” he said. But that’s not necessarily the media’s fault, he added. Pruitt has “effectively closed the door” on information about his ties to the industry by refusing to comply with CMD’s and others’ records requests, and failing to answer questions from the media over the course of the nomination process. “So even though that tells a story of a person who doesn’t want to talk about that record — and that should tell reporters something — he has really starved the media from having oxygen on this,” Surgey said. “It’s pretty concerning to have someone who would basically be the world’s top environmental regulator who doesn’t want to talk about the relationship he’s had to an industry he’d regulate.”


News Article | February 15, 2017
Site: www.eurekalert.org

Dr. Kurt Gottfried, a recognized leader in the scientific community on missile defense and nuclear terrorism, has been awarded the 2016 Scientific Freedom and Responsibility Award from the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). Dr. Gottfried, currently a professor emeritus of physics at Cornell University, was honored by AAAS "for his long and distinguished career as a 'civic scientist,' through his advocacy for arms control, human rights, and integrity in the use of science in public policy making." In 1969, Dr. Gottfried helped to found the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS), acting on his concerns about the militarization of scientific research and the Vietnam War. He was among the first to publicly raise concerns about missile defense strategies, AAAS noted, developing a draft treaty to ban space weapons and presenting it to the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee. The UCS grew to include concerned citizens, as well as scientists, and expanded its work to address environmental issues. The organization began a petition to urge government support of the Kyoto Protocols. Nobel Prize-winning scientist Dr. Harold Varmus has said that the UCS "has set a high standard in fearlessly providing reliable, if often controversial, advice to the public and government." Dr. Gottfried has also worked as a human rights advocate, traveling to the Soviet Union during the Cold War to meet with dissidents. He served on the executive committee of Scientists for Andrei Sakharov, Yuri Orlov and Natan Sharansky. Dr. Gottfried later helped Orlov find employment as a professor at Cornell, after Orlov's release from prison. Dr. Gottfried co-founded American Physical Society's Committee on International Freedom of Scientists, and served as its first chair. Dr. Gottfried was also dedicated to alerting the public when the government distorted science for political goals. AAAS noted that while he understood that scientific information is seldom the only consideration in government decision-making, he spoke out when those decisions were not scientifically sound. He recruited 62 preeminent scientists to help draft and release a statement titled "Restoring Scientific Integrity in Policy Making" in February 2004. The document charged President George W. Bush's administration with "[manipulating] the process through which science enters into its decisions." One of the signatories of that statement was Dr. Neal Lane, Senior Fellow at Rice University's Baker Institute for Public Policy, who nominated Dr. Gottfried for the Scientific Freedom and Responsibility Award. Dr. Lane previously served as assistant to the president for science and technology during the Clinton administration, and director of the National Science Foundation. In his nomination letter, Dr. Lane described Dr. Gottfried is "richly deserving of this prestigious award," and wrote that he "has encouraged fellow scientists to become involved in public policy, speak out on issues at the interface of science, technology and society, and hold governments accountable." Dr. Lane concluded his letter by writing that Dr. Gottfried "is an icon for what many of us have come to call the 'civic scientist.'" Dr. Gottfried completed his undergraduate degree in Engineering Physics at McGill University in Montreal, QBC, Canada in 1951, and his Ph.D. in theoretical physics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 1955. He has served as a physics professor at Cornell University since 1964. AAAS also noted that Dr. Gottfried has served on the senior staff of the European Center for Nuclear Research. The AAAS Scientific Freedom and Responsibility Award was established in 1980. The award honors scientists, engineers or their organizations whose exemplary actions have served to foster scientific freedom and responsibility. Such achievements can include acting to protect the public's health, safety or welfare; focusing public attention on important issues related to scientific research, education, and public policy by their responsible participation in public debates; or establishing important new precedents in carrying out the social responsibilities or in defending the professional freedom of scientists and engineers. The award includes a $5,000 prize and a commemorative plaque. The AAAS Scientific Freedom and Responsibility Award will be bestowed upon Dr. Gottfried during the 183rd AAAS Annual Meeting in Boston, Mass., February 16-20, 2017. The AAAS Awards Ceremony and Reception will be held at 6:30 p.m. on Friday, February 17, in the Republic Ballroom of the Sheraton Boston Hotel. The American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) is the world's largest general scientific society and publisher of the journal Science as well as Science Translational Medicine, Science Signaling, a digital, open-access journal, Science Advances, Science Immunology, and Science Robotics. AAAS was founded in 1848 and includes nearly 250 affiliated societies and academies of science, serving 10 million individuals. Science has the largest paid circulation of any peer-reviewed general science journal in the world. The non-profit AAAS is open to all and fulfills its mission to "advance science and serve society" through initiatives in science policy, international programs, science education, public engagement, and more. For the latest research news, log onto EurekAlert!, the premier science-news Web site, a service of AAAS. See http://www. . For more information on AAAS awards, see http://www. .


