The very thought that CISCO got it into their empty heads that this was somehow a good idea - and in April 2011, no less, when Apple had long-ago shown the way in this area - is positively frightening, not to mention pathetic.
This turkey of an industry *really does* need Apple to light the way forward. Desperately.
They could blame BYOD movement, or they could blame themselves for getting on the wrong end of that movement. BYOD is like a bulldozer: it's quite safe as long as you're not in its path.
I know it's obvious to most on these boards....but there are basically two business models...Apple's-make superior products, offer great value and make money or the Walmart model....sell crap, cheaply, but sell a lot of it to make money. It amazes me that CEO's always opt for the Walmart model, e.g., Dell, HP, motorola, Google, etc., etc.
It almost sounds like what happened is: so long as Cisco could get corporations to use devices the people didn't want, they were okay; but as soon as people had a choice, they were sunk. I'm sure I must have misread that.
No I think you actually kind of have it.
Basically we are in the midst of a move from the one device for each task to one device for each person movement. Going going soon to be gone are the days of buying this machine to be your cash register, this to be your bar code scanner. this to be your computer, your tv, your game machine. Instead you have one device that can be all and more.
its like back in the days of the 80s and 90s when you needed an assistive communication device. the insurance companies insisted that the device be nothing more. They wouldn't pay for you to get a computer because you could use it for other things and they weren't about to shell out $20k for you to play pacman etc. so you ended up with this big bulky custom machine that was slow and expensive to update. But parents put up with it because of the benefits and they couldn't afford the time and money for anything else. now you can get a $500 iPad or even a $200 iPod touch with an app that runs between $10-100 depending on the library and other features you want. Or you could go simple and just snap shots of what the child needs to be able to 'say' and keep them in the photo library. This is basically what a cousin did with his son. Kade wants to go to the park he just pulls up the photo they took at the park. He wants a snack, he can pull up the photo of what he wants and so on. he's even got a photo of his bed to say he's tired.
in another decade the notion of buying a machine just to pay games will seem like 'the old days' same as the telegraph and manual typewriters. We'll all have our whatever that does more or less everything we need from making calls (video of course, why settle just for a voice) to watching tv to reading books etc
Ci-what? this article is the first time I even heard of the Cius. Didn't CISCO have a trademark on iPhone for a video conferencing device that they reached some sort of agreement to let Apple use the name as well - whatever happen to that?
ah yes that's a fun bit of history
Cisco bought that device from another party and then mothballed it. Cisco let the trademark run out including their renewal grace period. Then they found out that Apple was about to buy the expired trademark so literally a couple of days before the end of the grace period they announced they were bring back their iPhone, to come out some 8 months laters. Apple filed a suit saying that Cisco had only announced their phone to stop Apple. The judge agreed and ordered that they share the trademark each for their own thing. But if either stopped making said device they gave up all rights to the trademark for good (which as I recall is what Cisco did after perhaps a year at most of making their new iPhone)
I think only FaceTime is unable to work over a cellular connection which seems clear it's because Apple makes deals directly with the carriers while Skype et al. aren't. That said, it does look like FaceTime over cellular network will come in iOS 6.
That's sort of correct. It's more like Apple MUST deal with the carriers whereas the 3rd party apps aren't forced into such a thing.
Lol. We couldn't sell them because those darn IT managers wouldn't force people to use them. They've always done it in the past. We just don't understand.
"We are facing a workplace that is no longer a physical place, but a blend of virtual and physical environments; where employees are bringing their preferences to work and BYOD ("Bring Your Own Device" to work) is the new norm; where collaboration has to happen beyond a walled garden; and any-to-any connectivity is a requirement, not a 'nice to have,' " Winge writes.
There is so much tip-toeing and euphemistic phrasing there that I may need to vomit.
That's sort of correct. It's more like Apple MUST deal with the carriers whereas the 3rd party apps aren't forced into such a thing.
I didn't get into the specifics as to why Apple is making deals with carriers. I'm sure we'll have plenty of articles that revolve around carriers that we can discuss the pros and cons of working so closely with carriers. Short answer: profit.
There is so much tip-toeing and euphemistic phrasing there that I may need to vomit.
I don't see your point. Everything stated seemed quite clear and accurate to me. In that sentence Winge isn't addressing that the Cius and dock are too little too late and too expensive, but he is accurately acknowledging the root of the issue that is making consumer devices more popular and less costly for the enterprise. But for all the wasted investments Cisco has made they still have a very profitable core business that I don't see being affected anytime soon.
But for all the wasted investments Cisco has made they still have a very profitable core business that I don't see being affected anytime soon.
