Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Nortel Networks (NT) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: The Phoenix who wrote (7376)	10/24/2000 11:24:10 AM
From: Jim Lamb	Respond to of 14638

NT article here. Maybe already posted upside.com

To: The Phoenix who wrote (7376)	10/24/2000 12:53:56 PM
From: Ian@SI	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 14638

I think a company - long term - has to be focused on service delivery to succeed. I think CSCO understands this model as well - perhaps better - than anybody. What do you mean by this statement? It's the voice side that's had bulletproof service; the data side came out of a "who cares if it works, it's only back office stuff anyway" attitude. I've suspected that this may well be one of the prime reasons that CSCO hasn't been terribly successful in the carrier space one in which ALA, NT and LU are more in sync with their customer's culture and business requirements. LU just missed the boat on the transition to a data architecture. But there'll probably be more boats in the future for LU to either miss or take advantage of. Or do you have a different definition of service delivery? Curious, Ian.

To: The Phoenix who wrote (7376)	10/24/2000 1:02:53 PM
From: Lerxst	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 14638

Phoenix, I absolutely agree that all three will continue to do well. However, I must respectfully disagree with your assessment of CSCO's ability to deliver a line-rate OC192 interface for the GSR. I think history will demonstrate that Cisco has been consistent in their disdain and/or inability and/or desire to deliver line-rate capable interfaces for their routers. Also, I don't believe I've seen any concrete proof that Cisco understands service delivery better than anyone else. Of course I'm pretty tied up with the startup I work for so haven't been able to follow-along very closely over the last year or so. Delivering a line-rate capable interface isn't about "brut force bandwidth delivery." The latter is simply a band-aid attempt at trying to solve network congestion, which typically just moves the congestion from one link to another. The former, however, allows for efficient use of network links for providing the enhanced services that will become required of the data network. Being able to maintain line-rate on an interface as more and more services are enabled will become crucial. Juniper makes the claim that they can do this, while I don't think Cisco will ever be able to make a similar claim. As such, its my opinion that Juniper will continue to gain marketshare in the carrier/service provider space for routers. With Juniper and Cisco the only two players left in this space, Juniper's gain will be at Cisco's loss. Regards, Lerxst