News Article | February 15, 2017
Site: www.marketwired.com

Scalable integrated system delivers Azure compatible infrastructure to customers' on-premises data center for unmatched performance, scalability, and security SAN JOSE, CA--(Marketwired - Feb 9, 2017) - Cisco ( : CSCO) today announced it is expanding its Cisco Unified Computing System™ (Cisco UCS®) Solutions portfolio by offering Microsoft Azure Stack on Cisco® UCS via an integrated, validated system that enables organizations to deliver Microsoft Azure services from their on-premises data center. The joint Cisco and Microsoft solution provides the tools for enterprises to grow and modernize their applications in a highly flexible and scalable hybrid cloud environment. As businesses evolve in response to changing market dynamics, they look for a simple-to-manage hybrid cloud solution that is intelligent and flexible enough to optimize resources and scale on demand, while retaining on-premises benefits. Through Azure Stack, customers receive a solution providing full control over how they manage governance, security, and performance through the combination of Microsoft's robust Azure cloud platform with the industry-leading Cisco UCS into an integrated system designed specifically for cloud workloads. Accelerate Business Growth With UCS and Azure Stack "Cisco and Microsoft are coming together to offer a hybrid cloud solution built on the power of UCS and Microsoft Azure," said Liz Centoni, senior vice president and general manager, Computing Systems Product Group, Cisco. "Through our joint engineering efforts, application developers and IT managers will have a turnkey solution that is easy to deploy, manage and scale." "Microsoft and Cisco are proven innovators and trusted technology partners, giving customers the confidence their IT environments can be supported and secure. Microsoft Azure Stack provides services and application programming interfaces (APIs) compatible with the Azure public cloud, allowing developers to do their best work while giving them the agility to deploy their applications to public, private or hosted clouds," said Mike Neil, corporate vice president, Azure Infrastructure & Management, Microsoft Corporation. The Cisco Integrated System for Azure Stack reinforces Cisco's complete approach to cloud, offering customers the freedom to choose the best environments and consumption models for their traditional and cloud native applications. Availability Cisco Integrated System for Azure Stack is targeted for availability in Q3-Q4 2017. About Cisco Cisco ( : CSCO) is the worldwide technology leader that has been making the Internet work since 1984. Our people, products, and partners help society securely connect and seize tomorrow's digital opportunity today. Discover more at newsroom.cisco.com and follow us on Twitter at @Cisco. Cisco, the Cisco logo, Cisco Systems and Cisco IOS are registered trademarks or trademarks of Cisco Systems, Inc. and/or its affiliates in the United States and certain other countries. All other trademarks mentioned in this document are the property of their respective owners. The use of the word partner does not imply a partnership relationship between Cisco and any other company. This document is Cisco Public Information.


