re: Fujitsu Sounds OffIt is interesting how Cisco is still able to get away with the allusion of bringing enterprise customers to CPN Service Provider Partners. Great gimmick, allows for excellent executive access with the pitch that "We own the enterprise customer" we will bring them to your network if you buy Cisco gear end to end. In reality its all crap. Someone please find just 1 satisfied CPN partner. In some areas multiple CPN partners overlap each other, so who gets the business. I am amazed that service providers are still taking the bait on the CPN program.
re: Fujitsu Sounds OffBut there is no other choice ...
What Cisco has done, and they have done it with every carrier, RBOCGÇÖs and IXCGÇÖs alike, ranging from Verizon to AT&T, is to essentially enter into a GÇ£barteringGÇ¥ arrangement. In the best case scenario, Cisco will bring enterprise business to the service providers in exchange for them to buy Cisco equipment.
And since they are doing it with everyone, it is not an exclusive syndicate. The advantage is not in the membership because the disadvantage is in the lack of. This is like being part of the Mafia ... there is no particluar advantage to being one of the five families. But not being one could be deadly.
There should be no illusion that Cisco is a very powerful company. The last time I checked, Cisco has more revenues and more cash reserve than the ENTIRE telecom industry combined. And I am not just talking about an industry that includes Nortel, Lucent, Ciena, etc. I am talking about Nokia, Erickson, etc.
I think Cisco Powered Networks is a misnomer. In a few years, it IS the Network.
re: Fujitsu Sounds OffY2K, Good post. "But there is no other choice ..." "I think Cisco Powered Networks is a misnomer. In a few years, it IS the Network."
Could you clarify for those of us on the outside of the Bell South deal, where and why Cisco needed Lucent, and Fujitsu appeared to go it alone (if this is correct)?
re: Fujitsu Sounds OffEasy explanation for the Cisco win. 80% off the list price. BS will be the loser in the long run if they don't have vendor diversity in their network. Buying into the CPN crapola will raise BS's cost in the long run.
re: Fujitsu Sounds OffIf I understand your question correctly, I don't think the choice of Lucent+Cisco was made by Cisco, it was by Bell South. I think we will see this kind of pairing going forward for other carriers as well.
I suppose from the customers' perspective, it is bad enough to have Cisco by your short hair, but at least have some kind of backup in case things don't work out.
re: Fujitsu Sounds OffHaha, that is a joke. Companies are migrating to the most reliable companies, with the highest poetential to fit their needs hands down. It's not entirely all about this marketing BS you all are making it out to be. CPN was not even pitched to Bell South at all, you guys are creating stories that don't even fit the glove. People just have a higher degree of difficulty accepting Cisco as the Bigger Boy on the block (Anthony Soprano) because their able to support the customers at a higher degree of efficiency, the most customer focused vendor, most reliable in terms of overall sustainability in the industry & ability to innovate quality in the future, and finally the best end to end story any one networking vendor can put together. That is what hurts everybody's feelings, is that they see Cisco as dominant. It's hard to swallow, and that is why you are writing about CPN even if it was not involved at all in this case. The ONS 15454 feature capabilites, surprasses any Next-Gen SONET ADM hands down. If you don't know, then look it up folks. Cisco has a large contingency to make the optical piece successful. Get use to it. There not going away, unlike questions of other networking vendors. Breath Folks, maybe it will help you avoid these deranged comments.
re: Fujitsu Sounds OffI have talked to many BellSouth operations people in the past, and I would say the overwhelming majority had mostly negative things to say about Fujitsu's gear. My opinion - BellSouth put up with a lot of issues with them in the past simply because there wasn't another top of the line SONET alternative to Lucent.
Now there is, and they chose it. It's as simple as that. If Cisco can bring some of their enterprise customers into the mix, so much the better from BellSouth's perspective.
re: Fujitsu Sounds OffDonGÇÖt get me wrong. I think Cisco is a phenomenal company. I think they understand what their customers want but more importantly, they also understand what they need.
I remember reading an article about two years ago, at the very beginning of the telecom meltdown when all of the CEOGÇÖs were complaining about how they no longer have any visibility. One of the more respectable industrial analysts wrote an article at the time and ridiculed the CEOGÇÖs by saying that the only CEO that he knows of who ever had any visibility is John Chambers; the rest knows only back order and late shipment.
Having spent lots of time with Cisco, I am convinced that their most miserable employees are the engineers. They never get to build any GÇ£insanelyGÇ¥ great products and their efforts are not always appreciated.
