Re:Misinformed (Score 1)

If you're just thinking of network cards, then this makes sense: "It can't be more affordable than iSCSI (as the network and the adapters used are the same)." But the article author, Bernard Golden, may have meant that iSCSI is more expensive than AoE because of the cost of a TCP Offload Engine (TOE). These iSCSI host adapters cost hundreds of dollars per host. AoE doesn't require a TOE, having no TCP to do.

Anyway, the way I read it he was calling iSCSI complicated, not expensive. Golden says, "It offers the ability to build SANs without the cost and complexity of fibre channel or iSCSI." I read that with an implied, "respectively," at the end. AoE requires almost no configuration compared with iSCSI, so that interpretation makes sense even if Golden wasn't thinking of expensive iSCSI host adapters.