Matthias Machowinski - Infonetics Research analyst, "In 2008, the WAN optimization appliance market crossed the $1 billion mark for the first time, increasing 29% from the previous year--impressive results for a year in which the world's economies slowed and many related networking segments struggled."
According to the Infonetics 4Q08 WAN optimization report, the WAN optimization vendors below are ranked for the quarter and the year by worldwide revenue:
1. Cisco
2. Blue Coat
3. Riverbed
This new order of the WAN optimization vendor rankings is not surprising to yours truly as almost a year ago I blogged:
Riverbed just another has-been competitor to Cisco
It's my personal opinion that you can't be a milquetoast and hope to successfully compete against Cisco.
Why?
As I specifically noted earlier in my April 2008 blog:
"Riverbed CEO - Jerry Kennelly admitted that competitively it has become a 3 horse race, it is Riverbed, Cisco and Juniper. Blue Coat is not in the top three, by Kennelly's metrics.
"However most surprisingly, Kennelly insisted that the competitive landscape had not changed.
"Cisco revealed on April 4th that according to a recent analyst report, Cisco currently has a 20.0% market share versus a 20.2% market share for Riverbed."
Perhaps Jerry will now admit that the competitive landscape has changed.
Update from Cisco:
Received the following email message from Mark Weiner - Cisco Director of Data Center Marketing:
"Hello Brad, I felt compelled to post on our own DC blog and highlight yours. It's been an amusing and day-to-day challenge the last couple years bringing this product family to market, growing it, and making sure buyers have the honest info on hand vs. some FUD-driven competitors. Your observations will be a key milestone in that effort for awhile to come."
Mark continued in his Cisco blog post:
"I invite Riverbed and other FUD-heavy vendors to change their approach in this increasingly tough economy. IT teams and buyers need honest, accurate information about vendors and their solutions, given their purchase decisions in times of minimized Capex and ever reducing Opex are critical for their companies, as well as their careers. Focus on key things like business models, return on investment, and productivity benefits to employees and IT staff."
Update on Riverbed:
Quotes from Riverbed CEO - Jerry Kennelly published the day after this blog story:
As for its big-name rival, Kennelly admits that Cisco is a "fierce" competitor with great brand recognition but says that he is not afraid of the networking behemoth.
"We don't compete with them in their strength, which is layer two to three [switching and routing]," he said, explaining that Riverbed is focused on layer four to seven applications such as email and file transfers.
It appears to yours truly that even though Riverbed is now ranked #3 behind Cisco and Blue Coat in WAN optimization revenue, its CEO still believes Riverbed has nothing to fear because it doesn't compete with Cisco in layer two to three.
Am I the only one perplexed by Jerry's logic?
Cisco's response to Jerry's logic:
You're not the only one who's perplexed with Jerry's thinking...Couple thoughts:
1. "layer four to seven applications such as email and file transfers" -- Wasn't aware that there were "layer four applications", but rather that Layer 7 was "the application layer" of OSI stack...? Certainly optimization for the use cases he mentioned are primarily Layer 7 (i.e. CIFS, MAPI protocol optimization).
2. More importantly, we at Cisco don't "divorce" Layer 2/3 network infrastructure interoperability from higher layer technologies like WAN optimization. Rather, we've done the opposite with tight, carefully crafted integration with router software (IOS, WCCP) and related IP layer 2-4 services (QoS, firewall, IPS, etc.) --- something we called "transparency" when we launched in Fall 2006. And something they copied in their datasheets over last 12 months.
If you have any better insight than we do, thanks for sharing...
Further thoughts from Cisco:
Many Cisco customers would also agree with your perplexity re: "CEO still believes Riverbed has nothing to fear because it doesn't compete with Cisco in layer two to three". An interesting data point for that:
Over 50% of Cisco WAN optimization deployments (into branch office sites) have been with the router module version of WAAS. Customers repeatedly tell us they like the simple integration into the router footprint, as well as the lower TCO (given that WAAS support cost is covered via router support license).
Related story:
Cisco expands its SMB router market share but loses ground in high-end segment
What's your take on why Cisco now commands the #1 revenue share in WAN optimization?
BradReese.Com Cisco Refurbished
Contact: Brad Reese
Twitter: http://twitter.com/BradReese
Call Toll Free 866-864-0506 or International 850-364-4115
Brad Reese cofounded BradReese.Com Cisco Refurbished, which enables affordable networks globally by assuring customer satisfaction with guaranteed one year warranties on both Cisco Repair as well as Refurbished Cisco.