They are about to make some serious bank on all the IPv6 router upgrade requirements. I just bought a new Cisco router for that exact reason. There are a lot of old 10/100 base T routers out there in the enterprise that all need to be upgraded.
They are about to make some serious bank on all the IPv6 router upgrade requirements. I just bought a new Cisco router for that exact reason.
Most of my Cisco lab equipment is IPv6 ready and it's not new equipment. I only had to update to IOS v12.4. I have a couple 2500 series routers that aren't capable but I think everything else is capable. I hope most companies would have planned for this long ago although by at least l using IPv4 internally and making sure they have a IPv6 border router to connect to their ISP.
I started learning IPv6 back in 1999 when I bought the first edition of the Cisco Press TCP/IP Routing Vol1 & Vol 2 (I forget which volume covered IPV6. I can honestly say I don't think I've learned anything new about it in a dozen years. IPv4 is confusing enough with 32 bits and four relatively simple octets. Moving to 128 bit is rough but hexadecimal seems to stump most people in technology. I doubt most people in networking could even convert denary or binary to hex (and vice versa) even when they can convert denary to binary and back with ease.
Perspective: There are a total of 4,294,967,296 IPv4 addresses in the world. That is obviously less than one per person. IPv6 takes that to a whole 'notha level with about 50,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000. Not in total but per person* I think we're set for a few years. :D
* I'm pretty sure you know this mstone but just pointing it for those that may not be aware of how many addresses that really is.
Most of my Cisco lab equipment is IPv6 ready and it's not new equipment. I only had to update to IOS v12.4. I have a couple 2500 series routers that aren't capable but I think everything else is capable. I hope most companies would have planned for this long ago although by at least l using IPv4 internally and making sure they have a IPv6 border router to connect to their ISP.
I started learning IPv6 back in 1999 when I bought the first edition of the Cisco Press TCP/IP Routing Vol1 & Vol 2 (I forget which volume covered IPV6. I can honestly say I don't think I've learned anything new about it in a dozen years. IPv4 is confusing enough with 32 bits and four relatively simple octets. Moving to 128 bit is rough but hexadecimal seems to stump most people in technology. I doubt most people in networking could even convert denary or binary to hex (and vice versa) even when they can convert denary to binary and back with ease.
Perspective: There are a total of 4,294,967,296 IPv4 addresses in the world. That is obviously less than one per person. IPv6 takes that to a whole 'notha level with about 50,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000. Not in total but per person* I think we're set for a few years. :D
* I'm pretty sure you know this mstone but just pointing it for those that may not be aware of how many addresses that really is.
Most consumer telcos have not switched to IPv6 for their customers and even if a company network has a border router, unless their public web servers and named servers are configured with IPv6 (not that they aren't capable), pretty soon those servers will become inaccessible from many new mobile devices in China, which are expected to be IPv6 only. Just as you stated, the numbers are confusing hence many corporate IT departments have not even thought about implementing it. The first step is to actually get an IPv6 network address block from your provider which many small to medium size companies have not done, including my company. We are just now getting the project underway. We have three class "C" networks from three different providers and none of them are currently IPv6.
Like you, I had a 2600 which has now been replaced with a 2900.
They could blame BYOD movement, or they could blame themselves for getting on the wrong end of that movement. BYOD is like a bulldozer: it's quite safe as long as you're not in its path.
They were on both sides here. They offered a dedicated device, but they also offered free apps to use on your own device to connect to their services.
They could blame BYOD movement, or they could blame themselves for getting on the wrong end of that movement. BYOD is like a bulldozer: it's quite safe as long as you're not in its path.
Does anyone bring their own tablets to work? Accessing work emails and calendars from personal smartphones are extremely popular, but I've never seen anyone use their own tablet at work. All work tablets I've seen were bought by the company.
Actually bringing tablets to work is extremely popular and one of the reasons the Cius did not work. I have one and it is a decent little tablet but is a victim of it's own compromises and I am happy that I was told on Friday I can now pick up the new Ipad. Cisco does not sell consumer driven products well & they had to design a secure tablet around a form factor that businesses would actually buy and no one really thought business would but tablets for their own sake. Hell even VMware is going completely BYOD across the board from phones, to laptops, to tablets.
I have found most of the Cisco people I deal with have long migrated to Apple products, during a Telepresence presentation in Cincy everyone of them had a Ipad, only one of them had a Cius. During Cisco's partner summit for demo's they had an Ipad on the stage and I do not remember seeing a Cius anywhere. Most of the reps I deal with have started carrying Macbook pro's and I was told that was the general direction of the company since Apple did not complete with them in the server market.
