On Don, 2008-03-13 at 14:44 -0800, John Clark wrote:
[....]
> supported protocols. They seem to be on the path which is support what 
> is absolutely required
> for interoperability, and even then do it half-assed, especially if they 
> have a proprietary protocol
> that they would rather get contract 'lock in' capability... so, when a 
> customer puts out an request
> for quote, and says, 'must support EIGRP', that really means CISCO is 
> going to get the business
> for the routing equipment, no matter who gets the contract for 
> installation or integration. Of course
> EIGRP is 'superior' to OSPF... and especially CISCO's version... for 
> example...

Yes, the classical customer lock-in ("customer enslavement" describes it
better) which is usually played by monopolists/market leaders -
especially if they want to expand in new areas. Support existing
protocols just far enough to not loose tenders (read: be able to add
"support $PROTOCOL" on sales sheets without too much obvious ) and blame
then all the others.
Works especially well if
- you have governmental decision makers which spend the money of other
  people
- you have a well-known brand name which you can (easily) get with
  thorough marketing.
- sell client-server applications/systems where one can virtually give
  the server part away for free (or quite cheap or at least tell that
  the customer) and cash in with service and the clients.
The next step is to define "$COMPANY Certified" (so-called)
qualifications, offer them for cheap or free (as in "free beer") to
school, universities, etc. So if people than are working in some
company, they already commercially correct opinion .....

Works well for the large companies for decades now .....

	Bernd
-- 
Firmix Software GmbH                   http://www.firmix.at/
mobil: +43 664 4416156                 fax: +43 1 7890849-55
          Embedded Linux Development and Services




