Slashdot Mirror


3com to Compete with Cisco

RNelson writes "3com has announced its new lines of routers poised to compete with Cisco. 'The company claims that these routers will cost 30 percent to 50 percent less than similar offerings from market leader Cisco.' The new routers compete the Cisco's 3725, 3745, and 83xx routers."

181 comments

  1. but will it by Anarke_Incarnate · · Score: 5, Interesting

    compete with Juniper? Since Juniper got Netscreen, they look like a nice player to compete with Cisco. We'll see if this is a three horse race, but I like what Juniper's doing. Their SSL VPN appliance is also very sweet.

    1. Re:but will it by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Juniper has picked up some nice tech. Netscreen's firewall products are very nice. The Neoteris (Netscreen / Juniper) "SSL VPN" access solution is increadibly useful. But how will Juniper handle these aquisitions?

      I'm especially interested since my team purchased and manages both Netscreen and Neoteris (before either went through the current tree of aquisition) products. And unfortunately, all we've gotten for the Juniper name is an increased maintenance cost and decreased quality of service. We'll have to see if this is just wrinkles from the aquisition.

      Juniper has certainly made some interesting moves and nice aquisitions. They certainly have the technical firepower to be competative. We'll have to see if they CAN compete. Although... I agree. They would come to mind before 3com.

    2. Re:but will it by autumnpeople · · Score: 1

      Having worked at 3Com in the router business when they decided to bail out (and cost me my job), it seems they are now trying to get back in to a market space they gave up on years ago. We didn't have a core router then, and they probably won't have one this time. They tend to focus more on the corporate side then providers...

    3. Re:but will it by Anarke_Incarnate · · Score: 1

      I happened to like netscreen's service. I hope Juniper doesn't screw it up for them. I hate to see solid tech killed by an aquiring company in the name of "progress"

    4. Re:but will it by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Netscreen's service is (was) excellent. And that was a key issue for us as service was one issue we had with Checkpoint. But as I've said - with the aquisition by Juniper, our service contract has increased fairly steeply with a decrease in the level of service (although the old Netscreen guys are still great once we get ahold of them).

      As we've all seen before... it is possible to kill a great product by overcharging for crappy service. Now... I'm not saying that's where we are now. It's too early to tell yet. But we're definately a bit nervous (and a little annoyed at how quick Juniper was to increase our cost for support before ironing out the wrinkles).

      I hope (for our own good at least) it all works out.

    5. Re:but will it by shokk · · Score: 1

      3Com does this waaay too often. I pray that they never abandon the NBX telephone systems. Just because the market is hot for SIP and VoIP it doen't mean 3com won't go against the grain and screw us all as they have before. I'm sticking with Juniper's Netscreen and Neoteris products, of which we were customers before Juniper came along.

      --
      "Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart, he dreams himself your master."
    6. Re:but will it by shokk · · Score: 1

      I already don't like Juniper's service. We've been a Netscreen customer since early 2000, and we acquired our Neoteris SSL-VPN about 4 months ago. I hope Juniper doesn't screw us with this.

      --
      "Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart, he dreams himself your master."
    7. Re:but will it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      3Com is not developing those routers themselves. They're selling rebadged Huawei Technologies routers. And Huawei Technologies steals code and docs from Cisco (google it). So 3Com series is just cheap knock-offs from Cisco. The only reason that Huawei can still indulge in this ridiculus theft is because they have major connections within Chinese government. Cisco decided to back off the legal action in exchange for a chunk of Chinese/Asian marker.

      There's no innovation here - it's disturbing to see 3Com compared to Juniper and Cisco.

  2. Foolish move... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    3Com's router/switch business got beat up precisely because it couldn't compete with Cisco gears. Are they back for more black eyes?

    1. Re:Foolish move... by Mysticalfruit · · Score: 1

      What I want to know was when Cisco got into the gear business.

      I knew that Cisco make routing equipment, but I didn't know they had also branched out into gear making!

      I'm expecting that when they repair the clock tower in my home town they'll be a "Powered by Cisco" sticker on the side of the thing.

      --
      Yes Francis, the world has gone crazy.
    2. Re:Foolish move... by autumnpeople · · Score: 1

      Actually it wasn't that bad when we were in the business, we just had poor management with no will to compete or support the staff, and making stupid decisions to benefit themselves. Upper management was on so many boards of directors that I'd be surprised that they had a clue what was going on with any of the companies. As an example, 3Com spins Palm because they are a networking company, not a gadget company. About a month or so after that they announce that they are going to exit the networking business, selling the parts of the business to Extreme (a member of upper management just happened to sit on the board of directors of Extreme). They then moved to focus on consumer electronics like Kerbango and Audrey, AKA gadgets. Now that this strategy has failed, they decided they were a networking company again, and are now having to build them selves back up after screwing over their customers and employees. It was a big market for the company. One major bank had a 3com router at every ATM (10,000+) going to one of 3 data centers for redundancy.

    3. Re:Foolish move... by MC+BoB · · Score: 1

      Lets not forget they've tried this before and failed.

      Lots of clients bought into the 3Com corebuilder line only to be left high and dry when 3Com suddenly (literally overnight) discontinued the line and withdrew from the router market. Leaving those who committed to 3Com for the core with no upgrade path and no decent support.

      You could NOT get a overnight replacement part for core builder after they pulled out of the market, even after they promised to support the line for 5 years. . .

      Not to mention how bad the ATM gear they built performed. Worked great in the lab, it was just all that pesky corruption that occured under a heavy load in production. . .

      I think this plan is dead on arrival, no one who saw them screw over thousands of clients the first time around will buy from them again.

      Fool me once. . .

  3. The Error is You by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Cisco owns Linksys, not 3Com.

    Why don't you read the article?

    1. Re:The Error is You by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And Linksys owned 3Com. See how that all works. If A buy B and B owns C then A owns C. Somone didn't pass their logic class in school!

    2. Re:The Error is You by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Linksys doesn't own 3Com. That someone is you.

    3. Re:The Error is You by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Linksys doesn't own 3Com. That someone is you."

      In Soviet Russia you own Linksys!

  4. Re:3COM by LurkerXXX · · Score: 1

    Not kidding that you are uninformed? I don't doubt it. 3com still sells a LOT of gear.

  5. 30-50% less? by grasshoppa · · Score: 4, Insightful

    How hard is that? Cisco sells their name, not equipment. While they are not in the same position Intel was before Amd became a threat, it's close enough to be useful for this discussion. Cisco can charge what they want, within the realm of semi-reasonability, and they will get it. Because, it's the name, not equipment or capabilities.

    3com knows this, I suspect, which is why they are lowballing them. I would even suspect they think high enough of their name to not charge less than 30-50% less than cisco stuff.

    You want to entice purchasing managers, but keep your name "good" in their eyes as well.

    --
    Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
    1. Re:30-50% less? by jayhawk88 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      True story: We have a Cisco VPN (don't know model off hand) that we needed to order an extra 256 meg of RAM for. We call up our Cisco rep, and they get a price quote from Cisco of $9600. For a 256 piece of RAM. The damn VPN itself only cost like $12k. So our Cisco rep does some more calling around, trying to find out what the story is with that price, and finally comes back with a price of $450 or something like that.

      So obviously this is much better and we're all relieved, and then it dawns on us: Who else other than Cisco can buy PC133 sticks of RAM in bulk for probably $10 a pound, stick a "Cisco Certified" sticker on them, then sell it to you for $450 a stick, and make you feel like you're getting a good deal?

    2. Re:30-50% less? by TylerB11 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Get a 256MB CF card from them. They'll hit you for 800 Bucks, and its not even cisco-branded, its just a SMART.

    3. Re:30-50% less? by Agent+Green · · Score: 2, Funny

      3com knows this, I suspect, which is why they are lowballing them. I would even suspect they think high enough of their name to not charge less than 30-50% less than cisco stuff.

      Apparently, 3Com has never heard of eBay. :)

      --
      // Agent Green (Ian / IU7 / KB1JQO)
      // IEEE 802.3: All 10base Are Belong To Us
    4. Re:30-50% less? by gmack · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Too late, I've already been burned by 3Com. We had a switch show up DOA and called them for a replacement only to have them demand payment for a second switch before they would ship the replacement. When that didn't happen they told us to send the switch backand as it turned out.. they didn't even have that model in stock they told us we would get our replacement in three weeks! After fighting it out with them I managed to talk them down to a week and a half.

      Contrast that with Cisco: Last time I had a Cisco with a dead port they sent me the replacement overnight delivery and then told me I had three weeks to return the old one or be sent a bill.

      Cisco's advantage is their customer service. They have your back when things go bad. 3Com doesn't understand this and until they do I won't consider them a serious player.

    5. Re:30-50% less? by jayhawk88 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The 4210 IDS we have is basically a re-branded Dell rack mount. I needed a 256 memory upgrade for it to run the 4.x OS update, which luckly we got for free under maintenance contract, but if not would have cost us like $500. And I installed the memory, I know for a fact it wasn't anything more than a genereric DIMM stick.

    6. Re:30-50% less? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Careful there, we have a dell in our office that apparently checks the eeprom in the stick to make sure the ram we install is "official" dell ram. Just because it looks the same on the outside doesn't mean just any old dimm will work.

    7. Re:30-50% less? by Karma+Farmer · · Score: 2, Funny

      Why didn't you just make your own replacement switch, using open bsd, some spare ethernet cards, and an old 486 you had lying around? Then, if you had problems, you could go to a mailing list or usenet newsgroup or irc chat, and get almost immediate help.

      That's what real men do on slashdot. People who need technical support are wussies, or have jobs, or silly crap like that.

    8. Re:30-50% less? by Paulrothrock · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Who else other than Cisco can buy PC133 sticks of RAM in bulk for probably $10 a pound, stick a "Cisco Certified" sticker on them, then sell it to you for $450 a stick, and make you feel like you're getting a good deal?

      Apple's almost as bad. $75 for 256MB of DDR333 for the eMac. That's over three times what I paid for the same RAM to upgrade my Mother-in-law's eMac.

      --
      I'm in the hole of the broadband donut.
    9. Re:30-50% less? by fimbulvetr · · Score: 0, Informative

      Apples to Oranges.
      You had Cisco Smartnet, they don't advanced replace for warranty period without a contract.
      Guess what? Neither does 3com.
      If you would have purchased 3com's maintenance contract, http://www.3com.com/products/en_US/detail.jsp?tab= features&pathtype=purchase&sku=WEBCSO3CS10 7 , they would have given you advanced replacement too.