News Article | February 24, 2017
Site: www.theenergycollective.com

The looming insolvency of Toshiba has set off a chain reaction of events that threatens the existence of nuclear power in the West: The Japanese and French governments will be compelled to act for economic reasons — their nuclear industries are too important to their economies to fail. The Japanese government has always played a strong role in shaping the direction of its industries, including nuclear, while the French nuclear industry is entirely government-controlled. Even though it lacks its own nuclear industry, Britain is emerging as the strongest of the three nations because it has a significant number of planned nuclear plants that involve Japanese and French companies, and is a big player in a buyer’s market. The new Conservative government of Theresa May has expressed more interest in industrial policy than prior Conservative governments, and has already begun talks with the Japanese government about the UK government coming in as an investor on two of its planned plants. The question is whether anyone in the three governments will have the vision and strength to make the right choices. The right choices will be the most difficult ones because they will require standing up first to the nuclear industry and next to ideologues on the Left and the Right. But crises bring opportunities and there are large ones for reformers within the industry and within governments to do what should have been done 40 years ago: standardize designs, reorganize and consolidate the industry, and implement a vision to scale up plants while bringing down costs. But before doing any of that, policymakers and the public must understand why Toshiba and Areva failed. “Everything you described in your article was true for nuclear plants built in the 1970s,” an industry veteran told me. In my investigation, I described how Toshiba’s Westinghouse AP1000 design was radically new — it had never been tested and indeed wasn’t even complete before construction began. And yet when it came time to build two of them in Georgia and South Carolina, all parties were afflicted with a kind of historical amnesia. “No one involved seemed to fully appreciate just how difficult it would be to build new reactors, especially the AP1000 — a ‘first of a kind’ design,” reports the Financial Times. It’s not unusual for big construction and manufacturing projects to go over time and budget. Consider the San Francisco Bay Bridge. After an earthquake in 1989 caused part of it to collapse, California officials decided to replace the entire eastern span. Construction started in 2002 and was supposed to cost $1.5 billion. The project was afflicted with challenges. In 2009, steel rods flew off the span and hit at least two cars. Faulty bolts were discovered. The problems delayed the opening by four years and cost $6.4 billion — four times more than what had been estimated. Or consider the Boeing “Dreamliner” jet aircraft. The FOAK arrived three years late, in 2011. Immediately things went awry. Engines failed along with fuel pumps, computers and wings. Lithium batteries caught on fire. The problems were so bad that the Japanese government launched its own investigation. Now consider that building a nuclear plant isn’t like building a bridge or a jet plane — it’s like building a bridge and a jet plane at the same time. Except it’s not. It’s much harder than that. The reason has to do with scale. Where Boeing is making 10 aircraft per month — allowing everyone involved to become more efficient and produce planes faster — it takes nuclear plant construction companies up to 10 years to build one plant. Boeing knows the importance of standardization. The company is losing money on every Dreamliner it makes, and says it hopes to make money after selling 1,100 of them. Thus, when faced with a rash of problems in 2012, Boeing didn’t give up on the Dreamliner design — it fixed the problems. The response from the nuclear industry to such problems would have been to invent yet another nuclear plant design complete with promises of greater safety and lower cost. And yet what makes nuclear plants safer and cheaper to build and operate is experience, not new designs. What the constant switching of designs does is deprive the people who build, operate and regulate nuclear plants of the experience they need to become more efficient. Why then does the industry keep doing it? To some extent, the 40-year obsession with innovative new designs is a consequence of an industry dominated by the engineers — the project architects — rather than by the construction firms. But Boeing and Airbus are companies headed by engineers who don’t make the nuclear industry’s mistakes. Why? The answer in part is that Boeing doesn’t have to deal with a powerful, $500 million annual lobby that does everything it can to deliberately make nuclear expensive. NRDC, Sierra Club, Greenpeace, UCS, and myriad state and local groups have spent 50 years frightening the public with pseudo-science, suing utilities, subsidizing the competition, and winning regulations that do nothing for plant safety. On the one hand, the nuclear industry responded brilliantly to these attacks. After the anti-nuclear movement landed a decisive blow against the industry in 1979, with the meltdown at Three Mile Island book-ended