Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!gatech!akgua!usl!elg From: elg@usl.UUCP (Eric Lee Green) Newsgroups: net.dcom Subject: Re: Cisco Systems and dealing with small companies Message-ID: <857@usl.UUCP> Date: Mon, 4-Aug-86 03:03:46 EDT Article-I.D.: usl.857 Posted: Mon Aug 4 03:03:46 1986 Date-Received: Tue, 5-Aug-86 05:48:06 EDT References: <890@bu-cs.UUCP> <485@hplabsc.UUCP> <58@rpics.uucp> <838@usl.UUCP> <12538@amdcad.UUCP> Reply-To: elg@usl.UUCP (Eric Lee Green) Organization: USL, Lafayette, LA Lines: 77 In article <12538@amdcad.UUCP> phil@amdcad.UUCP (Phil Ngai) writes: >In article <838@usl.UUCP> elg@usl.UUCP (Eric Lee Green) writes: >>In article <58@rpics.uucp> schoff@rpics.UUCP writes: >>>People interested in CISCO should investigate the COMPANY. Technically >>>I see no problems, but it truely is a garage-shop operation, how >>>many full time employees do they have? (< 5). >> >>Wow. This guy must not buy any computer besides IBM, because "Nobody >>wants to buy anything from some LITTLE company, right?". It is >>thinking such as this that stifles technical innovation.... you build >>a better mousetrap, then nobody wants to buy it because you're not as >>big as Imperial Business Machines. >> >>In other words, I find it a disgusting attitude... [Relates horror story about company that bought bad chips and is still ferretting them out, because of poor quality assurance program. Then brings up the example of HP, one of the few companies with a very strict quality assurance program -- and high prices to match! ] >To say > >>thinking such as this that stifles technical innovation.... you build >>a better mousetrap, then nobody wants to buy it because you're not as >>big as Imperial Business Machines. > >shows a lack of knowledge about why companies buy products. Your >mousetrap may be more advanced technically but if you can't service it >like a bigger company can then I will have to consider the extra >(hidden) costs associated with such a product. Yes, I would investigate Cisco, look at their quality control, service, etc. However, I would do the same with any manufacturer, regardless of size. Remember DEC's failing RA80s? and how DEC continues to deny that there's any problem? It is not the size of the company, but rather the service the company provides, which is at issue. Some small startups never make the transition needed between small sales/small volume and large sales/large volume, i.e. setting up the management infrastructure necessary. However, there's many examples of companies that have a good product, that have the funds, that have the service personel, who don't make it because they aren't "IBM compatible" (if you're talking PCs) or "It's not a VAX" (if you're talking super-minis) etc. USL has three Pyramid 90x's, bought when Pyramid Technologies was a small startup. They have provided good service in their intended duty. If we had bought equivalent Vaxen of that era, they would have been severely overloaded and slower than mollasses under a load of about 25 students average per computer. Should we have bought three Vaxen because "Pyramid is just a little startup that could go out of business tommorrow"? Perhaps I'm confusing a university environment with a commercial environment... when something breaks here, generally the answer is to look around among us for an expert to fix it, rather than call in the serviceman and wait for him to fly in from Massachusetts or California. Do corporations lack this large body of talent? If so, why? And if so, how do American corporations intend to compete with Japanese corporations, which place great emphasis upon hiring talent and conducting large amounts of research? Your average Japanese auto executive started out assembling cars on the floor. If his car breaks, he can fix it. The average American auto executive started out in Harvard Business School. If his car breaks, he must call a mechanic. Maybe that's why the Japanese build better cars! In other words, I still find that people overlooking a company merely because of its size is pretty nasty... but then again, as a proud co-partner of a small telecommunications firm running out of a back bedroom, I'd naturally think that :-). (our primary strategy is to provide both a better program and better service than our big competitor, which is sort of cocky and snaps at the users). -- -- Computing from the Bayous, -- Eric Green {akgua,ut-sally}!usl!elg (Snail Mail P.O. Box 92191, Lafayette, LA 70509)