    10. Re:30-50% less? by arnie_apesacrappin · · Score: 1
      The problem with the 30-50% less that the article describes is that they use list prices. What will actually be relevant is how deep 3Com will be willing to go on VAR discounts. That $9000 they quote on the 3725 becomes more like $5400 with most corporate agreements. My guess is that 3Com will probably to a 10% discount to the VAR's so the price is basically a wash. At that point, I'll take Cisco.

      --

      Still, with a plan, you only get the best you can imagine. I'd always hoped for something better than that. -CP

    11. Re:30-50% less? by pnutjam · · Score: 1

      I've had great luck with ProCurve equipment. It seems to be fairly robust, HP has great service, and they have lifetime advance replacement on all their equipment. The price is right too.

    12. Re:30-50% less? by gmack · · Score: 1

      You had Cisco Smartnet, they don't advanced replace for warranty period without a contract.

      Not with that employer(too cheap) I told them I didn't have one. Cisco will replace a dead switch even without it. When I got to the second level tech I simply read him the post error and he demanded my shipping address to send the replacement to.

    13. Re:30-50% less? by goober1473 · · Score: 1

      Don't worry about the cost, we have 4 fairly big catalist switches, they have failed 5 times this year with hardware faults and 3 or 4 times with odd glitches which a reboot fixes.

    14. Re:30-50% less? by KingPrad · · Score: 1

      It is normal in tech support to get a purchase order or a credit card # before shipping a replacement. It isn't charged unless you fail to send back the first, broken unit. Did they really want to charge you or just get a PO in case they had to?

      Cisco might have already had your company's billing information and thus they were happy to send you a new unit overnight without first asking for the billing info. But if you hadn't returned the broken one, they would have charged you for the second, surely.

      Just my experience from working for a similar hardware company.

      --
      Stop the Slashdot Effect! Don't read the articles!
    15. Re:30-50% less? by robnator · · Score: 1

      Insightful, perhaps, but incomplete, Grasshoppa. Cisco sells their service, which is a warm and fuzzy security blanket, and well worth the premium they charge. Unfortunately, 3Com has no equivilant reputation in this area.

      Cheers,
      RobN

      --
      "If...you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to be a horrible warning" - Catherine Aird
    16. Re:30-50% less? by Zak3056 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Contrast that with Cisco: Last time I had a Cisco with a dead port they sent me the replacement overnight delivery and then told me I had three weeks to return the old one or be sent a bill.

      HP is similar as far as their network gear goes--lifetime warranty where the replacement part shows up on your doorstep the next morning with a prepaid label in the box to ship the defective unit back.

      --
      What part of "shall not be infringed" is so hard to understand?
    17. Re:30-50% less? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Cisco can charge what they want, within the realm of semi-reasonability, and they will get it. Because, it's the name, not equipment or capabilities.

      Not sure what land of fiction you live in, but you certainly haven't been privy to supply chain discussions in the last 5+ years. Anyone with any purchasing power leverage can influence the actual price. Quite substantially, I might add. The discount percentages Cisco quotes to various categories of customers are guidelines at best. The rest is up to how badly Cisco wants your business.

    18. Re:30-50% less? by Cylix · · Score: 2, Informative

      Don't forget Cisco certified standard equipment cables....

      It's a standard power cable with a notch cut above it.

      I think we can easily pull together a dozen or so more odd things cisco does to rape their customers.

      Soon we can say, No one ever got fired for buying Cisco!

      --
      "You should always go to other people's funerals; otherwise, they won't come to yours." -- Yogi Berra
    19. Re:30-50% less? by WarlockD · · Score: 2, Funny

      I HATE THOSE.

      We sell auctioned Cisco equipment some times, and it takes us 30 min to carve up a power cable for it.

      UGH.

    20. Re:30-50% less? by gmack · · Score: 1

      A credit card number would have been justifiable.. the problem was they wanted to charge the card for a $1000 piece of equipment and then refund it when the old one arrived. And yes Cisco did tell me they would have charged me for the second switch if I failed to return it. It's fair so I'm completely fine with that.

    21. Re:30-50% less? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Several years back (around the days of the Kornikova virus) we had our router start acting up. I called Cisco and explained that our network guy was 'released' from the company and they stuck me (a programmer) with his job so I did not know how this thing was configured. They telnetted into the router and found the problem, they then had me plug our cold spare in and they tftp'd the config over so they were in sync and later that night called me up to tell me that while they were in there they noticed a few other things that were configed wrong and they fixed those problems too. The next day the same tech support guy called me again and walked me through basic administration of the router so I would be more comfortable with it.

      That is excellent customer service and I remember that support guy to this day.

    22. Re:30-50% less? by itwerx · · Score: 1

      I've already been burned by 3Com.

      Same here. Their switch quality has taken a dive the last couple years. They're put together with flimsy sheetmetal and no standoffs (sheetmetal screws!). They flex so bad we had new ones coming in with screws rattling around inside. We quit using them immedtately thereafter but while we still had some in stock we had to open every one of them to make sure everything was still connected properly. Not to mention how the PCB's flap in the breeze...
      Yech. And 3Com used to be good stuff. :(

    23. Re:30-50% less? by talon77 · · Score: 1

      No, Cisco has life-time warranties on their switches.. with or without a smartnet.

    24. Re:30-50% less? by H8X55 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      This is industry standard upgrade practice. Dell does it too. Years ago we paid an arm and a leg (hundreds of dollars) for a "memory upgrade" for a PERC3 DCL Raid Controller in a Poweredge server. Imagine how pissed my boss was when it came in and the 128MB stick of SDRAM matched perfectly the sticks we were buying from Crucial.com for $26 each, shipped.

      that one should have went back, but it didn't because corporate had already cut the check and bossman had to save face - "Now our e-mail server is faster..."

      and the wheel goes round.

    25. Re:30-50% less? by secolactico · · Score: 1

      It's a standard power cable with a notch cut above it.

      Are they, really? I always thought they were higer rated cables (more amperes capacity).

      I have had some dinky cables heat up when connected to some medium size equipment.

      --
      No sig
    26. Re:30-50% less? by dasmegabyte · · Score: 1

      Ostensibly, the difference is that Apple won't support your ram. Apple's high prices are generally due to their awesome guarantees and stellar support...they have to add in the annuitized cost of having to perform service or a recall, which I'm sure is expensive (they next day EVERYTHING, even those battery replacements)! If it costs $300 in shipping and labor costs to repair a single stick of ram, and there's a one-in-twenty chance that a piece of ram will develop a problem over the life of the warranty, you'd need to add $15 to the cost of the stick to cover this. This is a much greater cost to support than the ram companies have -- they don't have to deal with shipping, opening or diagnosing the machine, they just have to swap the product. Therefore, they don't have to charge as much for their "lifetime warranty."

      Plus, a lot of times they can "get" the extra cost for their ram upgrades because people are buying the PC on a loan and want a single charge. Since there's such a low margin on ram anyway, why not let the people in the know order their ram from somewhere else and charge the others a price that makes it worth selling and installing the occasional ram upgrade.

      If you don't want the guarantee, don't need the fast shipping or the assurance that it Will Not Fuck Up Your Machine, order your Apple computer from somewhere other than the Apple Store. There are tons of players in the Apple sales market that will stick on cutrate extended warranties, additional ram, free printers, discounted shipping, cool accesories, etc to get you to buy from them. They're forced by contract to not undersell Apple on identical loadouts, but they can play around with the default setup while keeping the same cost. Small Dog is notorious for this: exploiting their discount on aftermarket hardware to add-on to existing setups to bring them up to a higher level of value with a lower cost than apple, e.g. a 256 meg, 60 gig model of PowerBook upgraded with an additional stick of 256 and a bigger hard drive and then charging $100 less than Apple for the equivalent of the next model up.

      --
      Hey freaks: now you're ju
    27. Re:30-50% less? by shokk · · Score: 1

      If the only thing accomplished by 3Com's entry into this market (and subsequent exit a year or so later) is lower Cisco prices for me, then it is a good thing. C'mon 3Com, let's see what you've got.

      --
      "Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart, he dreams himself your master."
    28. Re:30-50% less? by TheKubrix · · Score: 1

      I might have to second that. One day I was getting HIGHLY erratic behaviour on out network. Virus filters didn't catch anything. Everything (workstations and server) were all fully patched. No lag or latency from the ISP, NOTHING!!! After almost 3-5 hours of head scratching and no trails, I found the problem. A 3COM hub was screwed up. A FUCKEN HUB! Replaced it, and immediatly everything went back to status quo.......they now made it on my blacklist.

    29. Re:30-50% less? by lucifuge31337 · · Score: 1

      Don't forget Cisco certified standard equipment cables....

      It's a standard power cable with a notch cut above it.


      WRONG I'm not going to defend Cisco at all for things they've actually DONE, but try to learn something before spouting off on things about which you clearly have no knowledge.

      The power cable plug you are most likely referring to is a C15. It looks like a C13 with a notch in it. But it's not. A C15 is rated for more amperage and higer temperatures.

      --
      Do not fold, spindle or mutilate.
    30. Re:30-50% less? by Karma+Farmer · · Score: 1

      called Cisco and explained that our network guy was 'released' from the company and they stuck me (a programmer) with his job

      Taco, you're posting as an anonymous coward again. And you're still sucking up to Anne Tomlinson.

    31. Re:30-50% less? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cisco gear has a healthy margin (several 100's of percent markup as some buyers have found out on common items) so they could discount somewhat to keep market share. IOS is developed in India, the hardware is built in Maylaysia so they have low costs which allows discounting some without hurting profit too bad. I really don't see 3Com as that big a worry for Cisco, they have a lot of ground to make up and if they compete only on a few types of routers they are not going to hurt Cisco badly anyway even if they are good and cheap.

    32. Re:30-50% less? by twiddlingbits · · Score: 1

      Some models of HP equipment are just Cisco gear with some different looks. I know the SAN swithes are. Maybe that's why you got good support! I seem to hear more support issues with HP/Compaq than anyone else. Personally I've never had a problem with HP other than they (like Cisco) charge you for the name more than the features.

    33. Re:30-50% less? by tigersha · · Score: 1

      Or they do not really have the time to fuck around with OpenBSD. Calling Ciso takes 10 minutes. If you can create, build, install and get to work a 486 with multiple Ethernet cards to build a SWITCH in 10 minute I will bow before you. Time = Money.