by the release of the hysterical film “China Syndrome” and “No Nukes” concerts, the industry got its act together. Over the next 30 years the industry worked diligently to better train its workers and create a culture of safety that resulted in an extraordinary rise in plant efficiency from about 50 percent to over 90 percent today. But the industry also responded by creating new and untested designs: Westinghouse’s AP1000 and Areva’s EPR. The problem of serial design-switching is compounded by the vanishingly small number of nuclear plants being built. Just 60 plants total are currently under construction — most of different designs. The Koreans, by contrast, prioritized efficient construction over innovative new designs, and are now leading the global competition to build new nuclear plants. 3. Too much focus on machines, too little on human beings Areva, Toshiba-Westinghouse and others claimed their new designs would be safer and thus, at least eventually, cheaper, but there were always strong reasons to doubt such claims. First, what is proven to make nuclear plants safer is experience, not new designs. Human factors swamp design. The same is true of aircrafts. What made air travel safe was many decades of training and experience by pilots, air traffic controllers, and regulators — not radically different jet plane designs. In fact, new designs risk depriving managers and workers of the experience they need to operate plants more safely, just as it deprives construction companies of the experience they need to build plants more rapidly. While Boeing has touted the Dreamliner as a kind of breakthrough, it was an incremental improvement on the same jet planes we’ve been flying on since the 1950s, and did little to change the procedures of pilots and flight attendants. To be sure, continuous improvement of jet plane technologies has contributed to making flying safer than ever. But the key factors were executive-level commitment to risk reduction, a company-wide safety culture, better emergency trainings, inspections and accident investigations. Second, how do you make a technology that almost never harms anybody any safer than it already is? Fossil fuels operating normally kill far more people than nuclear plants do when they malfunction. And given such tiny health impacts, it’s simply not clear that making plants any safer is actually possible. Long time horizons and small sample sizes will likely make it impossible to ever know — scientifically — that newer plant designs are safer. Advocates of new designs, including the EPR and AP1000, will acknowledge this point, but point to their enhanced safety, such as the EPR’s double containment dome, the AP1000’s back-up water system, or meltdown-proof fuel-coolant mixtures. But the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has already ruled that all new nuclear plants will be subject to the Aircraft Rule. And containment domes are not as large of an expense as is sometimes suggested. A 2012 Black and Veatch study estimated that for the AP1000 the reactor island was just 13 percent of total plant costs. And the reactor island’s actual share of costs would be lower given the $10 billion in cost overruns of the two US AP1000s. The key takeaway from the Toshiba and Areva debacles is that the cost overruns due to construction delays from building a highly regulated FOAK nuclear plant swamp any savings from modestly smaller amounts of necessary equipment. Finally, the overwhelming amount of harm caused by accidents are due to fear and panic, not radiation exposure. What made Three Mile Island, Chernobyl and Fukushima the three worst nuclear accidents wasn’t the radiation released. The fire at an innovative gas-cooled reactor in Windscale, England, in 1957, and the partial meltdown of a sodium-cooled reactor near Detroit in 1966, were both far worse than Three Mile Island. What made the more famous accidents harmful was how local and federal governments panicked and triggered dangerous over-evacuations. What they should have done was told local residents to simply “shelter in place” — as is done for things like tornadoes — until the accident was dealt with. Contrast that to the handling of jet plane accidents. PASSENGERS ON SULLY’S FLIGHT BRACE FOR IMPACT BY SHELTERING IN PLACE. In the recent film “Sully,” based on a real event, an Airbus 320 loses both of its engines to bird strikes in just five minutes. With all power gone, the pilot has seconds to act. Can he make it back to La Guardia airport in New York? Or should he attempt a water landing in the Hudson river? Captain Sully chooses the latter. He tersely announces, “Brace for impact,” at which point the flight attendants in unison begin a kind of creepy, hypnotic chant: “Brace! Brace! Heads down! Stay down! Brace! Brace!