While all maps like this tend to make little practical sense since they inevitably over-generalize and over-simplify things, I'd still like to point out that they got "columnar" category quite wrong: neither HBase nor Cassandra are columnar stores in a way this term is commonly understood.

HBase and Cassandra still store data in rows, however rows can be partitioned into column families which may be stored separately. Columnar databases are usually also relational (Vertica and Redshift) and support SQL or SQL-like query language.

Anyway, I think regardless of how you define columnar, HBase and Redshift shouldn't end up in the same category as they are quite different in a way they work, throughput/latency and read/write balance and use cases.