      --
      The dangers of excessive individualism are nothing compared to the oppressiveness of excessive collectivism
  6. backdoors by GMail+Troll · · Score: 1, Interesting
    Given Cisco's security history, switching to someone else might be a good idea.


    gmail invite

    1. Re:backdoors by MikeMacK · · Score: 0

      So, switching to someone who just got into the business and has no history in dealing with security issues with routers, is a more secure option?

    2. Re:backdoors by jermz · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Eh? Just got into the router business? 3Com has been doing routers for YEARS now. Their core business was Ethernet from the start. It was only when they started trying to do EVERYTHING ELSE that they got in trouble. They were doing packet filters on their routers before it was in style. I remember working on a NetBuilderII router back in '97-'98 and updating packet filters.

      --
      Hi-Technical Excellent Taste and Flavor!
    3. Re:backdoors by Moskit · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Out of hundreds of their products one (and based on Linux!) has a problem. Big deal...

      Cisco at least provides publicly information about their security problems and makes timely fixes. It makes no sense bashing them - everyone else will have a problem sooner or later...

      "Given Linux security history, switching to someone else might be a good idea."

    4. Re:backdoors by talon77 · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yeah, because look at how secure 3COM's officeconnect firewalls are. If you are a neophite to networking, then you can go with a 3com "my first NAT device" or now, a 3com "my first router". But if you have an office enviorment, you might want to look at a real security product, such as a PIX.

    5. Re:backdoors by drinkypoo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Given that cisco deliberately installed backdoors, I'd say yes, it's a more secure option. Unless you feel it's reasonable for backdoors to be hidden in your router code...

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    6. Re:backdoors by Geoff-with-a-G · · Score: 1

      Yes, thank god 3Com open sourced the code for these new routers, so you don't have to worry about anything like that.

      They did release the source code, right?
      No?
      Really?
      Oh...
      Hmmm. That Cisco router is starting to look a little better...

  7. Re:3COM by keiferb · · Score: 3, Informative

    Yeah, they're still kicking. They have a decent marketshare in the NIC business, and are also semi-competitive in the workgroup-level switching arena as well.

    I've always sworn by their network cards... they're always the first name I turn to.

  8. Interesting move for 3Com... by Vexler · · Score: 3, Interesting

    You know, a while ago Cisco brought suit against the Chinese technology company Huawei for allegedly stealing Cisco's IOS interface and perhaps even code for their routers. I believe the suit was eventually settled with Huawei agreeing that they will "cease and desist". And now 3Com seems to have buddied up with Huawei and come up with their own line of routers, which seems to be 3Com's attempt to be everything to everybody. The problem is that you can only cram so much technology into the box without charging extra for it, as 3Com is doing. With Cisco's dominance in the market place, sooner or later it will hit you in the bottom line and you will be left with very limited set of choices.

    1. Re:Interesting move for 3Com... by Portigui · · Score: 3, Informative

      A little background info on this:

      Info about the suit
      Info about the settlement

    2. Re:Interesting move for 3Com... by jayhawk88 · · Score: 2, Funny

      I'll have you know that 3Com's line of routers have a default username/password of 3Com/oakland. So clearly they are a seperate and complete product from Cisco's line of routers, and there is no chance whatsoever that any of Cisco's code was used to create the 3Com router code.

    3. Re:Interesting move for 3Com... by mborohovski · · Score: 1

      Right, because obviously default usernames and passwords can't be changed ;)

      --
      -Tang, it's a kick in the ass.
    4. Re:Interesting move for 3Com... by LordNimon · · Score: 1

      Wow, you're smart!

      --
      And the men who hold high places must be the ones who start
      To mold a new reality... closer to the heart
    5. Re:Interesting move for 3Com... by Vexler · · Score: 1

      It is interesting that the second article notes that, unlike most other competitors who failed to undercut Cisco's market, Huawei represents a relatively new way of breaking into a market as a competitor from the Far East. The key for Huawei, of course, was to steal and otherwise obtain illegally any proprietary Cisco code that they could find. I suppose this is not at all an "innovative" way of introducing yourself into a new market, as many other companies have done so in the past, some more successfully than others.

    6. Re:Interesting move for 3Com... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you realize that your comment rhymes with your sig...?

  9. Re:3COM by pro547 · · Score: 1

    I would rather have something that has been in the game longer then something that is just starting.

  10. Cisco should be scared by tod_miller · · Score: 0

    I am only associated with our network equiptment through modest inquisitiveness, and I even know cisco are only a brand.

    3com, level1, and linksys are out there. As customer awareness for these products grow (i.e. they know WHAT they do) they can actually shop around, rather than think, oh, erm, I need a cisco.

    --
    #hostfile 0.0.0.0 primidi.com 0.0.0.0 www.primidi.com 0.0.0.0 radio.weblogs.com
    1. Re:Cisco should be scared by firebeaker · · Score: 5, Informative

      If I recall, Cisco owns Linksys....

      --
      -beaker
    2. Re:Cisco should be scared by jumpingfred · · Score: 1, Informative

      Linksys was bought by cisco.

    3. Re:Cisco should be scared by d_force · · Score: 0, Redundant

      3com, level1, and linksys are out there. As customer awareness for these products grow...

      Allow me to increase your awareness... Linksys is a division of Cisco. That's why you see the "Copyright 2003 Cisco Systems, Inc." at the bottom of the Linksys home page.

      -- dforce

      --
      SELECT * FROM USERS WHERE A_WINNER = "YUO";
    4. Re:Cisco should be scared by Geoff-with-a-G · · Score: 1

      I am only associated with our network equiptment through modest inquisitiveness, and I even know cisco are only a brand.

      If you were more acquainted with networking equipment, you would know that Cisco makes impressive hardware. In a later post, you state that you're unsure of their marketshare. It's huge.
      The breakdown goes something like this:
      Home users - less than 1% Cisco (assuming you don't count Linksys, only proper Cisco hardware).
      Enterprise networks - 60%-70% Cisco, depending on your source.

      There's a reason for these numbers and no, it isn't just this sense of "nobody ever got fired for buying Cisco."
      Given a product like a 24 port switch, you can get a 95% reliable product from Netgear, D-Link, Linksys, etc... for something like $200 or so. Meanwhile, Cisco will charge you more than $2,000, for a 99.9% reliable switch.
      If you're a home user, that's a no-brainer: You buy the $200 switch.
      For enterprises that run hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of business transactions through that switch everyday, it's also a no-brainer: you buy the Cisco.

      This 3Com announcement is that they're gonna try to compete for those Enterprise level routers, not the home stuff. It's not hard to undercut Cisco's prices, the tricky part will be matching Cisco's reputation for reliability and support (when something does break, you get help and replacements faster than you would from competitors).

      Meanwhile, that's also why Cisco bought Linksys: so that they could sell cheap (but less reliable) products to home users. Both Cisco and Linksys do a great job of making products for their target markets, but those markets have such different needs that you can't sell them the same product, even if they do the same thing (24 port, 10/100 ethernet switch)

  11. Heh by Gannoc · · Score: 4, Funny

    The new routers compete the Cisco's 3725, 3745, and 83xx routers.

    Hehe.

    The new routers compete the Cisco. 3com have no chance to survive make your time.

    1. Re:Heh by Timmmm · · Score: 1

      The new routers compete the Cisco's 3725, 3745, and 83xx routers.

      Compete *with*.

      Honestly do you people even read what you're posting?

    2. Re:Heh by m0rningstar · · Score: 3, Informative

      And, today, Cisco basically announced the replacement for the 1700, 2600 and the 3745.

      From URL:http://newsroom.cisco.com/dlls/2004/prod_09140 4.html?CMP=ILC-001): ...The Cisco 1800 Series, 2800 Series and 3800 Series integrated services router will begin at list prices of $1395, $1995 and $9500, respectively. The new Cisco 1800 and 2800 Series routers will be available in September 2004 and the Cisco 3800 Series routers will be available in October 2004...

      New features appear to include a higher and easier integration of VoIP/IPT and security and a new WIC interface with higher speeds (1000FX WIC, for instance).

    3. Re:Heh by Trigun · · Score: 1

      So I'll be able to pick up some 1700's, 2600's and 3700's for cheap on e-bay. Looks like now's the time to go for the certs!

    4. Re:Heh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Honestly do you people even read what you're posting?

      Maybe that should be:
      Honestly do you people even read what you're posting?

      That said, he was spoofing the old Zero Wing game Engrish, for some reason.

    5. Re:Heh by m0rningstar · · Score: 1

      While this is somewhat offtopic, I actually used 2500's to study for all the Cisco certs, plus a little time with an ISDN simulator when it came time for the sissy.

      I had one larger router as a frame switch, and was working enough ATM to get away without it, mind.

  12. Roll Out the Red Carpet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I, For one, wecome our new 3com overlords! "Here's the new boss, same as the old boss"

  13. Umm, there's something you should know. by AltGrendel · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Cisco bought out Lynksys.

    --
    The simple truth is that interstellar distances will not fit into the human imagination

    - Douglas Adams

  14. i rather like 3com network software by PhiberOptix · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Here where i work i would rather use 3com than cisco. Even though pretty much every equipment we have is from cisco, imo 3com software is much easier to use than ciscos ios.

    also i hate all the different software versions (SMI, EMI, etc) that comes preinstalled in cisco switches.

    1. Re:i rather like 3com network software by mikael · · Score: 1

      also i hate all the different software versions (SMI, EMI, etc) that comes preinstalled in cisco switches.

      That's how Cisco got to where they are today. They kept bundling every single possible protocol into their boxes as fast as they could. Everything from TCP/IP to ATM to Berkeley trailer packets. If they couldn't get graduates straight out of university, they'd buy out their competitors and add their software.

      I worked for a medium sized company that made routers/bridges/network probes back in the mid 90's. There was no way we could compete against the salaries or the constant stream of new and proprietary protocols.

      --
      Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
    2. Re:i rather like 3com network software by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      3com's switching software sucks. Add a vlan, reboot. That's unacceptable.

      Also, their nazi's about password recovery, want to charge you an arm and a leg.

      They're getting killed for the following reasons:

      1) Price isn't everying. Their documentation sucks, support sucks, RMA process sucks.

      2) Do you remember when they left hundreds of customers hanging when they ditched their last router product line?

      3) Their engineering staff all left to work at Extremenetworks. What you have now is bad cisco emulation from Chinese IOS knock offs.

