Learnt about consumer behavior on Wi-Fi not learnt thst they couldn't do consumer products. After all, they tried to get into tablets last year!

If Cisco had really "learned" about the consumer space from the linksys purchase and subequent experience, then why the heck did they buy the internet camera company?  Seems to me they did not learn at all, but tried to double down.  And failed.  Notice they dumped all their other consumer products in the last big re-organization.  This Linksys sale is the last part of that strategy.

sailboat

I had exactly the opposite experience.

With Linksys devices that were made before the acquisition, bomb proof.

Post acquisition, all of them failed right after the warranty expired.  Cisco cheapened the design, replacing PCB's with lower quality versions, and lower quality chip sets.  They did this of course to maintain Cisco's abnormally high margins.  

I diagnosed the failures: 1 was bad solder joints that failed due to temperature stresses adn one was a failed IC also due to temperature, 3rd one failed due to failed resistor.  

I stopped buying Linksys products after this.

I also did some measurements of field strength of the wifi network and post Cisco, the reach of my linksys devices decreased.  I think due to lower cost antenna design.

When I switched to other brands, my issues went away.

just my personal experience.  I do not believe Cisco knows how to do a good consumer product business.  They know how to run high end core network technology with few competitors and very high margins.  But not really good at high volume, lower margin appliances.

sailboat

Speaking as a consumer, the Linksys routers I've owned stood the test of time. I had an 802.11b router that just would not die...the faceplate had separated from the body of the device, yet it continued to work like a charm.  Eventually got an 802.11n and the Cisco/Linksys installation process was smooth.  Not sure if Cisco's execution after the purchase was perfect, but I never had any issues with the products themsevles. JB

Yeah, that's a good point, they were the market leader way back when.

I remember talking to some of the folks who worked at Linksys during the acquisition who were told Linksys would remain independent and not get absorbed.  I was thinking, "yeah, right," but it never happened.  Square pegs and round holes.

Did Cisco ever post any numbers on the Linksys group's revenue contribution since '03?  Back then, Linksys was riding high and owned the market. So, if CSCO paid $550M to get a multiple of that number earned over the next ten years, plus all the education, market penetration, distribution, etc., it could have been a good deal.

And now they've sucked all the marrow out of the bones, time to jettison.

Oh I suspect they learnt about consumer behaviour and Wi-Fi through Linksys so it probably wasn't a total wash. But yeah, an expensive way to learn for sure....

Linksys never made any sense for Cisco.  Sure they wanted to get into the consumer and SMB market segments but in reality, they could have done that all by themselves.  The reason why they were not successful is the price of the products.  Consumers and the SMB market didn’t need the capabilities of the equipment like an enterprise would.  The cheapest ASA firewall is around $400 and it has far more capabilities than what a consumer or a SMB would need and the price is just too high.  The other issue is configuration; they are not plug and play like a less than $100 offering you could buy at any retailer.  Sure Linksys gave them an inroad, but Cisco could have produced lower cost gear with a default config that would be good for most scenarios.

The other issue; margins.  The consumer segment has very small margins and products quickly get replaced by a new model and support for the older gear is quickly dropped.  This is not something Cisco does for enterprise gear.