Generally they seem happy to integrate apple endpoints and make all of their video and collaboration software completely compatible. Endpoint agnostic I think they call it.
Comments
The very thought that CISCO got it into their empty heads that this was somehow a good idea - and in April 2011, no less, when Apple had long-ago shown the way in this area - is positively frightening, not to mention pathetic.
This turkey of an industry *really does* need Apple to light the way forward. Desperately.
They could blame BYOD movement, or they could blame themselves for getting on the wrong end of that movement. BYOD is like a bulldozer: it's quite safe as long as you're not in its path.
I know it's obvious to most on these boards....but there are basically two business models...Apple's-make superior products, offer great value and make money or the Walmart model....sell crap, cheaply, but sell a lot of it to make money. It amazes me that CEO's always opt for the Walmart model, e.g., Dell, HP, motorola, Google, etc., etc.
It's "predatory!"
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronbo
It almost sounds like what happened is: so long as Cisco could get corporations to use devices the people didn't want, they were okay; but as soon as people had a choice, they were sunk. I'm sure I must have misread that.
No I think you actually kind of have it.
Basically we are in the midst of a move from the one device for each task to one device for each person movement. Going going soon to be gone are the days of buying this machine to be your cash register, this to be your bar code scanner. this to be your computer, your tv, your game machine. Instead you have one device that can be all and more.
its like back in the days of the 80s and 90s when you needed an assistive communication device. the insurance companies insisted that the device be nothing more. They wouldn't pay for you to get a computer because you could use it for other things and they weren't about to shell out $20k for you to play pacman etc. so you ended up with this big bulky custom machine that was slow and expensive to update. But parents put up with it because of the benefits and they couldn't afford the time and money for anything else. now you can get a $500 iPad or even a $200 iPod touch with an app that runs between $10-100 depending on the library and other features you want. Or you could go simple and just snap shots of what the child needs to be able to 'say' and keep them in the photo library. This is basically what a cousin did with his son. Kade wants to go to the park he just pulls up the photo they took at the park. He wants a snack, he can pull up the photo of what he wants and so on. he's even got a photo of his bed to say he's tired.
in another decade the notion of buying a machine just to pay games will seem like 'the old days' same as the telegraph and manual typewriters. We'll all have our whatever that does more or less everything we need from making calls (video of course, why settle just for a voice) to watching tv to reading books etc
Quote:
Originally Posted by lilgto64
Ci-what? this article is the first time I even heard of the Cius. Didn't CISCO have a trademark on iPhone for a video conferencing device that they reached some sort of agreement to let Apple use the name as well - whatever happen to that?
ah yes that's a fun bit of history
Cisco bought that device from another party and then mothballed it. Cisco let the trademark run out including their renewal grace period. Then they found out that Apple was about to buy the expired trademark so literally a couple of days before the end of the grace period they announced they were bring back their iPhone, to come out some 8 months laters. Apple filed a suit saying that Cisco had only announced their phone to stop Apple. The judge agreed and ordered that they share the trademark each for their own thing. But if either stopped making said device they gave up all rights to the trademark for good (which as I recall is what Cisco did after perhaps a year at most of making their new iPhone)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee
Can't any iPad or iPhone or iPod Skype over 3G/4G?
sure can. although not always that well (depends on the strength and stability of the signal)
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
I think only FaceTime is unable to work over a cellular connection which seems clear it's because Apple makes deals directly with the carriers while Skype et al. aren't. That said, it does look like FaceTime over cellular network will come in iOS 6.
That's sort of correct. It's more like Apple MUST deal with the carriers whereas the 3rd party apps aren't forced into such a thing.
Cisco blames the fact that no one would willingly use their POS tablet. Interesting.
Lol. We couldn't sell them because those darn IT managers wouldn't force people to use them. They've always done it in the past. We just don't understand.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
"We are facing a workplace that is no longer a physical place, but a blend of virtual and physical environments; where employees are bringing their preferences to work and BYOD ("Bring Your Own Device" to work) is the new norm; where collaboration has to happen beyond a walled garden; and any-to-any connectivity is a requirement, not a 'nice to have,' " Winge writes.
There is so much tip-toeing and euphemistic phrasing there that I may need to vomit.
I don't see your point. Everything stated seemed quite clear and accurate to me. In that sentence Winge isn't addressing that the Cius and dock are too little too late and too expensive, but he is accurately acknowledging the root of the issue that is making consumer devices more popular and less costly for the enterprise. But for all the wasted investments Cisco has made they still have a very profitable core business that I don't see being affected anytime soon.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
But for all the wasted investments Cisco has made they still have a very profitable core business that I don't see being affected anytime soon.