      I'd rather stick with Cisco or one of their real competetiors, like f5, foundry, extreme, juniper, etc... but 3com?

      Hell no.

  15. Interesting by ryg0r · · Score: 1, Interesting
    Cisco certainly has a large grip on the enterprise router market, 90% the article says.

    Most of the time coporate bodies switch on price (or just fire more people) so good work 3Com.

    When that article came up on /. I knew that more brands of routers need to hit the market and quickly.

    With one company, you inherent all the faults of that company. With different companies coming up to play the game, you'd have vastly different gaps and holes.

    Its all about moving away from the typical exploits.

    Hmmm, I think posting late at night makes my sentences incoherent. Sorry guys.

    --
    Karma whoring .sigs don't work
  16. Should I bother with my CCNA and CCNP, by Trigun · · Score: 4, Funny

    Or can I get the same certificates from 3com for 30-50% less work and knowledge?

    1. Re:Should I bother with my CCNA and CCNP, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean "for 30-50% more braindumps"...

      Haw, haw, haw.

    2. Re:Should I bother with my CCNA and CCNP, by bofkentucky · · Score: 1

      Depends on if you are learning how to route packets and build a network correctly or just doing some IOS handwaving.

      --
      09f911029d74e35bd84156c5635688c0
  17. Confused by stratjakt · · Score: 2, Interesting

    For this article to be posted, we must either hate or love one of Cisco or 3Com.

    I can't think of any reason to particularly give a hoot about either, but this non-news article could only have been posted as a chance to flame a company we hate, or praise a company we love.

    --
    I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
    1. Re:Confused by Compholio · · Score: 1

      We're supposed to be rooting for the underdog (we've kind of got that theme here).

    2. Re:Confused by stratjakt · · Score: 1

      Who's the underdog, though?

      They're both electronics mega-corporations.

      I mean, if Cisco put their routers in translucent pink cases and called them iRoutes and charged 3x as much as they're worth, the "hero" of the story would be obvious.

      And then 3Com is the evil, uninnovative villian creeping in to steal their business away.

      But that's not the case. Cisco has the price, but not the hipster translucent plastic housings.

      --
      I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
    3. Re:Confused by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Yeah, or as an advertisement. You know, like 99% of the stories in it.slashdot.org. (Is it just me or is it aggravating to have to change the url to fix the stupid color scheme? Why are color schemes not user-configurable per-section?)

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  18. Faster Better Cheaper, pick two.... by Mr.Senator · · Score: 3, Informative

    3Com is claiming exactly what everyone wishes to claim, their product is better, their service is better and more in tune with what the customer wants, and above all its cheaper. What they are claiming is not even possible by NASA. You can't have everything as it goes. Every company has found this out and concentrated on 2 of the above. Cisco has decided to provide the best but for a premium, 3com wants it all for less. How do they see themselves as competing against the industy measuring stick in product AND provide it cheaper? Last time I saw one of these claims wasn't from a Fortune 500 company, it was an infomercial declaring its blender could take the place of 50+ kitchen appliences. In this world of computers you get what you pay for and only stiff compitition can drive down a price, not a loose claim from an outdated company. 3com may have balls to make such a large claim, but obviously not the brains to make it happen.

    1. Re:Faster Better Cheaper, pick two.... by e1618978 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yes you can have it all, because Cisco has an 80% margin or something. You can under charge them by a whole lot and still make money. You could spend twice as much per customer to get them more of what they want, charge half what Cisco does, and still make money. BTW - NASA sucks. They spend way too much money to accomplish way too little, so not a good example there.

    2. Re:Faster Better Cheaper, pick two.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They're planning on doing "both" because they've outsourced the majority of the design to a Chinese company.

      They're doing what every formerly-decent "computer" company is doing -- using their brand name to sell products formerly designed in the US, now handled by China and India.

      I don't think Cisco is much better, they outsource plenty too...what a world.

  19. Used to work for Cisco by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I used to work for them, and I will say each component in their line is probably overpriced for what it is.

    That said, you don't just pay for the name, you pay for the brand, the relationship, the support, and the leadership. They do something similar to what Microsoft does, but in a much more benign way, IMHO. They make sure their products work well and give advantages in the way they interact with other Cisco equipment, but then they work with others on interoperability as well. This creates a level playing field and allows "innovation" in important areas, but then they work closely with standards bodies to standardize the parts that "deserve" to be universally applied across the whole internet.

    One such example is multicasting. There are many different standards for multicasting, *even across Cisco's own line*! However, they will work to standardize it and then implement that standard on all of their routers and encourage others to do the same through marketing, partnering, and collaborative development. They line up everyone in advance, even competitors, and work to get such a standard universally accepted.

    Basically, they really do have true leadership. They choose the protocols and technologies that have a chance of getting wide adoption, and make sure that they are the ones behind them. That increases their visibility and credibility in a self-perpetuating cycle.

    Of course, I might be biased from having worked with them, so I would love to hear other opinions. I came away thinking that it's a first class organization, and while not perfect, is certainly a model for how competition, cooperation, and coordination should interact.

    1. Re:Used to work for Cisco by salvorHardin · · Score: 1

      I used to work for 3Com, back in 1996. It seems amusing to see the headline about 3Com products being launched to compete with Cisco, as back then, 3Com viewed themselves as *the* competition for Cisco, and indeed way ahead of any offerings from Madge, Cabletron, Newbridge and Bay. Nowadays, I'm sure it's a very different story.

    2. Re:Used to work for Cisco by Vexler · · Score: 2, Interesting

      We have had extremely patient Cisco TAC engineers on the phone with us for hours trying to resolve a Catalyst 4507R that kept blowing power supplies, and a VPN Concentrator that refused all connectivity after a firmware upgrade (by the way, we were credited with the discovery of a previously unknown bug). If ever their gears go on the blink, you have TAC engineers leaving messages on YOUR voicemail days after the incident was resolved, following up with you to make sure that you are absolutely satisfied with the resolution.

      It's not just the brand, it's the whole support infrastructure with them. Cisco is to the networking world what Dell is to the PC world, in terms of customer support caliber.

    3. Re:Used to work for Cisco by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You kick-ass bug discoverers.

    4. Re:Used to work for Cisco by RicoX9 · · Score: 1

      I used to work for them too. I feel much the same about their standards work.

      3Com, by comparison, has some of the worst command-line stuff I've ever had to work with. Their hardware quality sucked. The last straw for them was the way they exited the Enterprise market. One of the local Universities had a 3Com ATM backbone. They had a problem where the whole set of backbone switches would crash, requiring a power cycle to recover. They called 3Com - 3Com support's answer was "Sorry, we don't support that anymore". So a very expensive support contract wasn't worth the paper it was written on.

      Good luck getting big companies to trust you EVER again 3com...

    5. Re:Used to work for Cisco by woodlander · · Score: 1

      I think there are some very good points here. There is a LOT more to success in the marketplace than just having a well-priced box. When you need it to work, Cisco stands behind it. I have worked with their tech support people for years and I would say there are few in the same league. We'll see if 3COM survives the encounter.

    6. Re:Used to work for Cisco by pyite · · Score: 1

      Man, let me know who your TAC engineers are. Generally I get ones who don't know any other words than "upgrade IOS." That said, the higher level ones that work with you on a more personal basis are pretty good, even if they rejected my claim that a certain incident was a new bug and then came out with an advisory on August 27, 2004, three weeks after telling us it wasn't a serious problem. Disgruntled? No, not me.

      --

      "Nature doesn't care how smart you are. You can still be wrong." - Richard Feynman

  20. Wait and see by Mateito · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I love Cisco stuff. I does everything I want, it does it well, and it doesn't break.

    3com have some good products, but in my experience they don't scale. If I was installing a 10 person office, a 3com firewall and switch is fine. But I wouldn't put 3Com anywhere except the access layer.

    I'd also avoid 3coms VoIP solutions. I don't like their WoS, and the NBX is a dog. I'm not about to recommended Cisco because I have no experience with it, but 3Com won't even make it to the short list.

    Didn't know about the NetGear/Juniper fusion. Juniper's high-end stuff is great, but way more than all but the largest enterprises and carriers would need. The Netgear lines will complement this well.

    1. Re:Wait and see by maxbang · · Score: 2, Funny

      Your comparisons are insightful, indeed. But you forget that THERE CAN ONLY BE ONE!

      *runs screaming into net ops room, kitana drawn...*

      --
      I also reply below your current threshold.
  21. It's about time by wtoconnor · · Score: 1

    Cisco took away a market 3COM basically help create. Tens years after the fact 3COM decides it must compete with Cisco. What a revelation.

  22. access router competition by agristin · · Score: 2, Interesting


    Cisco is in an interesting position in spite of buying linksys, they will face competition from 3com (who is positioned below them in the market now) and from above by Juniper. Both Juniper and 3Com are getting into the access router comptetion.

    I'd like to know if 3com has some or any of the convergence features (voip, ipv6, qos, multicast) that new networks often need. Cisco access routers may cost, but it is easy to implement a network with some excellent modern features. Cisco has a modular product line that will allow you to implement without VOIP or other features and then later add it easily. It is also easy to find people familiar with cisco IOS command line. You may pay less for a 3com router, and then waste time configuring it or finding out you can't configure the features you need.

    For Juniper a different set of problems (as there are a few people out there that know JunOS and there is a training infrastructure for it like Cisco). Juniper may have the convergence features (I don't know I haven't looked at the product line), but it is more likely as they are moving from the top down.

    Cisco will face some interesting comptetion, but I'm sure they will respond- which can only be good for the customer.

    -A

    Disclaimer: I am Cisco certified and like using their networking equipment.

    1. Re:access router competition by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      JunOS is easy.

      Think Catos meets BSD.

      Plus, it's got cool API's so you don't have to be a console monkey anymore.

  23. Too late, and no voice support by tlon · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The author mentions that these products compete against the Cisco 3725, 3745, and 83xx (that should read 8xx series) routers.

    In related news, Cisco today announced three new router families, the 1800 series, the 2800 series, and the 3800 series, which are positioned to replace the 1700, 2600, and 3700 series. Nice of 3Com to position against an obsolete technology platform

    Competitors are crawling out of the woodwork with products positioned against Cisco's old tired iron, but Cisco isn't exactly sitting back on its laurels and scratching its head.

