When comparing your options in WAN optimization controllers you might be hearing conflicting claims about key features and architectures that can make it difficult to figure out what makes one product better than another. Most products on the market today are mature and have a competitive feature set. Core features such as compression, caching and TCP acceleration are a given for a product to get on the short list. The performance between products on core features might be similar in routine tests so making a choice could be difficult, but there might be other things to consider that are not so obvious that might really make a difference in how a product works for you.
Consider for example how stable a device is under a heavy load. It is one thing for a device to perform well under an average load, or even to operate reliably near the rated load, which most equipment can do, however do you know how a device will work under a heavy load that bursts up over the rated capacity? Will it stand up to the load or will it block traffic and take a long time to recover?
I am happy to share that the Cisco Unified Computing System was just awarded Gold Award in the “Hardware for Virtualization” category at the Best of VMworld 2009 Awards. The system represents a lot of hardwork and commitment from a large number of folks and we truly appreciate the industry recognition. Thank you.
Interesting analogy I saw today in story from Byte & Switch blogger Frank Berry. He used the analogy of SUVs and their rather spartan initial models (can you say “early Ford Bronco” or “Cash for Clunkers”?) to the recent unified networking (in Cisco-speak “unified fabric“) offerings — the converging of traditional data and storage traffic over a single low latency and high performance 10Gb Ethernet pipe. I’m not sure if today’s unified networking offerings are quite as stripped down as a 1980s Bronco, and I’m sure the energy efficiency is much better. In fact, they may be much closer to an early 2000s Toyota Prius…