 Eric, I'm thrilled that you're able to be in the field, welcome. Yeah, thanks very much, Dave. Good to be here. You and I had a discussion about this, and somebody from IBM was kind enough to send me, I was on Twitter the other day, talking about, okay, I'm asking kind of Colombo questions, and I'll ask you those questions. Doesn't that essentially put in a layer that is, provides, you know, what's in, injects overhead into the system, and so they sent me some technical documentation with actually a red paper, not a red book. So I've been squinting through that, but let me just ask you, it's common that customers will leverage the SVC stack and put TMS behind that, and some of the customers that we talked to, like Kareem Abdullah, I believe, is one of them, puts tier one storage behind the SVC. But nonetheless, conceptually you would think that adds a layer of overhead. Does it, why, or why not, and does it matter? What we see is that the traditional enterprise storage customers, who want the snaps, who want the dedupe, or I'm sorry, the compression, who want the replication, all of that, and they can't get it from the application layer where we think, you know, lots of the, lots of the tier one apps have it already in software somewhere else. But if they need that in the stack, then we'll deliver that with SVC, and then we'll do that without compromising the performance of the flash system in a significant way. Does it inject overhead? Yes. You get 100 microseconds of additional latency in the base use case with SVC. But for that price of 100 microseconds, you get basically all the enterprise features of a tier one array. So you have the performance, or at least most of it, and then you have the feature functionality. That's a winning combination for many of our clients. Well, even better performance than the tier one array. Absolutely. You get the performance of the flash system, essentially, without compromising on the features. It's a question which we often have to ask, and that's why we've been very aggressive in developing bundled solutions that incorporate not only the sand volume controller technology, but also the flash system technology as an optimized tier one storage solution. But thinking about, and there are dozens of others, I'm just naming a few for our audience, but thinking about an all flash array, which as many of the vendors, you guys do, how do you guys stack up there, why do people choose you, and what do you emphasize with customers in terms of your name? Sure. So it all starts with the hardware. And I know we don't like to talk so much about the hardware architecture. As part of IBM, there's a lot of emphasis on the software as well. But what TMS did for over 30 years was design this purpose-built piece of hardware totally around performance, reliability, and efficiency. Those are the three key advantages that we bring to the table. And the reason we have them is because of that original hardware design. So that's something which there's only one competitor, which comes close in terms of having the purpose-built hardware, which then you layer on the software. And the software brings IBM yet another advantage, because we have this time-tested proven feature-complete SVC stack that's been in mainstream enterprise deployments for years. And we have this great integration that happens between the two of them. So you get the hardware part, you get the software part, and it's all integrated together in nice packages, which we'll be discussing even more as time continues to pass. Okay, now you guys are using SLC, correct? Well, we have a choice between SLC or EMLC. And the focus is really on EMLC. Now it tends to be the most cost-effective approach for many enterprises. Turns out that if you're a big enterprise and you're doing your traditional enterprise apps, typically you actually aren't writing as much as you think you are.