On Tue, 2010-03-09 at 18:45 -0500, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
Sent from my iPhone, please excuse any errors.
On Mar 9, 2010, at 17:31, Jake Khuon <khuon@neebu.net> wrote:
On Tue, 2010-03-09 at 17:02 -0500, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
On Mar 9, 2010, at 3:36 PM, Jake Khuon wrote:
On Tue, 2010-03-09 at 15:29 -0500, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
The only "wow" here is "wow, why did cisco hype how far behind they are?"
Because in some organisations, the only vendor that matters is Cisco.
Then why bother hyping at all?
Anyone who needs even a significant fraction of 322 Tbps is not going to ignore competitors.
Come now. You know the answer to that. While technically true, by that logic, Cisco should never perform any press releases.
First, this wasn't a press release, this was an event they were hyping for quite a while. Second, doing a press release is fine, but even the most aggressive companies have a modicum of truth in their releases.
If they said "look at our cool new router", one could overlook obvious marketing BS like comparing to the T640 instead of the T1600. But claiming to "revolutionize" the Internet while being afraid to compare yourself to your chief competitor's flagship product is just pathetic.
Again, that may be true but I think you give marketing in general more credit for credibility than actually exists. Pathetic or not, it happens and some people don't actually see it for the blatant undertruth that it is... especially those who have been blinded by the Cisco "light". We in this industry often forget that not everyone looks for dotted T's and crossed I's when it comes to detail. For whatever reason, most people don't directly challenge the spindoctors. -- /*=================[ Jake Khuon <khuon@NEEBU.Net> ]=================+ | Packet Plumber, Network Engineers /| / [~ [~ |) | | -------- | | for Effective Bandwidth Utilisation / |/ [_ [_ |) |_| NETWORKS | +==================================================================*/