    What all these competitors are missing is that Cisco's router strategy has subtly changed in the last 18 months: voice features and services are a key part of Cisco's differentiation, and none of its competitors, be it Juniper, ADTRAN, Tasman, Enterasys, or 3Com, have stepped up to challenge Cisco on that front.

    VoIP is an ideal in the branch office, and Cisco is in a cushy position to get a corner on that market unless some of its competitors get their act together.

    1. Re:Too late, and no voice support by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      Well sometimes getting the old tech is useful. Many people just need the simple stuff and if they can save 30% what the heck. Sure techs like to have all the neat and cool stuff but most people don't even use 20% of all the features there is to offer. So might as well pay less for someting with less features but more % of features you will use. Why do you think the Sun is hurting, although Sun has great products and a lot of truly inovative features in the OS an their Hardware, People don't really need most of the features so they don't buy sun hardware but go to an AMD 64 bit option with linux where you get all the stuff they wanted without having to pay for the stuff they will never use.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
  24. Re:3COM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thats funny I have always sworn AT their network cards.

  25. 3com nics.. great.. 3com switches.. ugh.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Unless 3com has finally fixed their issues with autodetection of 3com nics working with their 3com switches.. forget about it..

    I know Cisco stuff works.. and it's EXPENSIVE.. personally i LOVE alcatel switches.. they worked as advertised.. and unlike cisco.. were pretty simple to configure.. I hate cisco IOS.. unless you use it all the time.. every day.. it's impossible to configure without having to go back and make changes before you get it right.. that and IOS isn't consistent across platforms.. what works on a 3600 doesn't necessairly work on a switch.. doesn't necessairly work on a cat5000..

    Alcatel.. good gear.. too bad more people don't use it.

    1. Re:3com nics.. great.. 3com switches.. ugh.. by RicoX9 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Cisco IOS is great.

      Yes it hasn't been consistent historically. That's because the Catalyst 5000 line was a purchased product, using "Catalyst OS".

      Nowadays, all switches are coming with IOS, unless you specify Cat OS (can only put Cat OS on the chassis switches)

      Plus - it's not an apples to apples comparison to compare IOS on the 3600 (router) to IOS on a 3500 (switch). The functions are inherently different.

      IOS is not hard once you learn a few basics. You can practially build the commands without ever looking at documentation. For that matter all the docs are freely available on Cisco's website.

      I have never seen Alcatel's gear or the OS. From looking at the documentation, Alcatel's CLI is a knock-off of IOS. That would leave you using the web interface. Cisco has a web GUI as well. I wouldn't use it, but it's there.

      Sounds like you don't do enough networking to even make an educated evaluation of hardware or operating system.

  26. 3Com's got a nasty habit..... by ARRRLovin · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ....of discontinuing products and then removing every trace of that product on their website (firmware, manuals, etc) and that will keep me from ever buying or recommending their products. I have an entire wireless setup at home, 3 "Office Gateways" and some other gear (not in use) that I should just throw away because they don't even acknowledge its existence, much less provide me with a PCMCIA card driver or access point/router firmware.

    --
    -Randy
  27. There are no 83xx ciscos by Jerdie · · Score: 0, Redundant

    The article says 83x.

    --
    Programming is simply the application of logic to creativity
  28. 3Com's history by mrscott · · Score: 4, Informative

    3Com used to be in the higher end switching market with pretty big gear - the Corebuilder 9000 was their high end chassis and was NICE. In fact, at one point (1999), they were the number two vendor in the market right behind Cisco. After working with 3Com and Cisco for a replacement of my campus network (I managed the network group at a college at the time), I selected 3Com based on the equipment features and the VERY attractive price in relation to the Cisco solution. The sales reps from 3Com were confident in the solution and in the support we'd get from 3Com moving forward
    Two months after my installation was complete, 3Com EXITED the market. Yes - they immediately discontinued ALL of the brand new gear that we had just purchased. No notice. On a Monday morning, it was in the papers.
    They botched their rep ALL over the place. I doubt I'd touch their new gear with a 10 foot pole. They're one of the flakiest companies I've ever had the misfortune to work with. Good gear, but absolutely horrid management.

    1. Re:3Com's history by chinard · · Score: 1

      This is actually a VERY important point that people need to remember. I too was completely burned by 3com "changing direction" and killing their entire line of enterprise switches, and offering no extended support either. They have done it 3 times since as well. I'm surprised how quickly people seem to forget about this. Another important thing to take into consideration as well is the recent shift away from access routers towards layer 3 switches and wan switching. Lets face it, love them or hate them, cisco isnt going anywhere for a while.

    2. Re:3Com's history by pappy72 · · Score: 1

      Amen, samed thing happened to me, I used to be a network engineer for a regional Reseller, and we had just outfitted 3 entire school districts with Corebuilders in each of the schools, as well as several businesses with 3Com routers, prior to their exit from that market. We ended up losing all these customers (all their network and PC needs) because of 3Com....

    3. Re:3Com's history by pyite · · Score: 1

      Yea, I just checked our stockroom. We're using Corebuilders as doorstops... literally. Then again, we use Cisco 5000s as doorstops too.

      --

      "Nature doesn't care how smart you are. You can still be wrong." - Richard Feynman

    4. Re:3Com's history by Bargeld · · Score: 1

      Same experience here. In fact, the shop I was at had the very first "outside of 3Com" CB9k. We did pre-release testing and evals on pretty much every piece of infrastructure gear they made in the late 90s. The Netbuilders were utter shyt, but the high-end core switching was pretty nice, certainly comparable to the best Cisco had to offer at the time.

      And then the other shoe dropped. "We" (myself and my fellow consultants...network engineering for this client was staffed entirely by the company I worked for) warned them...we were all Cisco and Bay geeks to begin with tho, so we were discounted. And then 3Com dropped the bomb: discontinued, no support, switch to Foundry, yadda yadda.

      Ironic that as one of their purported "premier clients", the first we heard about the decision was the press release on the web the morning they released it.

      Never again.

      --
      "I hate to advocate drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity to anyone. But they've always worked for me." --Dr. Hunter S.
  29. Response to Cisco & Linksys by tod_miller · · Score: 1

    My linksys must be pre-cisco - no sign on there, but this shows that they are scared of competition, buying out competitors that are small enough perhaps....

    --
    #hostfile 0.0.0.0 primidi.com 0.0.0.0 www.primidi.com 0.0.0.0 radio.weblogs.com
  30. 3Com Routers by liam193 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    That's an interesting thought. Didn't I hear about those somewhere before. Yeah, that's it. They used to sell routers and vacated the market. Rather quickly if I recall and a number of people got stuck with gear that they couldn't use.

    I just don't know how quickly people will be to jump on the bandwagon with an organization that left many of there customers hanging with a "we're not doing this business anymore" message 3-4 years ago.

  31. Atrocious quality by gweihir · · Score: 2, Informative

    3com is a low-quality manufacturer and has been at least for the last 10 years. And I am talking manufacturing and design here.

    My first experience was a 10-pack of 3com network cards about 8 years back: Some were fast, some were slow, some produced so many bugs that the router (Cisco) disabled the interface. These were cards with consecutive serial numbers! My explanation is very poor Q/A on the cards. I never have had this type of problems with any cheack RTL8xxx card from Taiwan.

    The second experience was an unusable "Office" switch, that had a noisy and very poorly designed switching regulator in it. That was 1 year back. The switch finally died becayse they also had cut the leads of the power semiconductor too long and in short-circuited. I declined a replacement, since it also ran so hot, that it would have dies in a few months anyway. I have now a far cheaprt router by Netgear, with no such problems and overall far more solid design and manufacturing. And cheaper as well.

    --
    Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    1. Re:Atrocious quality by Eraser_ · · Score: 1

      Agreed. We have had more problems with 3com layer2 managed switches than any of the Cisco stuff we bought. You get what you pay for, and Cisco was always there for us with a updated firmware, work around, *something* to get the network going again.

      3com was fairly lax about the whole thing and the switches were eventually canned and Cisco green sits in their place. (The switches were purchased by managment somewhere along the line, judging by price alone)

      On a side note, one of the signs of intelligent life is a sense of self preservation right? Ever notice when something is going horribly wrong on a network port, IOS cuts power to that port? Cut off the finger to save the arm...

  32. I'm sure I'm not the only one by dougnaka · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Who will never buy anything with the 3com name one it. I'm no fan of Cisco's overpriced junk, but 3com really brings home the title of crappiest hubs, switches, and network cards. When dell shipped 3com cards I had a pile of them on my desk, we're talking failure rates over 80% from brand new in less than a month. And I've had 3 3com switches, all had more than 50% of the ports dead.. There's little to no chance they can redeem their brand from me.

    I'd pay more for an unknown brand because at least I have a chance at it working.

    --
    My Linux Command of the Day site : LCOD
    1. Re:I'm sure I'm not the only one by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A few years ago I had the misfortune of experiencing 3COM. I was writing drivers for a PCI ATM network interface card for OS/2 for a *very* large bank in Europe. The bank wanted to run ATM with Lan Emulation and chose 3Com's ATM switches. Of course 3COM promised that they'd provide drivers for an ATM NIC (which they didn't). The bank didn't believe 3COM either and chose us as a vender, especially since we already had OS/2 ATM drivers. Anyway, our drivers worked flawlessly unless there were multiple 3COM switches. When multiple switches were used, the ATM signalling would fail. Now ATM, unlike Ethernet, is prettymuch strictly point to point like a telephone network. An end station really has no idea how many hops are between it an another endstation. The bug was clearly somewhere in 3COM's signalling stack.

      3COM put the blame on us and never fixed the problem, causing my group to lose a multimillion dollar contract (which is a fraction of the contract 3COM lost through their lack of support).

      Later we developed Ethernet cards designed for the server. We managed to get qualified for Dell's servers which was no easy task. At the time, the only other card certified by Dell was Intel. No matter how hard they tried, 3COM always failed miserably. Their drivers sucked and could not handle the high loads.

      I wouldn't touch 3COM with a ten foot pole.

    2. Re:I'm sure I'm not the only one by madcow_ucsb · · Score: 1

      And even if they were *good*, they were still the guys that had boxes at Fry's, $75 for a NIC next to a D-Link for $10. Never dealt with their enterprise gear other than some already purchased and installed switches, but their consumer grade stuff was so overpriced it wasn't even funny.

      But their name sold. There were a number of times I had to tell people I saw in the store "Just grab the $10 OEM NE2000. It's a fraction of the cost and will work with everything."

