NEW YORK -- The winners of this year's Leading Lights awards were named Tuesday night at a gala dinner held in Manhattan's amazing Hudson Terrace.
So, who won? If you're a Light Reading registered user, find out by clicking right here. If you're not a registered user, click here to sign up. It takes just a minute, it's free and you get plenty of access to great content all year long.
I think you mean to say you can't ONLY evaluate a network processor by speed. You can use speed as a consideration. You can also use market power and market share as indicators of whether a new tech will be successful.
I do agree, though, that you have to look more at how a processor is used vs. its speed and other such metrics in isolation. Again, another great comment I'll send along to the category editor.
Different vendors utilize the processors in different ways - some companies utilize the processors to do full layer 2 and layer 3, while others don't.
A better gage is the number of ports the chip (chips, in FP3's and Trio's case) can handle along with the feature/functionality, such as moving video processing off of the services card and onto the line card:
Yes, understood. That was more of a general comment for the vendors who did spend a lot of time this week stomping sour grapes into fine whines. It is astonishing how, as much as we try to celebrate the industry's success in a meaningful way, we spend the next few says dealing with overtures of foul play and negativity.
Fair enough. Overall, you guys do a very good job.
For the record, the company that employs me isn't a telecommunications vendor, therefore, we wouldn't submit a product to "convince" anyone in this category.
It's obvious we don't work for any vendor and we do impress easily when the presentation of the technology is impressive. It's also true our editors, in hindsight, clearly should have done more due diligence in this category.
But careful about coming down on us too hard. If we're gullible and as easily led as you suggest and STILL your company couldn't convince us, then they're doing a pretty horrible job.
Anyway, I do appreciate the criticism and hope that next time you'll come forward with it earlier in the process -- like when we're putting out our thoughts on the shortlisted finalists.
"It's hard to ignore a product that represents a quantifiable leap ahead. The FP3 will allow dual 100Gbit/s router cards in 2012, adding to what's been a strong 100Gbit/s story for AlcaLu's router franchise."
Good point. I believe the thinking was that even though it was a technology submitted as a product, we were impressed enough to stretch the bounds of what is normally defined as a product in this category.
That is, of course, utlimately up to the category judge to decide how much it utlimately matters whether the product will be sold to other suppliers or if it will simply be a component in several network devices.
For more on what we saw in the FP3, http://www.lightreading.com/blog.asp?blog_sectionid=388&doc_id=213458
The FP3 processor is not a product. Its an internal component of potential future products. This is like awarding the 2013 Chevy Transmission the award in the "Best New Car of 2011" category.
The blogs and comments are the opinions only of the writers and do not reflect the views of Light Reading. They are no substitute for your own research and should not be relied upon for trading or any other purpose.
To save this item to your list of favorite Light Reading content so you can find it later in your Profile page, click the "Save It" button next to the item.