…” The passengers comply. They are frightened, and some scream, but they stay seated. They tuck their heads and some put hands on the seat in front of them. In other words, they shelter in place. Only two companies make large-bodied jet planes: Boeing and Airbus. Large, complicated projects like building a jet plane or a nuclear plant require very large, upfront investments that only large, well-capitalized entities can back — like an electric utility, or Boeing, which invested $32 billion making the Dreamliner. If nuclear is going to survive in the West, it needs a single, large firm — the equivalent of a Boeing or Airbus — to compete against the Koreans, Chinese and Russians. There will never be as many nuclear plants as jet planes, especially not during a time of low overall demand for electricity. As such, economies of scale must be achieved more rapidly. One of the keys is making both construction and operation as efficient as possible. Many of the big global nuclear players offer to build and operate the plants. That’s what the Korean company, KEPCO,  has done in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). The four-reactor nuclear plant KEPCO is building in the UAE is on-time and appears to be on-budget. In January, the UAE awarded KEPCIO with a 60-year, near-$50 billion contract to operate and maintain the plants it built. I was told by someone in the industry that KEPCO treated the construction part of the work as a loss-leader in order to get the more lucrative operation, maintenance and refueling contract — and perhaps to advertise its construction prowess to other nations. The Airbus of nuclear should be run by someone with significant experience in nuclear plant construction — since that’s where the cost savings (and overruns) come from — not engineering. To some extent, consolidation is already happening. In 2006, Toshiba bought Westinghouse and Mitsubishi partnered with Areva, while in 2007, Hitachi partnered with the GE nuclear division. Toshiba recently bought the construction firm hired to build the AP-1000 Vogtle plant, but with the latter deal, the consolidation came too late. It was done in response to, not in anticipation of, future construction and manufacturing delays. Of course, consolidation on its own is not enough, as Areva learned. There must also be standardization, scaling and social acceptance. Consolidation is essential to achieve the repetitions required for cost reductions. And a planned scaling-up of nuclear is the key to achieving those repetitions. First, the new Boeing or Airbus of nuclear should build a single design. Standard-setting is a traditional role of government, and in the past has been a huge aid in helping industries consolidate, grow and achieve continuous improvement. The UK has key role to play here. It should scrap all existing plans and create a new one from a blank piece of paper. All new UK nuclear plants should be of the same design. Second, the criteria for choosing the design should emphasize experience in construction and operation, since that is the key factor for lowering costs. Reprocessing waste should be off the table. It is unnecessary and adds to the costs. Some emphasis should also be on mass-manufacturing modules, something the Koreans are also pursuing. But what both Toshiba and Areva failures underscore is that all new nuclear plants, however much they are going to be manufactured, are going to require construction according to the exacting standards of strict regulators, and it was that kind of construction that helped destroy not just one but two of the world’s largest nuclear companies. Third, the plants should be constructed sequentially so that managers and workers in Airbus Nuclear can learn from experience. Fourth, the firm should have strong financial incentives for reducing costs. Fifth, the program should include a significant increase in funding to test alternative reactors. The record here is clear: governments only invest significantly in demonstrating new nuclear reactor types when their nations are building new nuclear plants. And with good reason: people believe there is a future for nuclear. It works the same way in reverse. Long before they had achieved their goal of shutting down existing plants, anti-nuclear activists avidly sought to cut funding for nuclear innovation. They won a big victory in 1982 when Congress cut funding for the Clinch River fuel processing project. And they won another in 1993 when Congress cut funding for the integral fast reactor. Funding for the experimental molten salt reactor developed at Oak Ridge in the late 1960s was cut before it could ever become a test reactor. The U.S. Atomic Energy Commission estimated that building one would cost $10 billion (in 2016 dollars), and noted that past tests usually cost twice what had been estimated. A long-term, global build-out of standardized nuclear plants is the only way in which states will invest the billions needed to test radically different designs. What’s behind the crisis facing nuclear generally and Toshiba in particular is the utter lack of certainty about any future nuclear plant builds — including those under construction. Nations must work together to develop a long-term plan for new nuclear plant construction to achieve economies of scale. Such a plan would allow for certainty, learning-by-doing, cost declines and lower financing costs. Risk and rewards should be pooled. Cost savings achieved through experience should be shared along with the cost overruns of the first few plants. Governments should invest directly or provide low-cost loans. While this will inevitably be decried by anti-nuclear groups, the truth is that the U.S. and Europe have been subsidizing wind and solar for decades. In Illinois and California, subsidies for wind and solar have played a key role in threatening nuclear plants with premature closure, undermining