  33. Re:3COM by ke4qqq · · Score: 1

    You're kidding right?? The fact that 3com was founded by Metcalfe, often touted as the creator of Ethernet. Or the fact that 3com (1979) was in existence 5 years before Cisco(1984).

  34. News Flash! by everklear · · Score: 0, Troll

    Maker of switching and networking gear intends to compete with maker of switching and networking gear! Stop the presses! Yes Cisco dominates, but 3Com has been trying to win a bigger market share in this arena for many years. They even do *gasp* IP telephony.

  35. 3com? Boo! by telemonster · · Score: 4, Informative

    Okay, so recently I had the misfortune of using some 3com NICs in FreeBSD servers for a project. I hereby swear off the use of 3com cards. I notice that on multiple switches the thruput is horrible (Cabletron ELS and 7C, Netgear, Cisco 5513).

    Also, where I used to work they bought a 3com RAS solution. The CLI was pretty bad compared to my favorite at the time, Livingston Portmasters. It was overpriced, and just seemed like a botched design with the CPU in one box and a $2000 add on with 4 modems in it.

    Some people seem to have a thing for 3com. I think it is mostly the people that used their cards when 3com was the major player. Their earlier switches do seem rugged, but I'd probably look to SMC Tigerswitch (owned by Enterasys now?) before 3com for a SOHO deployment. I'm odd, even for SOHO I like managed switches and rackmount. And metal boxes, I dig NetGears form factors. PS, is NetGear still tied to Bay? Bay was sold to Nortel, Netgear used to be Bay Networks. Is Netgear Notel or the existing Bay Networks? Confusion.

    I'd imagine it is management that plauges 3com. They announced the end of all high end products a while ago, since Cisco's market share was owning them (and others like Riverstone, Extreme, Enterasys, Foundry). They wanted to concentrate on their NICs (one word, intel Pro 10/100) and little baby network devices.

    Cisco dominates the market. I own a few pieces of Cisco gear, ALOT of Cabletron/Enterasys surplus and many of the smaller vendors. Cisco gear is indeed nice, I like it but there is a premium to be paid (unless your like me and buy from eBay, a practice Cisco tried unsuccessfully to stop).

    There have been alot of small players that might have competed but the major players buy them up. Prominet got bought by Lucent, their products became the Cajun family (and Intel resold some of their stuff). There are others (ELS series from Cabletron was a smaller company that got bought out). You can see it when you dig thru the firmware binaries :-) Look for copyrights and look up the no-names you see on the copyrights.

    --
    Southeastern Virginia REPRESENT!
    1. Re:3com? Boo! by Vexler · · Score: 1

      To be fair, I have used my share of 3Com NICs and have never had any major problems with them. Oh, sure, with the older cards you had to tweak the settings, but nothing major to which you now refer. That's my experience with their NICs.

      Their switches and routers are a different story, I'll grant you that. We had really old 3Com switches and routers in here that are hard to use and not as reliable, and I've personally witnessed before a single Cabletron card taking out connectivity to all the sites of a major East Coast healthcare insurer (who shall remain anonymous). Forget their high-end stuff if you must, but their NICs are better IMHO.

  36. I won't trust them again. by jonesboy_damnit · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ..3Com used to make all kinds of high-end networking gear (those of you in the cable industry will be familiar with 3Com CMTSes). Their kit never adhered to standards ("DOCSIS? What's DOCSIS?" - as if DOCSIS equipment needed any help being incompatible and/or unpredictable with other DOCSIS gear), never worked properly, and their support was always terrible.
    One of our customers bought about $50k worth of 3Com broadband over cable equipment, called a few days later to ask about a firmware upgrade, and were informed that 3Com had never made such a piece of equipment.
    Classy.
    -Matt

    1. Re:I won't trust them again. by draggy · · Score: 3, Informative

      Bullsh*t.

      The 3Com CMTS 1000 system based off the TotalControl (which was a USR platform anyways) chassis, was DOCSIS 1.0 , so much do CableLabs chose it as the standard platform for DOCSIS testbed.

      The earlier platform wasn't DOCSIS, then again before y2k neither were many popular CMTS systems (Terayon's CDMA)

      http://www.3com.com/corpinfo/en_US/pressbox/pres s_ release.jsp?INFO_ID=7339

      --

      Let's not all suck at the same time please

  37. Come ON! Was: Response to Cisco & Linksys by LucidityZero · · Score: 1
    but this shows that they are scared of competition, buying out competitors that are small enough perhaps....
    You weren't around in the late 90's during the tech boom, were you? Cisco has always been notorious for purchasing companies to enter new market space. Many of the products Cisco offers today were originally produced by other companies, and when seen viable they were snatched up by Cisco.

    I don't think it's that Cisco is scared. I think it's smart business. It's exactly actions like purchasing Linksys that has gotten Cisco to where they are today.

    --
    Sig.i>
  38. Mod this AC down by MarkGriz · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    How did this BS get modded Informative? Hello? Earth to mods? Please don't moderate something informative if you have no idea what you are moderating about.

    Cisco does not own 3Com. Now perhaps if the AC said "lol 3com - c15co \/\/1|_|_ 0wnz ju", an Insightful moderation would be appropriate.

    --
    Beauty is in the eye of the beerholder.
  39. Cisco at the high end, Adtran at the low end by zerofoo · · Score: 1

    Is there really a market for another cheap router? Our last ISP (years ago) gave us a 2500 series cisco router. It was great, built well, fast and it even had an ISDN backup for the T1 circuit. Nice gear, never had a day of downtime due to the router in 5 years, but pricey.

    Now we've got an Adtran. Literally, one third the cost of the cisco, performs just as well (without ISDN backup). Lots of ISPs are switching to Adtran stuff because it's cheap and it works.

    Remind me again why we need MORE cheap routers?

    -ted

    1. Re:Cisco at the high end, Adtran at the low end by furasato · · Score: 1

      Of all of the routers I have ever had to configure, the ADTRAN equipment seemed to be the least difficult to work with. Thier tech support is top notch, and the T/A line of routers are exceptionally stable. Only once in two years has any of our 4 adtrans decided to die. A quick reboot, problem solved. Did I mention that they are cheap for the old wallet as well?

  40. Cisco IOS by crimson30 · · Score: 1

    Will their hardware be able to run Cisco IOS? If not, will their OS be nearly the same?

  41. Or you can get them 20% more cheaper from Huwaei by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Look 3Com routers are nothing but Huwaei routers stamped with 3Com name. 3Com has no technology at all. They have no engineers building routers. They think of themselves as Dell of networking world but Dell has competition from multiple vendors for their product. 3Com has only one vender : Huwaei. If Huwaei splits they are up the creek. They have no routers/switches to sell except from Huwaei. Yes I do know about the joint venture but all joint venture products are from Huwaei. 3Com is NOT providing any engineering. If you really want to buy the product then buy from Huwaei which will be even cheaper.
    Another issue is support. 3Com has currently 1-4 supporting the routers. They do not believe in training ahead of time. Most of them have no router experience so you take your chances when you call. If you have an issue with the router and call 3Com then 3Com calls Huwaei to fix the problem. Guess what Huwaei has no incentive to do an emergency customer fix of the router. They will just say (or do say) it will be in the next build or version. Guess what as a customer I am up the creek !!! 3Com has no engineering to fix your issues, Huwaei does !!!
    I agree that Cisco products are overpriced, but remember that this is the networking equipment you are talking about. If router goes down, network goes down. What would you have 30-40% off with no support or pay higher to make sure network is always running. I even heard the CEO of 3Com say in Merril Lynch conference that he talked to CEO's and they said price was NOT a major factor in purchase. They need the network to work 24/7 with full support if anything goes wrong. If I am an enterprise customer I will NOT buy 3Com, small business sure it is cheaper but you get what you pay for.

  42. Re:30-50% less? - How About This... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Try this on for size. How about a AFDX (Avionics Full Duplex Swithced Ethernet) network card that costs $19,000 and $10,000 USD (price varies with form factor). It is similar to a commodity Ethernet card that has redundancy and is deterministic. But since so few are produced and the customers have deep pockets, the price is steep.

  43. Re:Come ON! Was: Response to Cisco & Linksys by Cheile · · Score: 1

    Mod parent up! You're 100% spot on. Cisco has a long history of buying out companies that they think either have interesting technology or would compliment their existing line well. I remember vividly when Cisco swooped through and bought out Cerent Corp for some huge amount of money (Quick googling shows it was $7.3 billion) as I lived in Sonoma Co. at the time.

    Cisco wasn't scared they were smart. Instead of trying to stifle innovation with legislation or illegal market practices they just showed up with buckets of cash when they found something interesting.

  44. funny by extra+the+woos · · Score: 0

    I once met and had a conference...with one of the lead guys at cisco.. I think he was the senior VP... Anyway, he wasn't really that nice, and I didn't like most of his ideas but.. He said that him and 2 friends formed 3com... Would be funny, his own old company stealing his market share.. just kinda ironic.

    --
    replacing it with NEW Folger's Crystals! (lets see if they notice the difference)
  45. I only take my routers three ways... by sleighb0y · · Score: 3, Informative

    Purchased

    Free

    Secure


    Any combination of the above three.

    1. Re:I only take my routers three ways... by cpghost · · Score: 1

      You don't need them for high bandwidth pipes, do you?

      --
      cpghost at Cordula's Web.
    2. Re:I only take my routers three ways... by RinkSpringer · · Score: 1

      Show me a PC that can route 10GBit then, in that case. Normal PC's can't do 1GBit either, unless you have expensive hardware like PCI-X and 64bit PCI...

      But granted, for the typical home user, they are more than enough :)

    3. Re:I only take my routers three ways... by sleighb0y · · Score: 1

      Nope, just slow old 100Mbps.
      What do you have at home?

      I was surprised to see a P133 w/ 32MB running FREESCO, transfer a solid 35Mbps.

      I had to download OpenBSD from about 5 different mirrors at the same time (with ~4 simultaneous downloads per-site) to get my bandwidth use up that high.

  46. Software by hhawk · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Back in the day when I was buying my first real Router a 20k unit from Cisco I had looked at a similar 3com offering. It was clear it was better on a pure packet handling basis, but the software wasn't anything I needed. I think it did some Novel Routing and TCP/IP (et. al.), but I didn't have support for sample for giving ethernet routing to Apple computers "then" still on LocalTalk (a key feature for me); but it was more than just Apple support. Cisco had much more software in Router to really let me set up the network I really needed...

