Recently I blogged on the rise of UCS and my own perspectives joining Cisco Data Center Services around the launch of Cisco UCS back in March 2009. I then posed a quick poll on the Cisco Data Center Facebook page, with a number of options, asking which of these options did we in Cisco Data Center Services *not* offer to our customers today. Thanks to all who took the time to answer the poll. So let’s look at the summary of our services I presented in my previous blog (diagram below), and let’s discuss what you said via the poll.
March 2009 was an exciting time for both for Cisco and for me personally. Cisco launched the revolutionary Unified Computing System, with many observers across the industry doubting if we’d stay the course (and if we’re honest, some truly misplaced derision – I wonder who is on Planet Zircon now!). And I joined the Cisco Data Center Services team from the Cisco R&D organization! So with the recent third generation launch of Cisco UCS, described very well by my colleague Todd Brannon, I thought it would be a good time to reflect on our data center services portfolio around that time, and where we are now. My previous blogs chronicle part of this journey, however I have to say, the direct comparison I draw here I personally think shows that we have indeed brought a new transformational experience to the data center for our customers. And I’d like to give you my personal recollections on how and what I found out about Cisco’s approach to shaking the incumbents’ lack of innovation in the blade server market.
Need something to decorate the walls of your office, your data center, or your conference room for the new year?
Order the new Connected Retail Architecture Poster now at Cisco MarketPlace
Features of the new poster include:
I’ve been thinking a lot about TCO recently and ways we can help the Government maximize the investment of our tax dollars. By chance, I ran across this incredible White Paper written by one of our top Optical Engineers entitled “Government Transport Networks: Minimize Lifetime Costs”.
It’s a good read, and if you are a Network Architect making purchasing decisions in this area, I would highly recommend it. In fact, if you have any further questions on any of the data presented please reach out to me directly and I’ll put you in touch with the author.
This paper makes the case that transport networks represent a significant portion of government IT costs and is often overlooked in terms of TCO. It guides the reader through the various Network Deployment Models (private, managed private, hybrid) and the benefits in real dollars by going with one approach over another.
Transport networks affect government operational costs at least as much as campus or data center networks, and carefully selecting the platform can result in significant savings. In summary, a well-planned transport architecture can help agencies avoid the considerable expense of upgrades as they accelerate adoption of business video and virtualization. In contrast, a platform with lower upfront costs may have a shorter lifespan and require IT teams to continually add overlay networks that increase costs and management complexity.
So “caveat emptor” when considering your next network purchase.
To learn more about Cisco transport platforms, visit: http://www.cisco.com/go/optical.
Part 2 – The Winchester House and the Strategic Imperative for Architectural-led IT Evolution and Transformation
Last week in part 1 of this blog, I used the analogy of the Winchester House to start the discussion on why an architecture-led approach should be a strategic imperative for your IT architectural evolution and transformation. In this part 2, I’ll give some industry data points, and use some examples of the complex network-based solutions you are implementing, to illustrate why you should adopt the architectural-led approach over the point product minefield.