clean air and climate goals. Some basic fairness is in order. This starts with investment and financing as well as support for nuclear plants at risk of premature closure due to our discriminatory subsidy regime. Others might wonder why nuclear energy should be supported when Boeing and Airbus flourished without government help. But the truth is that they didn’t: last year the World Trade Organization says Boeing and Airbus received billions in government subsidies — up to $22 billion worth for Airbus alone. UK Labor leaders have already called for direct government investment to save the plants: “The delay we’re seeing under the Tories is leaving thousands of nuclear workers uncertain about their future,” the shadow Labor secretary said on Wednesday. “Public investment in nuclear energy would bring huge benefits through the nuclear supply chain and energy security.” Plus, financing is the key to opening up the global market — something that is in the entire industry’s interest. Vietnam recently cancelled plans to build nuclear plants and is now planning to build coal plants instead. Someone close to the situation told me that had foreign nations financed the nuclear plants, they would have gone forward. And the quantities of financing — not development aid — are trivial considering the potential benefits to nuclear supplier nations, especially when the financing is spread out over 30 years and is shared by UK, Japan, France and the United States. And such financing would offer a decisive advantage to the Airbus of nuclear over its competitors, allowing it to win contracts and provide the certainty everyone in the industry needs. For such an effort to work, it would need widespread support that lasts for many decades. That will require that national governments work together to increase public demand and social acceptance of nuclear. Toshiba and Areva show that declining social acceptance drives demand for unnecessary regulations, as well as the industry’s constant changing of designs. Japan’s nuclear industry cannot survive so long as public opposition is preventing the restarting of shuttered nuclear plants. The Japanese government and industry leaders must overcome their shame and seek help from allied nations in overcoming the public’s continuing radiophobia in response to Fukushima. What’s needed is an independent, serious and sustained effort by health and medical professionals to help Japanese and other publics to overcome fears based on grossly unscientific information. France, Canada and most recently Vietnam all show that this can be done. And as an analogy, there is much more to be learned from efforts to increase support for vaccinations among skittish parents. There is an aggressive and effective effort to educate the public about vaccines that, for the most part, still works. In response to a recent measles outbreaks, for example, California started requiring students be vaccinated to attend public schools. If millions of parents will inject their children with the polio virus because they understand that it is a weakened version of the one that cripples and kills, they are capable of understanding that nuclear plants are the safest and cleanest way to make electricity. The truth is that human beings around the world have been victimized by fake news about nuclear power since the late 1960s. When most people learn the basic facts about nuclear they become far more supportive of it. And yet neither governments nor industry have ever, in the 50 years of nuclear energy, made a serious effort to provide those facts. What that means is that there is enormous potential to touch hearts and change minds, just as many of ours were upon learning why nuclear is essential to mitigating climate change. The crisis that threatens the death of nuclear energy in the West also offers an opportunity for a new life. When you consider that the nuclear industry has for 40 years often done the exact opposite of what’s known to work, it’s a small miracle that nuclear is still 11 percent of global electricity, instead of zero. Everything that’s wrong — the proliferation of designs, the delay in project starts, efficient Korean competitors, low demand, low social acceptance — is something that can be made right. We can learn from the Koreans. We can standardize design. We can finance the necessary scale. We can go back to Vietnam with a better deal. And we can increase public acceptance. Policymakers have a special role to play. They must seek out reformers and change agents within an industry that is dominated by the same kind of thinking that led to today’s crisis. They must reach out to their counterparts in other nations. And they must stand up to ideologues peddling pseudo-science on the Left and pseudo-economics on the Right. Ultimately new leadership with a new vision and plan must emerge from within the nuclear industry. Toshiba has seen a succession of leaders pitching what is fundamentally the same approach. It’s not clear that Areva has yet learned the lessons from its EPR debacle, or whether anyone has really started to clean house. But, happily, Toshiba and Areva are not the only two companies capable of exercising the leadership required to save the world’s most important environmental technology from being consigned to the long-term waste repository of history.


