Ascend Archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: (ASCEND) Don't look so hot...
At 09:37 AM 10/17/97 -0700, Matt Holdrege wrote:
>Here's my 2 cents:
>
>First of all, Lanquest didn't say if the modems were V.34 or 56k. They did
>basically a router test, not an Access Server test. They tested packet
>sizes of 64K and 256K when most of our customers have average packets sizes
>of 800K (for email and http.)
>
>There are a few other things I could criticize them on, but this whole
>thing gets petty. There was a Tolly test on the TNT which was a network
>access server based test. This test showed the TNT performing far better
>than the Cisco/Lanquest test did.
>
>Back when I was a customer, I never paid much attention to reports in trade
>mags. They never seemed to be based in reality. I always recommend that
>folks test the equipment in a real network doing the exact job that you
>need it for.
I won't comment on the test, but I will agree with Matt. Don't use the
"management by magazine" method.
Two things determine what vendor you should choose:
1) How much value does this vendor bring to your company as a strategic
network vendor? (i.e. product depth, local support, tech support, etc)
2) How well does the vendor's equipment work in your environment both
presently and with regard to scalability?
If you examine those two items and a vendor comes out on top, choose that
vendor and throw the magazines in the trash.
Wade
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wade Williams "And the trees are all kept equal by
Systems Engineer hatchet, axe, and saw."
Cisco Systems, Inc. - N. Peart
Brentwood, TN
615-221-2918
wwilliam@cisco.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
++ Ascend Users Mailing List ++
To unsubscribe: send unsubscribe to ascend-users-request@bungi.com
To get FAQ'd: <http://www.nealis.net/ascend/faq>