x
Page 1 / 2   >   >>
gigeguy 12/4/2012 | 9:12:13 PM
re: Lucent's SBC Win: Confusing News I'm very far from being a Lucent person, but geez, folks, they finally have a bit of success to show in the marketplace and you still dump on them! So, it's not a softswitch or SIP. Obviously, SBC didn't want to buy softswitches or SIP, or they would have gone somewhere else. That's the thing about LR - you always find some tarnish, even if it has to be manufactured.
diffraction 12/4/2012 | 9:12:11 PM
re: Lucent's SBC Win: Confusing News
First of all I'd like to say that I think I
represent and unbiased observer.

This is a message to LIGHTREADING.

I also feel there is ample evidence you are dishing out biased judgements towards Lucent.

I've talked to a lot of people in the industry and a lot of people agree something really fishy
is going on.

If I were Lightreading, I'd be careful about appearances of conflicts of interest and I wouldn't want to get into any legal trouble.

I'd like to see full discloser of the heads of
Lightreading and any telecome stock they might own. Will they rise to the challege ?


Scott Raynovich 12/4/2012 | 9:12:11 PM
re: Lucent's SBC Win: Confusing News we own no stock. We have no conflicts. The way we remain a top news source is to analyze as we see it.
boston beans 12/4/2012 | 9:12:10 PM
re: Lucent's SBC Win: Confusing News Was that analysis before, during or after the trip to Caffrey's?

LR is not hard enough. There are many posts and articles which superficially address news without real NYT investigative type reporting. LR articles often appear to placate charismatic individuals like Pauline's Bill Diamond article today or the Tellabs figurehead piece few weeks ago.

LR is the best, but could be better. You guys should press on and go for the Pultzer.

-Beano
beetlejuice 12/4/2012 | 9:12:10 PM
re: Lucent's SBC Win: Confusing News Supports 512,000 Fast MIM channels !
flanker 12/4/2012 | 9:12:09 PM
re: Lucent's SBC Win: Confusing News If I were Lightreading, I'd be careful about appearances of conflicts of interest and I wouldn't want to get into any legal trouble.

No, of course not. Not with an expert in law, not to mention the English language, like you on the case.

I'll take a number three with fried rice. And make it snappy.




wayland_smithy 12/4/2012 | 9:12:04 PM
re: Lucent's SBC Win: Confusing News Flanker observed tactfully:
If I were Lightreading, I'd be careful about appearances of conflicts of interest and I wouldn't want to get into any legal trouble.

No, of course not. Not with an expert in law, not to mention the English language, like you on the case.
I'll take a number three with fried rice. And make it snappy.

---> At least he/she got the subjunctive formation correct - first time I've ever seen that in a LR post. There could be some hope for what little remains of the English language in North America engineering culture ......
wayland_smithy 12/4/2012 | 9:12:04 PM
re: Lucent's SBC Win: Confusing News Flanker observed tactfully:
If I were Lightreading, I'd be careful about appearances of conflicts of interest and I wouldn't want to get into any legal trouble.

No, of course not. Not with an expert in law, not to mention the English language, like you on the case.

I'll take a number three with fried rice. And make it snappy.
hyperunner 12/4/2012 | 9:12:03 PM
re: Lucent's SBC Win: Confusing News Disclaimer: I don't work for a manufacturer.

I don't see bias in this article. This is a classic "non-event" press release from Lucent. It's incremental revenue into an existing account, and using a technology/architecture that seems to be on the wane. If you look back to the original ESS win announcement, this revenue would have been included in whatever terms were disclosed, if any.

If Lucent appear to be under fire from the media recently, it's down to their ongoing problems. The press folks I've spoken to here in Europe are actively looking for good news stories to report, believe me. There are some small sparks of hope out there - projects that would keep a startup happy, but not a money pit like Lucent. After all, they have to fund those executive "performance" bonuses, don't they.

This is a very screwed up company; from a product perspective, a (lack of) strategy perspective, and perhaps most visibly a management/politics perspective. I know from our contacts with the company that internal morale is very low. Geez even the techies that our account managers drag in to see us have a hard time making eye contact! They show you roadmap slides and we have to remind them that some of these products have now been canned. They draw up architecture diagrams, and you have to point out that they don't have a B-RAS anymore, so just how do they propose to build an IP Services network?

Before I start sounding too much like Bobby Max, I'd like to say that I think it's childish and spiteful to talk about wanting companies to "die". The whole industry needs companies to succeed and get some confidence back into our lives. Empty announcements like this are not helping, they're just highlighting how desperate the PR departments are for something to announce.

hR.

Belzebutt 12/4/2012 | 9:12:00 PM
re: Lucent's SBC Win: Confusing News I don't remember the last time a circuit-switch upgrade made news on LR. Must have been a year ago.

This is a sign of the times...
Page 1 / 2   >   >>
HOME
Sign In
SEARCH
CLOSE
MORE
CLOSE