In my opinion, Cisco only maintains smaller people like Juniper and Foundry in the information networking market to prevent monopoly situations. With the largest impact, deep market transmission and wide open breadth of high quality item portfolio, it has built a significant level of toughness into their aggressive company strategy. As far as Alcatel (or Alcatel-Lucent), and Nortel goes, they could be categorized as telecom participants more than data comm participants and HP is too diversified to equate to Cisco as a natural knowledge marketing player.
Cisco’s organization can only just be threatened by improvements in consumer preferences/demand (external) or scientific obsolescence of these current products and services (internal), equally of which are hard to imagine as a result of money assets it uses on marketing study and market acquisitions. Juniper is positioning themselves on several levels to contend with Cisco. Making use of their recently launched move platform and the T collection routers and the purchase of Netscreen and Redline etc. Juniper currently has competed fiercely for the key network space and has done somewhat well with the ISP market. They have maybe not broken the enterprise very well, though. Using their new service releases focused right at knocking Cisco off their perch, we may start to see the landscape change. Big corporations like to have several vendor to play down each other. Healthy competition causes creativity and drives value down.
If Juniper may actually determine a successful advertising plan and set down the silly cartoons trying to be interesting, they may have a legitimate shot. They did a very amazing point a few years ago and offered free lessons to recent and possible customers to get engineers more common and more comfortable with JunOS. Recall OS/2 did not die as it lacked quality or fascinating features. Nortel has established the mandatory function, efficiency and presence within the style industry. As the line between style and old-fashioned data blurs, Nortel is likely to be an raising threat.
But usually the one component of the problem left out was “why does Cisco have this location?” The solution to the problem is found in the answer to exactly how many IT graduates have studied Cisco programs, or are Cisco accredited, or purchased Cisco gear during their education? Apparently the clear answer is most. There are not many Juniper licensed graduates, and even fewer Nortel graduates, aside from Huawei. But that doesn’t signify their respective products are greater, worse or corresponding to Cisco. Iit only ensures that Cisco has skillfully used company to identify itself from its competitors. People by their character gravitate as to the they know or experience comfortable with. That doesn’t mean its proper or wrong, its a convenience thing. The same problem can be asked about McDonalds, Cola, Pepsi, and Nike.
The huge difference is not so much the specialized side of the equipment suppliers, it’s more the advertising strategy of the companies. Cisco, although a manfacturer, has marketed it self as a’process service’which is just accomplished by joint techniques with greater program integrators. It has light emitting diode the client to think that Cisco is larger and more versitile than it really is, a really ingenious approach. Cisco has always work a program to enable its clients to follow IP strategy in the info and style area without significant preliminary cost. Thereby crossing the boundary of style and information ( a standard strict division).
Juniper markets to the style things i.e. the old PABX people in voice including the telecoms market. Procurve offers to a strict SMB industry place and is just a cheap reseller product. The Chinese allow us a Cisco player situated in Basingstoke, UK. Nevertheless it lacks a solid advertising program with clients. This is why most of us speak about voice and knowledge convergence. It’s what most businesses try to sell. However you will find still powerful divisions in the end-user/client work roles … with knowledge rooms being one place … and voice frames in another.
The conclusion option is easy …. each producer, each integarator from different circles with various ability sets needs to come together to resolve/serve a clients needs. The customer needs an aspirin for his headache …. and maybe not the elements to produce his own. Cisco can take over in its market as a result of solid stategic relationship plan with primary associations with the client. If someone wants to concern this they’ve a lot of perform to do yet … this is not only a problem of specialized ability.