News Article | March 2, 2017
Site: www.businesswire.com

SAN JOSE, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Nutanix, Inc. (NASDAQ:NTNX), a leader in enterprise cloud computing, today announced financial results for its second quarter of fiscal 2017, ended January 31, 2017. Reconciliations between GAAP and non-GAAP financial measures and key performance measures are provided in the tables of this press release. “ Our journey has taken us from an unknown upstart to a well-established enterprise IT brand approaching a $1 billion annualized billings run-rate in just five years of selling. We continue to evolve and refine our strategy, including product expansions, sales focus and alternate consumption models, as we seek to capture a growing share of the highly dynamic $100+ billion enterprise infrastructure market,” said Dheeraj Pandey, CEO, Nutanix. “ Our solid results were driven by notable strength in our international business. Further, I am pleased we were able to hold our non-GAAP gross margins essentially steady despite component price increases impacting our costs,” said Duston Williams, CFO, Nutanix. For the third quarter of fiscal 2017, Nutanix expects: Supplementary materials to this earnings release, including the company’s second quarter fiscal 2017 investor presentation, can be found at http://ir.nutanix.com/company/financial/. All forward-looking non-GAAP financial measures contained in this section titled "Q3 Fiscal 2017 Financial Outlook" exclude stock-based compensation expense, and may also exclude, as applicable, other special items. The company has not reconciled guidance for non-GAAP gross margin and non-GAAP loss per share to their most directly comparable GAAP measures because such items that impact these measures are not within its control and are subject to constant change. While the actual amounts of such items will have a significant impact on the company’s non-GAAP gross margin and non-GAAP loss per share, a reconciliation of the non-GAAP financial measure guidance to the corresponding GAAP measures is not available without unreasonable effort. Nutanix executives will discuss the company’s second quarter fiscal 2017 financial results on a conference call at 5:00 p.m. Eastern time/2:00 p.m. Pacific time today. To listen to the call via telephone, dial 1-877-201-0168 in the United States or 1-647-788-4901 from outside the United States. The conference ID is 59841448. This call is being webcast live and is available to all interested parties on our Investor Relations website at ir.nutanix.com. Shortly after the conclusion of the conference call, a replay of the audio webcast will be available on the Nutanix Investor Relations website. A telephonic replay will be available for one week following the conference call at 1-800-585-8367 or 1-416-621-4642, conference ID 59841448. Non-GAAP Financial Measures and Other Key Performance Measures To supplement our condensed consolidated financial statements, which are prepared and presented in accordance with GAAP, we use the following non-GAAP financial and other key performance measures: billings, non-GAAP gross margin percentage, non-GAAP net loss, pro forma non-GAAP net loss per share, and free cash flow. In computing these non-GAAP financial measures, we exclude certain items such as stock-based compensation and the related income tax impact, costs associated with our acquisitions (such as amortization of acquired intangible assets, revaluation of contingent consideration, income tax related impact, and other acquisition-related costs), loss on debt extinguishment, and changes in the fair value of our preferred stock warrant liability. Billings is a performance measure which our management believes provides useful information to investors because it represents the amounts under binding purchase orders received by us during a given period that have been billed, and we calculate billings by adding the change in deferred revenue between the start and end of the period to total revenue recognized in the same period. Free cash flow is a performance measure that our management believes provides useful information to management and investors about the amount of cash generated by the business after necessary capital expenditures, and we define free cash flow as net cash (used in) provided by operating activities less purchases of property and equipment. We use these non-GAAP financial and key performance measures for financial and operational decision-making and as a means to evaluate period-to-period comparisons. Our management believes that these non-GAAP financial measures provide meaningful supplemental information regarding our performance and liquidity by excluding certain expenses and expenditures such as stock-based compensation expense that may not be indicative of our ongoing core business operating results. However, these non-GAAP financial and key performance measures have limitations as analytical tools, and you should not consider them in isolation or as substitutes for analysis of our results as reported under GAAP. Billings, non-GAAP gross margin percentage, non-GAAP net loss, pro forma non-GAAP net loss per share, and free cash flow are not substitutes for total revenue, gross profit, net loss, net loss per share, or net cash (used in) provided by operating activities, respectively. In addition, other companies, including companies in our industry, may calculate non-GAAP financial measures and key performance measures differently or may use other measures to evaluate their performance, all of which could reduce the usefulness of our non-GAAP financial measures and key performance measures as tools for comparison. We urge you to review the reconciliation of our non-GAAP financial measures and key performance measures to the most directly comparable GAAP financial measures included below in the tables captioned “Reconciliation of Revenue to Billings,” “ Reconciliation of GAAP to Non-GAAP Profit Measures,” and “ Reconciliation of GAAP Net Cash (Used In) Provided By Operating Activities to Non-GAAP Free Cash Flow,” and not to rely on any single financial measure to evaluate