    I hope they have learned from that lesson...

    --
    http://www.hawknest.com/
  47. My 3com experience by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    I don't use 3com NICs that much - I mostly use intel cards. I didn't have the problems others have described with their NICs, the failure rate may have been a little higher than the others, but I stopped using them because we noticed a considerable performance gain from using intel cards (not because their hardware failed so much)...

    Where I really draw experience from 3com is their switches and routers, neither of which I'll ever use again.

    Scenario:
    1 x 7513 connected to a switch via a PA-2FE on a VIP2-50
    1 x 3com 24 port switch connected to the cisco router and connected to
    8x Acend Max TNT's each with 672 DS0's and 1xFE.

    Two observations:
    First, the switch wasn't nearly as configurable as the competing cisco switch (2924xl). It had a neat web interface with java applets but in general its software configuration was limited, and its cli sucked.
    Second, under no load the switch was fine. However, under the heavy load of 5376 dialup users sharing a 100 megabit connection the switch had serious packet problems, or lack of packets since it dropped most of them. It couldn't do the packets per second that the 2924 could, even if under no load the throughput was reasonable.

    In general the switch from 3com, which wasn't much cheaper than the cisco switch performed terribly.

    Second scenario:
    1 x adtran TSU
    1 x 3com t1 (well, v35) router

    I had to configure this piece of junk for a customer and I have to say that its CLI is the worst I have ever worked with. Yeah, its even worse than the xedia CLI for those who have also been unfortunate enough to work with those boxes. What should have taken minutes, and would have with a well thought out CLI took hours.

    In short, 3com don't even get into the business. Stay in the consumer sector where people don't have a clue - because I and anyone else who has really put your "enterprise" products to the test already know to stay away from you - we won't be buying. You burned us once, then instead of making things right and fixing your software issues, you exited the market leaving us high and dry.

  48. Re:30-50% less? - How About This... by RISCy · · Score: 1

    Not exactly true, they have a proprietary IP stack, to provide the determinism. 802.3 does not provide for this kind of service, much to the the chagrin of most realtime processes

  49. Re:Come ON! Was: Response to Cisco & Linksys by tod_miller · · Score: 1

    I agree, purchasing these companies is what gave cisco the position where it is today.

    I would argue that it is precarious - although I have no idea of thier existing market share, only that they seem (from my observations) to be priced on the border of the market. If they price themselves out of the market, it will be filled by other companies.

    --
    #hostfile 0.0.0.0 primidi.com 0.0.0.0 www.primidi.com 0.0.0.0 radio.weblogs.com
  50. Of course! by glass_window · · Score: 2, Insightful

    They had to make up for the fact that they can't sell a 14.4 modem for $300 anymore!

    1. Re:Of course! by /dev/trash · · Score: 1

      But couldn't you upgrade that for free to thelatest and greatest?

  51. Do you mean by 2names · · Score: 1

    their history of quickly finding problems and fixing them?

    --
    "I'm just here to regulate funkiness."
  52. IOS-like CLI? by cpghost · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Only if 3Com provided a IOS-like command line interface will they be able to gain market share among trained CCIE/CCNA/... personnel. Of course, they will have to provide high quality (*cough*) equipment too...

    --
    cpghost at Cordula's Web.
    1. Re:IOS-like CLI? by Guppy06 · · Score: 1

      "Only if 3Com provided a IOS-like command line interface"

      The only non-NIC 3com device I'm familiar with is my $300 OfficeConnect Dual 56k LAN modem (I didn't see anything else out there like it at the time). While "everything" is "supposed" to be configurable, there is an undocumented, unsupported, disavowed CLI interface accessable through Telnet that does a lot more than their port 80 stuff can do (like, say, filtering). Unfortunately, it's malformed (as if the people who made it cobbled it together like a hobby, with no real intent in making it completely functional) and it seems the odds of it being able to do even everything it claims to be able to do seems slim to none.

      Between that and the way it locks up for inexplicable reasons (to the point where the disavowed Telnet interface is the only responsive interface at all) and needs to be hung up or reset... but it's not as if anybody else makes a small end-user router with two 56k modems, or at least not anybody that would sell me just one without having to set up a freakin' commercial account (are you listening, Cisco?)...

  53. Cisco Equipment by Arjuna01 · · Score: 2, Informative

    I work in an environment with a mix of Cisco 2600, 3600, and 3700 routers and Cisco 2900XL, 2950, and 2970 switches. I can tell you from experience 3Com will never get in the door here with their substandard goods. We've had countless 3Com 3C905, 3C509, etc etc NIC's go bad for no reason. I wouldn't trust our business to 3Com switches or routers.

    I would consider Juniper or Foundry equipment for certain applications, but not without demo hardware first to see how they integrated into our stricly Cisco network. VLAN trunking, spanning-tree, etc can differ immensly from one vendor to the next. Sometimes even the same vendor but different models do not interoperate quit the way one would expect.

    In any case, if you are on the fence with either Cisco or 3Com, I'd tell you Cisco. We have lots of Layer 2 switches that they replace overnight with no issues. I've had Cisco send me exact replicas of routers in less than 4 hours (courier service), complete with memory and flash to test problems with integration. They really do offer top notch customer support and service.

    Things I do not like about Cisco. If you buy hardware used from anyone but Cisco, it has to be recertified by Cisco Engineers before you can put it on Cisco maintenance. Sounds logical? Sure, until you see to recertify hardware is about the same price as getting some newer, faster, and more featured. I go through a nightmare every year when it comes time to renew our maintenance contract. I won't go into details, but it seems their database for this information is very cumbersome for the reps. They lack SSH as a standard connection option. Without certain IOSes this feature is not available at all. I wish they would change this.

    --
    "Some mornings, it's just not worth chewing through the leather straps." ~ Emo Phillips
  54. Re:Come ON! Was: Response to Cisco & Linksys by twiddlingbits · · Score: 1

    I know someone who has done some VC work with Cisco and Cisco actually FUNDs quite a few of these small companies as VCs (no, I don't know which ones..thats a secret). When the technology is mature, Cisco then buys them out via an option in the VC funding contract. If it doesn't pan out, Cisco hasn't lost nearly as much as if they had done the R&D internally. If it does work they can incorporate the technolgy into many different products very quickly. Pretty smart strategy.

  55. Woe and Misery by Bargeld · · Score: 1

    Having had the misfortune of working extensively with 3Com's old Netbuilder line of routers 5-10 years ago, all I can say is: setd -bollocks !3com

    At least they seem to have the good sense not to try and compete in the mid-to-high-end market this time around.

    I recall having a 2-month long "support war" with their engineers (we were at the time one of their premier clients...director of IT was even on their technical advisory committee if memory serves...you'd think we'd rate good support).

    I wanted to do some basic network management on their Netbuilder 2 dual-cpu models. But the numbers I was getting back via snmp made no sense...4000% steady utilization on one, 0% pegged on another, and...heheh...negative utilization on a third, for example. After months of wrangling, I finally got one of their developers to admit something along the lines of "well, it was too hard to accurately calculate utilization with a second CPU, so we just populate the value with a random number."

    Brilliant workaround :)

    --Bargeld

    --
    "I hate to advocate drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity to anyone. But they've always worked for me." --Dr. Hunter S.
  56. No EIGRP by skeezix-the-cat · · Score: 1

    ...of course. For those of us w/ eigrp-based networks, that's going to be a real problem. And the faculty of eigrp can be debated, yes. But some will be stuck w/ it for a long time to come, and unless another prot is used and then redistributed, well....no crappy 3Com for YOU! skeezix... "I do what I can, I work in the dark"

    --
    --I do what I can, I work in the dark.
  57. 3Com tried this before. by bs_02_06_02 · · Score: 4, Informative



    I love it when bean counters decide that years of end-user pain and agony is worth $500 or $1000 savings on a cheap piece of hardware.

    I've installed, maintained, configured, and troubleshooted hundreds of routers over the past 10 years. Hardware costs are not the only thing to consider. If you think saving 30%-50% in hardware costs is great, how about spending 200% more in labor costs, year after year? How about outfitting your NOC with an expensive new monitoring package exclusively designed for your new hardware? How about facing growth limits? How about watching your network go from 99.9999% uptime to something less?
    What do you tell your customer/client base? "We're saving $1000 per router. I'm sorry that you'll have to live with ______ and ______ for the next few years." What is that worth to you? When there is trouble, listen to the vendors bicker over the reason(s). What is it worth to wait 1 year or more for a bug fix? And then discover that in order to get that bug fix, you might have to buy new hardware?

    People don't realize what's involved in building a network. Reliability, room-for-growth, and features are everything. There are problems in every network. Giving your users a productive, working environment is the ultimate goal. Gambling with new hardware is not something I'd like to do very often.
    I can guarantee this: I'll pay double for a reliable piece of hardware that does EXACTLY what I want, all the time when I know that the other end is the same brand of hardware. Plus, the carrier in between is using the same hardware. Plus, it's been lab tested by everyone. It gets better: One phone call and all my problems and answers are readily available. Every one of those things saves time and money. User experience is more positive because features are better, and there isn't any finger pointing between hardware vendors. I don't have to spend money buying multiple hardware platforms to labtest. I don't have to worry about mixed-vendor networks. Have you ever installed a mixed-vendor network? It's one of the most painful experiences you could ever have. I would put it right up there with kidney stones, and having fingernails forcibly removed with a pair of pliers.

    Bean counters that want cheap hardware are usually going to pay increased labor costs. They will have workarounds and painful experiences for their end-users. It's NOT WORTH IT! If you want 99.9999% uptime, error-free performance, buy the best product available.

    Cheap hardware is almost always feature-less, inflexible, and painful to live with. How many people remember 3Com's last go-around with routers? Easy to configure, but limited flexibility, and lacking features makes it harder to live with in the long run. Oh, and darn near impossible to troubleshoot. We had to outfit all of our technicians with $100K protocol analyzers to prove the trouble to cheap 3Com (and other) hardware because of the finger-pointing.