The employees who have the second most fun are the Product Line Managers who get to talk to their customers and their efforts are mostly appreciated. The employees who have the most fun are the Business Development folks who get to talk to their customersGÇÖ customers and who get to buy companies with the right products and marginalize their own engineers.
To get visibility, Cisco expends enormous amount of time and resources to figure out what their customers want and need. They also do the same with their customersGÇÖ customers.
Think about it. How many of us get to talk to our customers? How many of us get to talk to our customerGÇÖs customers?
And how many of us get to leverage on our existing customers by bringing them to a new set of customers so that they can be their customers as well without worry about losing them as our own customers at the same time and yet be able to secure the new customers without always having to compete on merit alone.
re: Fujitsu Sounds OffIf you understand the ILECs, they will select a primary vendor (Lucent), who will get 98% of the business, the secondary, Cisco, will get drops. But BS will take advantage of the marketing machine and continue to sell their data equipment. BellSouth network guys want nothing to do with Cisco in the core network.
re: Fujitsu Sounds OffFrom my understanding: 15454's use alot of power and run really hot. The 10/100 ethernet cards are currently layer two and can't be used in RBOC layer 1 SONET. its Port density will let you exhaust space in the box before using all of the bandwidth on the ring, then you need subtending 15454. RBOC operations can very easily pick up new Lucent boxes, not so with CISCO. Look for CISCO sales teams to prime customers to request 15454 from RBOC's.
What Cisco has done, and they have done it with every carrier, RBOCGÇÖs and IXCGÇÖs alike, ranging from Verizon to AT&T, is to essentially enter into a GÇ£barteringGÇ¥ arrangement. In the best case scenario, Cisco will bring enterprise business to the service providers in exchange for them to buy Cisco equipment.
And since they are doing it with everyone, it is not an exclusive syndicate. The advantage is not in the membership because the disadvantage is in the lack of. This is like being part of the Mafia ... there is no particluar advantage to being one of the five families. But not being one could be deadly.
There should be no illusion that Cisco is a very powerful company. The last time I checked, Cisco has more revenues and more cash reserve than the ENTIRE telecom industry combined. And I am not just talking about an industry that includes Nortel, Lucent, Ciena, etc. I am talking about Nokia, Erickson, etc.
I think Cisco Powered Networks is a misnomer. In a few years, it IS the Network.
"But there is no other choice ..."
"I think Cisco Powered Networks is a misnomer. In a few years, it IS the Network."
Could you clarify for those of us on the outside of the Bell South deal, where and why Cisco needed Lucent, and Fujitsu appeared to go it alone (if this is correct)?
Thanks,
sidepipes
I suppose from the customers' perspective, it is bad enough to have Cisco by your short hair, but at least have some kind of backup in case things don't work out.
Now there is, and they chose it. It's as simple as that. If Cisco can bring some of their enterprise customers into the mix, so much the better from BellSouth's perspective.
I remember reading an article about two years ago, at the very beginning of the telecom meltdown when all of the CEOGÇÖs were complaining about how they no longer have any visibility. One of the more respectable industrial analysts wrote an article at the time and ridiculed the CEOGÇÖs by saying that the only CEO that he knows of who ever had any visibility is John Chambers; the rest knows only back order and late shipment.
Having spent lots of time with Cisco, I am convinced that their most miserable employees are the engineers. They never get to build any GÇ£insanelyGÇ¥ great products and their efforts are not always appreciated.
The employees who have the second most fun are the Product Line Managers who get to talk to their customers and their efforts are mostly appreciated. The employees who have the most fun are the Business Development folks who get to talk to their customersGÇÖ customers and who get to buy companies with the right products and marginalize their own engineers.
To get visibility, Cisco expends enormous amount of time and resources to figure out what their customers want and need. They also do the same with their customersGÇÖ customers.
Think about it. How many of us get to talk to our customers? How many of us get to talk to our customerGÇÖs customers?
And how many of us get to leverage on our existing customers by bringing them to a new set of customers so that they can be their customers as well without worry about losing them as our own customers at the same time and yet be able to secure the new customers without always having to compete on merit alone.
Is this a perfect World, or what?
15454's use alot of power and run really hot. The 10/100 ethernet cards are currently layer two and can't be used in RBOC layer 1 SONET. its Port density will let you exhaust space in the box before using all of the bandwidth on the ring, then you need subtending 15454. RBOC operations can very easily pick up new Lucent boxes, not so with CISCO. Look for CISCO sales teams to prime customers to request 15454 from RBOC's.