- Microsoft Windows chief decries standards grandstanding
- The 5 best, and 5 worst, features of Google Chrome OS
- Federal government using PS3 to crack pedophile passwords
- 10G Ethernet cheat sheet
- Top 10 free Windows tools for IT pros, at a glance
Site Editor Jeff Caruso helps you make sense of the evolving world of LANs and routers.
It's hard to ignore the recent revelation that Cisco is working on a blade server of its very own, a development that seems to go to the very heart of what "network architecture" is.
Network World's Jim Duffy last week wrote that Cisco is expected to introduce blade servers next year, servers that would compete head-on with those from IBM and HP.
If I remember right, Cisco doesn't like to compete in a market unless it thinks it can reach No. 1 or No. 2 in that market. Does Cisco really believe it can knock down those industry giants - and, as Duffy points out, partners - on what is essentially their home turf?
I wonder. It seems to me that Cisco is probably looking at a more targeted application for those blade servers. In fact, Duffy quotes a Cisco exec as saying that there are areas to be addressed at the "seams" between servers, switches and storage technologies, which would indicate such a limited application. But then he goes on to talk about how Cisco wants to make the "whole" environment "homogeneous," which sounds like something larger.
Some way, somehow, Cisco's ambitions will bump into those of IBM and HP. This all reminds me of when Cisco bought WebEx a year and a half ago, and we were told that Cisco was now competing more directly with Microsoft. Clearly, Cisco is breaking out of its networking niche, and bumping into some major players in the process.
Perhaps a clash was inevitable. The idea of blade servers, where the switch is integrated into the same chassis with the networked blades, created a location where networking and computing were brought even closer together. IBM and HP don't just put their blade servers out there; they bring in Blade Network Technologies' specialized blade server switch to connect them. In that sense, IBM and HP bumped into Cisco first.
Jeff Caruso is site editor at Network World.
Rss FeedRss Feed
Learn how to simplify your branch infrastructure while dramatically increasing app performance with Citrix Branch Repeater.
Free Guide: "Next Gen Load Balancing: 8 Things You Need to Handle Today's Network Traffic" shows you the functionality needed in your next load balancer.
Free Guide: "The Secret to Getting Maximum Speed from your Web Applications."' Learn how you can deliver Web apps up to 5x faster.
The Leader in Network Knowledge
Partner Content
Simplify Your Branch Infrastructure
Learn how to simplify your branch infrastructure while dramatically increasing app performance with Citrix Branch Repeater.
Download the Free Info Kit
Next-Gen Load Balancing
Free Guide: "Next Gen Load Balancing: 8 Things You Need to Handle Today's Network Traffic" shows you the functionality needed in your next load balancer.
Download the Free Guide
Accelerate Your Web Apps by up to 5x
Free Guide: "The Secret to Getting Maximum Speed from your Web Applications."' Learn how you can deliver Web apps up to 5x faster.
Download the Free Guide
Comments (2)
Cisco Baldes and Blade switchesBy hblanthorn on December 16, 2008, 10:01 amThe concept of Blades more tightly integrated with Blade Switches makes sense in a limited fashion, however, beneath the surface, there are hidden issues. Questions...
Reply | Read entire comment
IBM and HP bumped into Cisco first?By Anonymous on December 16, 2008, 10:48 amIn 1994 both IBM and HP sold more networking gear than Cisco did. Cisco was focused and executed well in the network and became the market leader. Now Cisco has...
Reply | Read entire comment
View all comments