They are about to make some serious bank on all the IPv6 router upgrade requirements. I just bought a new Cisco router for that exact reason. There are a lot of old 10/100 base T routers out there in the enterprise that all need to be upgraded.
Most of my Cisco lab equipment is IPv6 ready and it's not new equipment. I only had to update to IOS v12.4. I have a couple 2500 series routers that aren't capable but I think everything else is capable. I hope most companies would have planned for this long ago although by at least l using IPv4 internally and making sure they have a IPv6 border router to connect to their ISP.
I started learning IPv6 back in 1999 when I bought the first edition of the Cisco Press TCP/IP Routing Vol1 & Vol 2 (I forget which volume covered IPV6. I can honestly say I don't think I've learned anything new about it in a dozen years. IPv4 is confusing enough with 32 bits and four relatively simple octets. Moving to 128 bit is rough but hexadecimal seems to stump most people in technology. I doubt most people in networking could even convert denary or binary to hex (and vice versa) even when they can convert denary to binary and back with ease.
Perspective: There are a total of 4,294,967,296 IPv4 addresses in the world. That is obviously less than one per person. IPv6 takes that to a whole 'notha level with about 50,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000. Not in total but per person* I think we're set for a few years. :D
* I'm pretty sure you know this mstone but just pointing it for those that may not be aware of how many addresses that really is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
Most of my Cisco lab equipment is IPv6 ready and it's not new equipment. I only had to update to IOS v12.4. I have a couple 2500 series routers that aren't capable but I think everything else is capable. I hope most companies would have planned for this long ago although by at least l using IPv4 internally and making sure they have a IPv6 border router to connect to their ISP.
I started learning IPv6 back in 1999 when I bought the first edition of the Cisco Press TCP/IP Routing Vol1 & Vol 2 (I forget which volume covered IPV6. I can honestly say I don't think I've learned anything new about it in a dozen years. IPv4 is confusing enough with 32 bits and four relatively simple octets. Moving to 128 bit is rough but hexadecimal seems to stump most people in technology. I doubt most people in networking could even convert denary or binary to hex (and vice versa) even when they can convert denary to binary and back with ease.
Perspective: There are a total of 4,294,967,296 IPv4 addresses in the world. That is obviously less than one per person. IPv6 takes that to a whole 'notha level with about 50,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000. Not in total but per person* I think we're set for a few years. :D
* I'm pretty sure you know this mstone but just pointing it for those that may not be aware of how many addresses that really is.
Most consumer telcos have not switched to IPv6 for their customers and even if a company network has a border router, unless their public web servers and named servers are configured with IPv6 (not that they aren't capable), pretty soon those servers will become inaccessible from many new mobile devices in China, which are expected to be IPv6 only. Just as you stated, the numbers are confusing hence many corporate IT departments have not even thought about implementing it. The first step is to actually get an IPv6 network address block from your provider which many small to medium size companies have not done, including my company. We are just now getting the project underway. We have three class "C" networks from three different providers and none of them are currently IPv6.
Like you, I had a 2600 which has now been replaced with a 2900.
They were on both sides here. They offered a dedicated device, but they also offered free apps to use on your own device to connect to their services.
I'm surprised the carriers didn't require Apple to disallow all video chat apps.
Does anyone bring their own tablets to work? Accessing work emails and calendars from personal smartphones are extremely popular, but I've never seen anyone use their own tablet at work. All work tablets I've seen were bought by the company.
Actually bringing tablets to work is extremely popular and one of the reasons the Cius did not work. I have one and it is a decent little tablet but is a victim of it's own compromises and I am happy that I was told on Friday I can now pick up the new Ipad. Cisco does not sell consumer driven products well & they had to design a secure tablet around a form factor that businesses would actually buy and no one really thought business would but tablets for their own sake. Hell even VMware is going completely BYOD across the board from phones, to laptops, to tablets.
I have found most of the Cisco people I deal with have long migrated to Apple products, during a Telepresence presentation in Cincy everyone of them had a Ipad, only one of them had a Cius. During Cisco's partner summit for demo's they had an Ipad on the stage and I do not remember seeing a Cius anywhere. Most of the reps I deal with have started carrying Macbook pro's and I was told that was the general direction of the company since Apple did not complete with them in the server market.
Generally they seem happy to integrate apple endpoints and make all of their video and collaboration software completely compatible. Endpoint agnostic I think they call it.