Cisco & Google: Enemies Now & Forever

21 thoughts on “Cisco & Google: Enemies Now & Forever”

  1. Curious if this means Cisco is going to make another run at building products for service provider access networks. They’ve historically flailed pretty badly in this market, but the technology is playing more-and-more to their strengths (Gigabit Active-E).

  2. I’m not sure how this makes them enemies…

    Google announced that project because it wants to push others to provide high speed Internet, it’s not in that business. But it has the most to gain from there being a high speed Internet broadly available. Cisco would like that too — more gear to sell.

    How does this make Cisco and Google enemies?

    1. Good point- I don’t think that Google is going to enter into this business either.

      Would be interested to see a reply to your question: “how does this make Cisco and Google enemies?”, too.

  3. I think that you’re reading too much into this.

    Cisco’s carrier customers are threatened by this and Cisco’s muted response is aimed at avoiding offending them. Cisco themselves are not threatened by Google moving into the carrier business – they would be as happy hawking their kit to Google as they are to anyone else.

    There are other areas where Google and Cisco will compete head to head by broadband supply is never likely to be one of them.

  4. So what routers and switches will Google use in deploying their fiber? Somehow I don’t believe “HP” is the name that comes to mind…

    My way of saying: they’re not enemies, they’re in completely different markets… for now (avoiding Cisco’s market adjacencies on the video front). So no, they’re not competing. Who knows, they might even announce a new NEXUS edition which will enable Google’s fiber at consumer prices.

  5. This was a poorly written article with a sensationalist headline.

    Just because Goog is going to test a broadband deployment doesn’t mean that Cisco responded to somehow 1-up Google. Cisco hasn’t even been in the broadband / SP business, other than on the edge with cheap boxes aka Linksys. I wrote up more about Goog’s reasons for pulling the trigger on broadband and I agree with the above commenter – Gb EPON is the reason. http://stevecheney.posterous.com/why-google-broadband-finally-makes-sense

    Though these economics could also spur Cisco to move, the fact is neither one of these companies is even in this market today, and each gets a net benefit from the others actions here – not a zero sum game.

  6. After a second read, I agree with the sentiment of many of the other comments. What part of Google’s FTTH experiment is a threat to Cisco? If anything, Google is accelerating the FTTH market, an unequivocally GOOD thing for Cisco.

    Om, are you simply implying that because the major SP’s are Cisco clients, Cisco is forced to “choose a side” between the telecom’s and Google?

  7. like others i don’t’ see a competition per-say here, but liked the chances that Cisco might come into providing ultra high speed network.
    The ISPs have been procrastinating for ever in upgrading their network. someone need to wake them up.

  8. Given that Cisco and Juniper hold like 95% of the core routing market, It will be interesting to see what Google uses to deploy their network (Build their own or use one of the handful of players than can route this much traffic). I’d heard rumors of Google building their own 10GigE switches.

    http://gigaom.com/2007/11/18/google-making-its-own-10gig-switches/

    For arguments sake though, going with Nexus switches wouldn’t be that bad. A full size nexus 7000 full of 48 switch ports would on my napkin calculations cost under $400 a port (House)

    I know there are routing and other needs but compared to the cost of the dig I don’t feel like this is really all that expensive. Given that Google is only running a local loop network anyways, it might make sense for the actual ISP to be deploying the core switches and being the ones who light the fiber.

  9. The key, ultimately, is in the applications and services that the plumbing–fast plumbing though it may be–carriers. Guess who wins that one? I agree–competition is a good thing, and unified communications, both in its precise and more generalized sense, will be the winner.

    1. Regarding unification at the carriers there is lots of noise today… the carrier announcement at MWC to band together in apps/services has clear implications for the network roll-out to 3GPP /LTE.

      Pretty interesting when you look at what the gear providers are doing – esp Cisco – I covered that here. http://stevecheney.posterous.com/twenty-four-companies-unite-to-kill-apple-huh

      The big takeaway is that Cisco sees the mobile/fixed blurring as a huge potential land grab. This goes along with what I think Om is suggesting in this article… I just don’t buy any Google war.

  10. This was a boo boo on the part of the FT. The journalist was taking a briefing about a product upgrade in the core network of a major US carrier, they then put 2 and 2 together and came up with 5.

    The core of the internet and broadband are completely different parts of the network, upgrading one does not speed up the other. Are there no journalists out there that understand this?

  11. Missed the mark a bit on this one huh? Hope you don’t spend much time in Vegas. Cisco only announced “a router”. No service provider network, no competition with google, just another big fast router. No big deal

  12. Just because Goog is going to test a broadband deployment doesn’t mean that Cisco responded to somehow 1-up Google. Cisco hasn’t even been in the broadband / SP business, other than on the edge with cheap boxes aka Linksys. I wrote up more about Goog’s reasons for pulling the trigger on broadband and I agree with the above commenter – Gb EPON is the reason.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.