To: fumble who wrote (12909 ) 8/23/1999 11:44:00 PM From: Tunica Albuginea Respond to of 18016
fumble, the noise to can do ratio in the Telco industry is at an all time high. It reminds me of so many so called " successful clinical drug trials ". The trial was successful but the patient later died. So far my standard for things that work in the telco industry is simple: Whose light go out last? And the answer is..of course...NN, TARe: MCI/WC disaster <<Can anyone explain how does NN technology prevent or minimize such possibilities?>> A possible NN advantage. See quote from Ebbers - from a NYT article last week: nytimes.com - may not be free now.. <<Ebbers thanked the network experts from Lucent and its Bell Laboratories unit who worked on the problem, but later in the call he took a serious swipe at Lucent, wondering aloud whether the company even employed the right people. "Part of the reason that there is some concern here is that there has been a lot of consolidation in our industry and this software was originally developed by Cascade Communications, who was then acquired by Ascend Communications, who has since been acquired by Lucent," he said. "And so one of the concerns obviously in this cycle of events is what happened to the people and the process that did the development and wrote the software. And was the capability to maintain this software retained through these transactions?" That might sound somewhat obtuse, but for the telecommunications industry those are very harsh words. Communications carriers generally refuse to discuss their vendors at all, yet Ebbers publicly questioned whether Lucent, which spent $20 billion of its stockholders' money to acquire Ascend earlier this year, has been managing that deal correctly. Lucent took the high road, accepting responsibility, as indeed it should if its software was at fault.>>