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 : Osicom(FIBR) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ploni who wrote (6324)	4/1/1998 12:45:00 AM
From: Grantcw	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10479

Charles, It's rediculous. It seems that at least Ciena and maybe the other big players in the long-haul market can swoop through the market taking our short-haul customers without products on the market yet! I hope this isn't true, but it doesn't look good. I think our main hope is that our large partner may be able to add some credibility to the product and secure orders more quickly. Things aren't getting much better. Grant

To: Ploni who wrote (6324)	4/1/1998 2:07:00 AM
From: craig crawford	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10479

<< It's too bad that FIBR can't announce having half of some big LEC's DWDM business over the next 5 years, as their local distance GigaMux is presumably farther along in testing, already in production, etc. >> What makes you think that FIBR's Gigamux is any farther along in testing than CIEN's product? CIEN has been testing their Firefly products with more than one RBOC for a while now, they just didn't bother to issue a press release about it like FIBR did. Some on this thread would have you believing that CIEN had nothing to offer for several months even for testing. Right Tbone? I tried to dispel that notion to no avail. Well, proof is in the pudding. The Bell Atlantic announcement serves as one more example of how Osicom management (and some on this thread) tried to promulgate some notion that FIBR has some 12 month lead. If that is the case how come FIBR isn't announcing contracts with CLEC's and RBOC's and CIEN is?

To: Ploni who wrote (6324)	4/1/1998 2:55:00 AM
From: tbonenyc	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10479

<<Well, that's great: CIEN's product is still in the testing phase, and won't be ready for 6 months, yet Bell Atlantic has agreed to give them half of their DWDM business over the next 5 years.>> Hang on...relax for a second. The short-haul product named in that press release is the Multiwave Firefly. This product has been on the market since September. Isn't it interesting that this is the first time(from what i'm aware of) that Ciena has announced sales of it? Maybe it's because it's a severely limited product. Maybe? Well, the reality is that the Firefly is for point-to-point applications only, whereas the Gigamux can be used point-to-point AND in ring-based applications(the link below has a graphical representation by Nortel of a metro configuration. Notice that the metro portion{blue/gray} is displayed in a ring configuration). nortel.com Side note: ****************************************************************** Nortel seems to be offering a DWDM product(with similar specs to the Gigamux) all of a sudden. Is this product a Gigamux in sheep's clothing? Of course, that's only speculation. But if Nortel is claiming their product is ready to ship(i'm not sure about this), you have to wonder where it came from...these things don't just spontaneously materialize out of thin air(no press releases, etc). If they aren't claiming it's ready to go, then i wouldn't expect to see it on the market anytime too soon. That might(i repeat, might) be a clue as to who the teaming partner will be. By the way, you can repeat this scenario with NEC. Is it possible that Osicom will supply both of these companies? Or would a teaming partner want(and get) exclusive rights for such an arrangement? That's a question i can't answer. Anyone? ****************************************************************** back to Firefly vs. Gigamux: Additionally, the Firefly does not operate full duplex whereas the Gigamux does. The Firefly provides 24 channels on a PAIR of fiber whereas the Gigamux provides 16 channels on a SINGLE FIBER(which is 32 channels per pair)...adding 25% more capacity than the Firefly. The Gigamux can operate one channel and is scaleable to 16 channels without interruption...i don't believe the firefly can do this. The Firefly only operates up to distances of 40km whereas the Gigamux operates up to 120km. There are other things that make the Firefly a vastly inferior product, but i think you get the idea....it's uses are limited. That's why Ciena is working on the Multiwave Metro. Will the Metro address all of the shortcomings of the Firefly? Maybe. Can the LEC's(and other potential customers) wait until the end of the year for the Metro? Maybe. Will the Metro actually be released before the end of the year(as scheduled)? Maybe. Can the LEC's take the chance that the Metro might be delayed? Maybe. Will three months or so of testing prove the Metro is a worthwhile product? Maybe. That's a lot of maybes. By the way, did you notice the percentage of Bell Atlantic's DWDM purchases that they will be supplying? Answer: 50%. Who will supply the other 50%? We'll see. Also, now that it's pretty clear that the Gigamux and the Firefly are worlds apart...i would suggest that the fact that Bell Atlantic actually purchased any Firefly's might be indicative of how voracious the appetite for short-haul DWDM solutions actually is already. This is going to be a large market with enough room for several players...and i am very comfortable with the fact that the Gigamux is the only product on the market that provides many(or all) of the necessary features and functionality. P.S. We had extensive discussions about Ciena's Firefly and Metro, as well as a couple of other systems a couple of months ago on the Yahoo board...so this stuff is old hat...but i suppose it's nice to start talking about it again so close to game time.