our business. This press release contains express and implied forward-looking statements, including but not limited to statements relating to our competitive differentiation, our expectations relating to a contract awarded by the Navy Space and Naval Warfare Systems Command, including the execution and resulting value of any future orders under such contract, and anticipated future financial results, including but not limited to our annualized billings run rate, our guidance on estimated revenues, non-GAAP gross margin, and non-GAAP net loss per share for future fiscal periods. These forward-looking statements are not historical facts, and instead are based on our current expectations, estimates, opinions and beliefs. Consequently, you should not rely on these forward-looking statements. The accuracy of such forward-looking statements depends upon future events, and involves risks, uncertainties and other factors beyond our control that may cause these statements to be inaccurate and cause our actual results, performance or achievements to differ materially and adversely from those anticipated or implied by such statements, including, among others: the rapid evolution of the markets in which we compete; our ability to sustain or manage future growth effectively; factors that could result in the significant fluctuation of our future quarterly operating results, including, among other things, our revenue mix, the timing and magnitude of orders, shipments and acceptance of our solutions in any given quarter, our ability to attract new and retain existing end-customers, changes in the pricing of certain components of our solutions, and fluctuations in demand and competitive pricing pressures for our solutions; the introduction, or acceleration of adoption of, competing solutions, including public cloud infrastructure; changes in government fiscal or contracting policies, or decreases in available government spending; and other risks detailed in our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended October 31, 2016, filed with the SEC on December 8, 2016. Additional information will also be set forth in our Form 10-Q that will be filed for the quarter ended January 31, 2017, which should be read in conjunction with these financial results. Our SEC filings are available on the Investor Relations section of the company’s website at ir.nutanix.com and on the SEC's website at www.sec.gov. These forward-looking statements speak only as of the date of this press release and, except as required by law, we assume no obligation to update forward-looking statements to reflect actual results or subsequent events or circumstances. Nutanix makes infrastructure invisible, elevating IT to focus on the applications and services that power their business. The Nutanix Enterprise Cloud platform leverages web-scale engineering and consumer-grade design to natively converge compute, virtualization and storage into a resilient, software-defined solution with rich machine intelligence. The result is predictable performance, cloud-like infrastructure consumption, robust security, and seamless application mobility for a broad range of enterprise applications. Learn more at www.nutanix.com or follow us on Twitter @nutanix. © 2017 Nutanix, Inc. All rights reserved. Nutanix®, the Enterprise Cloud PlatformTM and the Nutanix logo are trademarks of Nutanix, Inc., registered or pending registration in the United States and other countries. SAP, SAP NetWeaver and SAP products and services mentioned herein as well as their respective logos are trademarks or registered trademarks of SAP SE (or an SAP affiliate company) in Germany and other countries. Cisco® and Cisco UCS® are the registered trademarks of Cisco Technology, Inc. Nutanix is not associated with, sponsored or endorsed by Cisco. CRN is a registered trademark of The Channel Company, LLC. All other brand names mentioned herein are for identification purposes only and may be the trademarks of their respective holder(s).


BERLIN--(BUSINESS WIRE)--StorMagic®, the software-defined storage company enabling hyperconverged infrastructure, today announced the technology demonstration of SvSAN software integrated with Cisco’s NFVIS to provide high-availability for branch office network routers at Cisco Live in Berlin. Earlier today, Cisco announced general availability for the Enterprise Network Compute System (ENCS) and NFVIS which virtualizes the underlying hardware from applications running network functions, as well as mission-critical business applications. StorMagic is part of Cisco’s Preferred Solution Partner Program and its flagship virtual SAN software product is available on a wide range of Cisco UCS servers and networking devices through the Cisco Global Price List. Starting today at Cisco Live Europe in the StorMagic stand E71 in Hall 3.2 there will be a proof-of-concept technology demonstration showing high-availability using Cisco’s NFVIS and StorMagic’s virtual storage software. “Cisco customers and partners are already benefiting from the power of StorMagic SvSAN with Cisco UCS Servers. We are excited about Cisco NFVIS and wanted to demonstrate how easily StorMagic SvSAN could be integrated for high availability,” said Hans O’Sullivan, CEO of StorMagic. “Enterprise customers often struggle to find affordable, easy-to-manage solutions to run mission-critical applications in their branch offices and remote sites. The technology demonstration of SvSAN with NFVIS is another example of how Cisco and StorMagic are working together to solve these customer demands.” StorMagic is a software-defined storage company enabling hyperconverged infrastructure for enterprises and SMEs to modernize IT. StorMagic offers SvSAN, the most cost-effective, centrally managed virtual SAN, removing the need for a physical SAN and reducing server and software spend by as much as 40%. SvSAN delivers performance and reliability where it’s needed most; the remote and branch offices where customers connect with the brand. All product and company names herein may be trademarks of their registered owners.

Loading UCS collaborators
Loading UCS collaborators