Not sure I'd go so far as to call it a "presentation" but we went with HDS for servers and storage as Scott mentioned.
My reasoning is that we're used to shared storage, and done correctly it's a godsend vs. the terrible burden that many people make it out to be.
We're a VMware shop and we have about 75 VM's (and increasing) and about 20TB of data (and increasing).
I looked at a lot of options.
Local storage is, to me, not an option at this scale, and I say that simply because with a single 10TB (and growing) file server on a single box you're going to have a bad day if that box fails, and it makes updates such as firmware and ESXi updates on the box something which have to be planned for.
Replicated local storage is something that I considered as we have experience of HP StoreVirtual, albeit the physical version vs. the virtual appliance.
In the end I ruled it out because it introduces more complexity than I wanted, and once you're into three hosts and 35-40TB usable and you want decent IOPS you end up buying an insane amount of RAW capacity.
I did a lot of research and came to the conclusion that for us, I needed to put to one side every "geek" instinct that I had and look at what we needed - which was dumb, deathly reliable block storage.
I'd seen HDS mentioned a fair bit on Spiceworks so spoke to John773 (@John-Nicholson) about them and got a ton of useful advice and found HDS the most helpful, easiest to deal with, and least slimy of all the vendors I'd been speaking to.
We settled on a HUS110 with a couple of tiers of disks combined into a single dynamic pool, so it just presents as 36TB (or so) of usable storage which we carve into LUNs and the hot/cold data automatically tiers between the fast and slow disk.
Connectivity is direct attached FC so there are no switches, the hosts just connect directly into the controllers so it's really being used as a high end DAS array rather than a true SAN (though at that point I think most people would use the term "SAN" even if semantically it is incorrect).
The HUS is 99.999% uptime rated - the environment it's in is not, so the HUS is not the thing I should be worrying about in terms of reliability.
There endeth the presentation.