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 : Cisco Systems, Inc. (CSCO) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: StockMan who wrote (14251)	5/25/1998 2:04:00 PM
From: Peppe	Respond to of 77400

<Which do you think major customers will buy ..> My money's on CSCO. Has been since 1995. It will take a lot more than one product to un-seat the champ of networking. Check with me in 6 months, Cheers, Joe

To: StockMan who wrote (14251)	5/25/1998 8:36:00 PM
From: Gold Beach	Respond to of 77400

Stocky: My money is with Cisco!! Don

To: StockMan who wrote (14251)	5/25/1998 9:51:00 PM
From: The Phoenix	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 77400

Stockman, Just in the interest of posting correct facts. That article you keep referring to had this in the first paragraph... "I had the exclusive opportunity to test an alpha version of the routing champion's first wire-speed campus router, the Catalyst 8510 Multilayer Switch. I was pleased by the switch's backward-compatibility...." NOTE: it was an alpha platform - pre-beta!!!... Then the comment you eluded to about signficant bugs... "Although I ran into some significant bugs with 10/100 autonegotiation.I was still able to test the Catalyst 8510 hardware and software's performance and functionality." Note that the bugs reported did not effect the test even though this was an alpha product. I've worked for a number of communication companies and been involved with many projects. Having the box run at alpha and able to do performance testing (or even a vendor willing to expose an "early work") to this rigorous and potentially exposing a test is unheard of. This is a great message when you consider that the only problem he reported was the 10/100 autonegotiation..this occurs at set up and after that doesn't effect performance, management, provisioning, or any other aspect of the product. So, Stockman if this is what you're hanging your hat on then your comments about Cisco's lack of quality are lost. AND, do me a favor don't bring up AT&T and the cockpit error that went on over there. AT&T is the larger percentage of blame on that. Unfortantely since that network is an order of magnitude larger than any BAY backbone there really is no comparison. But we already know that BAY builds perfect boxes... that's why they don't have a service organization. Problem is, BAY's boxes do break...and yet, they still have no service organization...or a sales organization. Stockman, bring me some intelligent commentary. Tell me why I'm wrong. Don't tell me this company smells.... I don't think it's the company you're smelling. But I won't go there. Tell me why, as a company, BAY is a better buy than Cisco. Lay off the shots on Chambers and the Company's "smell". Show me you can reason. Can you do it???? Gary