Don't be shy, contact Brad Reese online or call him Toll Free:
866-864-0506
International callers may wish to call Brad by dialing:
850-364-4115
The Leader in Network Knowledge
They'll find a creative way to spin it
Just like how they have claimed a competitive win rate so persistently (would not concede the point when trying to sell to me) I'm sure they'll find a way to spin this report as well. My team tested for ourselves and Cisco's WAAS is a great product. Our testing showed it to be as easy to use as the Steelhead, the performance was very similar, and the central manager for Cisco was far more capable overall than Riverbed's. Plus - my costs are lower because of router integration - win win for my company. We don't have a small shop - we have over 50 sites live today and happy - and plan to roll out another 120 in the next three months which will cover about 1/2 of our sites total (the rest don't need acceleration).
It is all marketing muscle
As someone who makes his living optimizing customers' WAN's, I would never recommend Cisco's product. They get deals the same they have for the past 15+ years - their excellent marketing machine, nothing more. Ask them about running their product in-line or just go ahead and do it. The WAAS will become overloaded. Riverbed and Juniper are far supperior.
Superior?
If what you say is true, that Riverbed and Juniper are superior; why can't they articulate that supposed message of product superiority to prospective customers?
Sincerely,
Brad Reese
BradReese.Com Cisco Refurbished
marketing
Because Cisco is superior in marketing, dude!
That is such a lie
Riverbed has pumped more money into marketing their solution than virtually any company that was their size at that particular point in evolution. They are a marketing machine. You can't blame Riverbed's loss of the #1 position on their "inferior" marketing. Their "marketing" isn't causing customers to not evaluate their product or technology. People are evaluating and buying products from vendors that provide alternative solutions because the largest of the performance and ease-of-use gaps that hurt other vendor solutions have been for the most part eliminated and other vendors have been able to establish credible differentiation in other areas that provide value to the customer.
Reply - That is such a lie
You've put it very nicely. Arguably their marketing is a great machine and I guess that's what they need because there are some very solid solutions out their that provide holistic WAN optimization as opposed to short term pain relief. I guess river has tried to bridge that gap with running 3rd party VM images on their hardware. Well, they have nothing to fear as their CEO says, and in my book they are the first signs of complacency.
I just wish their gorilla/FUD bloggers go away - they sound so lame and stupid its embarrassing.
That's funny, I have it inline in my network!
It works great in my network. Inline in 70 branches, another 100 with network modules. No overload problems here. Smells like F.U.D. to me
Cisco recommends WCCP
Cisco DOES recommend off-line deployment via WCCP instead of in-line. Ask your Cisco SE or refer to this Gartner document:
http://www.syscomtechnologies.com/documents/cisco_waas_update_client_fee_160302.pdf
Page 3, under the section about WCCP. Let me quote. "To
simplify installation in a small trial, Cisco has often recommended putting the device inline,
but then recommended full deployment using WCCP. Clients who followed this
approach found they had to deal with major router software upgrades to implement
WAAS. Cisco's strong recommendation to deploy WAAS using WCCP also compounds
the deployment challenges."
One reason why WCCP stinks? Because the router will send 3 keepalives to the WAAS at 10 seconds durations before giving up if the unit fails. So your connection will be down for 30 seconds if the unit fails.
In Cisco's inline config if the WAAS your connection is lost for 20+ seconds. Plug the power cord out of a Riverbed or Juniper and see how long your connection is down for - milleseconds.
Incorrect.
Where does it say that in the Cisco documentation? It doesn't - inline groups fail to wire instantaneously just like they do with any other vendor. It's the same hardware and watchdog as any other WOC vendor and Cisco's implementation is no different.
Fail-to-wire within seconds
Right here buddy...
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/contnetw/ps5680/ps6870/prod_white_paper0900aecd8051d5b2.html
Search for "fail-to-wire" or let me quote. "With the use of fail-to-wire capabilities, if the Cisco WAAS appliance experience a hardware or software failure, within seconds the appliance will transparently become a bridge and remove itself from operation." The documentation says "seconds" not instantly. Ask the Cisco WAAS product manager how long is "seconds" and the answer is 20 or more.
A Juniper WXC has relays inside it that close to let data to flow through it as soon as it loses an electric charge from a power outage or plug pull or hardware failure.
Post new comment