    Look at it another way: If you're buying a Cadillac for the home office, why would you buy a Ford Pinto for the remote offices? It doesn't make sense. If you were building a space shuttle... are you going to use the cheapest hardware? Why would you do that with your network? There's a reason why Cisco has 90% of the market. Cisco has the most features. Everything hinges on software. While there are bugs in software, Cisco OS is fantastic. Features like EIGRP and HSRP make Cisco worthwhile. Interoperability with Cisco's LAN equipment make it worthwhile. Also, think about training, grey market materials, and used goods. Cisco is out there, commonly available. If you pick 3Com access routers, you've got to hire/train people to handle a new brand of unknown hardware. Training is expensive. And if your best-trained expert leaves, you've got to go find someone else. Finding Cisco people is easier.

    People talk about Juniper. Juniper excels at one specific niche. The big, big router... basically IP to OC48 stuff. How many of those do you need? Juniper talks about the "pepsi challenge", but frankly, they'll have to go over and above Cisco to win my vote. There are other products, but you still end up with a mixed-vendor network.

    --
    -- No sig for you!
    1. Re:3Com tried this before. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Best of Breed mixed vendor networks work fine, and aren't really *THAT* big of a headache if the vendors know how to play nice. (I've had good experiences with multivendor issues, with f5 and cisco, nokia and cisco, extreme and cisco, most of the time, it *WAS* cisco's fault, but they usually fess up and fix the problems quickly.) Cisco definately doesn't make the best kit for everything.

      unfortunately, 3com has had some serious problems in the past. I think most of their top talent went to work for extremenetworks after being screwed by management.

      FYI Juniper rox, and has a good job in getting Cisco to fix a lot of the silly things that they do.

      Junos rules. we're slated to start testing the new XR IOS on GSRs, so I'm hoping for an equally pleasant experience.

    2. Re:3Com tried this before. by rnxrx · · Score: 1
      I've been working on large Cisco deployments for around ten years and recently passed the six year anniversary of completing my CCIE (..complete with recertification). I've literally worked on everything from the old 6xx series through the GSR and Stratacom lines. I don't work for any equipment vendor and never have.

      A good chunk of this thread seems to focus on the fact that Cisco gear is expensive. I don't think anyone (...Cisco included) would argue this point. The part that disturbs me is that there's this basic notion that somehow these costs yield boxes that are faster/better/more functional. At some point I think this might have had more of a ring of truth to it, but in the past 3-4 years the following has happened:

      1.) The quality of support staff in the field has declined tremendously. The layoffs hurt the company and its culture a lot more than people might imagine.

      2.) The quality control of software/hardware is absolutely horrific. From major, widespread issues with 4000- and 4500- series ASIC's to a stream of major security issues in IOS to an exceptionally poor history with the emergence of VOIP and the continued prevalence of bugs in fundamental parts of the IOS (...including EIGRP), I have now been in a number of large financial services and service provider shops that actively distrust anything from Cisco that they themselves haven't regression tested for an *extended* period of time (testing it yourself is always the right thing to do, but the extent of required checking here is in a different league).

      3.) The performance of Cisco equipment has never been #1. I don't think a lot of people realize that they're often not even in the top 5. I know of a number of situations where 7200-class routers with the newest NPE's and moderate interface counts (1-2 DS3's worth of traffic) have either been completely ripped out or - worse yet - fronted with Juniper boxes in response to situations requiring mechanisms to respond to spiking traffic loads and/or DDoS attacks. As anyone who has ever worked with Cisco equipment to any depth can attest, the best possible throughput an IOS device can achieve is with virtually no configuration. Adding features (fancy queueing, security features, etc) will often dramatically reduce the capacity of the box.

      I can buy a Juniper M7i for approximately the same price as a 7200, but the M7i can handle OC12 and GigE at line rate - with features enabled. This should be an ominous omen for Cisco, as is the new series edge routers that Juniper is bringing out (J series). I can buy Nortel L2 switches with radically better performance and density for a fraction of the price of equivalent Cisco gear - and still get very solid support.

      Cisco is a huge company that is increasingly treating even its larger customers very poorly. Technologies like EIGRP provide a degree of lock-in (I'm actually surprised that more folks on this board don't have an issue with the proliferation of this closed standard) but many large organizations are deploying BGP or OSPF backbones to facilitate migration toward technologies that allow competition.

      Having a single vendor is a nice thing and it's certainly an easy answer to automatically implement more Cisco boxes but I see a growing realization that there are other (potentially superior) ways to solve problems...

  58. 30% less isn't hard by rfc1394 · · Score: 1
    3com has announced its new lines of routers poised to compete with Cisco. 'The company claims that these routers will cost 30 percent to 50 percent less than similar offerings from market leader Cisco.'
    Cisco's routers at $9,000 and 3Com's undercutting those prices at $6,000 isn't hard to do when it's my understanding that you can do all or almost all of the features of those with a 233MHZ Pentium, a 1GB hard drive with CDROM, 64Meg of memory and any version of Linux or BSD and a couple of 4-port 100mbit Ethernet cards, in which the cards are the most expensive at $100 each, the PC is $50 and a copy of the BSD or Linux distro (if you don't already have one) is $5 including shipping from any number of the cheap distributors, and so with a little bit of skull sweat you can provide all the features of a $6,000 3COM 30% discount over Cisco, in a box that costs 5% of even the discounted 3COM price.
    --
    The lessons of history teach us - if they teach us anything - that nobody learns the lessons that history teaches us.
    1. Re:30% less isn't hard by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you can do all or almost all of the features of those with a 233MHZ Pentium, a 1GB hard drive with CDROM, 64Meg of memory and any version of Linux or BSD and a couple of 4-port 100mbit Ethernet cards Ummmmmm ... like terminating your remote office's T1 in a manageable chassis, including detailed stats about layer 1 errors when the T1 is being flaky? And provide from-anywhere VPN access to that office with an easy-to-use VPN client on their Windoze laptop that requires almost no end-user training? And use MPLS and other QoS features so that you can converge your data and voice networks and shoot the antique PBX in the head, and cut your company's telecom costs dramatically? And be able to debug every lunge and thrust of your routing protocol's behavior with a simple command or two, and have detailed documentation available online to understand the resulting output? And be able to save the device configuration in one simple file, so that replacement equipment can be configured instantly by anyone you can walk through hooking up a console port and using hyperterm? And be able to get a knowledgable network troubleshooter on the phone in minutes if/when major disaster strikes? And pay something around $1000 per site (after discount) for a VPN-accelerated 1721 router with T1 interface? Cisco is NOT perfect; I hope Juniper goes downmarket and gives them something resembling competition. (Too many of us have been BURNED by 3Com for me to take them seriously). If you just want something dirt cheap between your DSL line and your home network Cisco is probably overkill. But for deploying and maintaining a real enterprise network that can actually keep a corporation up and running, the PC is no answer at all. In the real world, saving $500 or $1000 on hardware means very little. Being able to deploy, efficiently manage, and add features to the network infrastructure is where it's at.

    2. Re:30% less isn't hard by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      obviously you're not familiar with slashdot reality, in which all router interfaces are ethernet, and WANs do not exist.

  59. New Cisco Routers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Disclaimer: I work for Cisco, so I guess I'm more than a little biased here.

    But: 3Com wants to compete with the 3725 & 3745? Fine with us. We just announced a bunch of new routers:

    http://newsroom.cisco.com/dlls/2004/prod_091404.ht ml?CMP=ILC-001

  60. Colors that actually have contrast by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  61. I'll pass if it's as bad as their 1g e switches by tweedlebait · · Score: 1

    I relied faithfully on 3coms 100mb products.

    lower cost rack mount gig e 6 port switches blew, and blew up! I had 5 die just out of warranty out of 8 total. Also they didn't handle large frame tcp.

    Personally I wasn't thrilled with the broadcom/3com gig E NICs either and support for a few simple questions took 3com 2 months to respond after repeated requests.

    I'll let everyone else test this batch of routers.

    --
    Firefox & /. ? Use this often:
  62. Still some juice in 3Com hopefully.. by Gentlewhisper · · Score: 1

    well, i don't know they are that bad in the corporate market, but they do make pretty good hardware.

    i remeember having this ethernet card from 3Com that really performs faster than another taiwanese card which i've got, albeit at 3X the price.

    i've got to admit their support really sucks, not that i've tried it before, but something about them.. they seem too arrogant, even http://support.3com.com smells of "fuck off, we don't want to see you here"

  63. Failed once, doomed to fail again by Teahouse · · Score: 1

    3 Com had decent products last timeand they were dumped from this market segment. I have no idea how they think they are going to compete a second time by dangling a price in front of an IT wonk. Any admins here want to risk their jobs?

    Let's award Joe Geek for cutting out costs for network equipment this quarter.

    Let's fire Joe Geek the next quarter when we start having problems and 3 Com provides the level of support we got for the savings....zero.

    Ever try to explain to a CEO why his email is down and how that's a good thing for the bottom line? LOL!

    --
    "Curiosity killed the cat, but for a while I was a suspect."- Steven Wright
  64. How in hell is this news? by suckmysav · · Score: 1

    We have known about 3Com and their partnership with Huawei aka "Cisco of China" for almost two years now.

    Huawei makes cheap knockoff copies of Cisco kit and bundles the IOS for free. They can afford to do this because they stole the documentation & the source code from Cisco and simply reproduce it for their own gear, software bugs, manual typos and all.

    Cisco sued Huawei back in January 2003, but they pulled the software piracy suit 10 months later after Huawei agreed to "modify some of their products". I still don't understand why they did that. Come last July and they dropped their patent infringement suit as well.

    Having said all that though, I'd be the last person to stick up for Cisco anywhere, IMO they are every bit as bad as Microsoft and they use many of the same "business tactics" that MS use to maintain their own stranglehold on the router/voip market.

    --
    "You can't fight in here, this is the war room!"
  65. EIGRP is proprietory by anti-NAT · · Score: 1

    You probably know that, although your post seems to indicate that you think 3com could have provided it, just didn't.

    Cisco are quite happy for you to use EIGRP, as it means you are locked into using their products, which means a constant revenue stream for them.

    Route re-distribution is quite easy. If you can't be bothered doing that, I'd think your Cisco rep still has a smile on his or her face, that formed on the day you decided to use EIGRP.

    --
    The Internet's nature is peer to peer - 20050301_cs_profs.pdf
    1. Re:EIGRP is proprietory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      one thing about eigrp that attracts a lot of people is that it's the lazy mans routing protocol. ospf, and isis are based around a particular model of building a network. while i would argue that is a good thing, a lot of engineers and damn near all management are entirely incapable of the discipline required to adhere to a network architecture. eigrp follows no model, you can build damn near any awful thing you want with it. and a lot of people want to do a lot of bad networking.