Market Leader Programs
5G Transport - A 2023 Heavy Reading Survey
2023 Open RAN Operator Survey
Coherent Optics at 100G, 400G, and Beyond
Open RAN Platforms and Architectures Operator Survey
Cloud Native 5G Core Operator Survey
Bridging the Digital Divide
5G Network Slicing Operator Survey
Open, Automated & Programmable Transport
The Journey to Cloud Native
...first
I agree that the Wellfleet platform had superior hardware compared to the Cisco 7000 series. They just needed better software, and things might have turned out differently.
You are correct. Wellfleet was #2 to Cisco in the router market, when routers were responsible for the majority of both company's revenue. Wellfleet was steadily gaining ground on Cisco in terms of router market share.
However, at the point that Wellfleet and Synoptics merged (October 1993), Bay Networks' revenue was actually slightly more than Cisco's.
Needless to say within a year that situation was "normalised", with Cisco growing like a weed and Bay Networks losing 15% of router market share.
As a matter of personal opinion, I always felt the Wellfleet hardware was superior to Cisco (even the Cisco 7000). And the Wellfleet OSPF (the second iteration that came out in V.7 code) was much better than Cisco's contemporary OSPF. But we all know that having the better product doesn't win the deal. Cisco was focused (at that time) on selling routers at >60% margins. Wellfleet sales guys were too busy selling obsolete Synoptics 3000 hubs at very low margins because sales management had forgotten to give them separate quotas for routers and hubs.
The Bay Networks fiasco is a classic MBA case study on how to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
Cheers,
Geoff
While it is true that Wellfleet had a cryptic console interface, it did have a configuration/management system that ran on another device that was graphical (in those days). Quite suprisingly, we didnt really ignore the critisism and ran many surveys of our customers regarding the UI issue. Every time, the surveys incidicated that the customers prefered the UI (site manager). I dont really think that the UI had anything to do with the problems that Wellfleet had but it was certainly a hotly discussed topic.
Lets face it, whats so great about the Cisco UI other than lots have people have been forced to learn it.
OZIP
Some people like GUIs, but a lot of people - carriers in particular - prefer a CLI because they can create scripts.
I must admit I always found Cisco's CLI very clunky, and I'm sure the company must wish it could start again with a UI that is designed for the purpose. Given that CLI has not only survived for 20 years, but has been widely copied, I guess they must be doing something right :-)
Cheers,
Geoff
That's a classic self-fulfilling prophecy, don't you think? If you ask your customers, then by definition it's already the set of people who liked the UI, or didn't not-like it enough to buy something different.
I agree with your later point that its doubtful the UI had any major influence on Wellfleet's problems, but I seem to remember everyone complaining about the UI. It was not good, plain an simple. It was annoying to configure and troubleshoot in the lab, and cisco's was easier. But it wasn't why wellfleet lost in the end.