Sorry it has taken me this long to reply, I have been extremely busy...
Anyways, here are some reasons (from an obviously Cisco bias view)...
Hope this helps...
First, HP is a server company. Their primary focus is not networking
equipment. Do you really want to trust your network infrastructure to them?
The new 2524's also took a step backwards from the 4000M switches by only
supporting basic 802.1p QoS. The also cannot do per-port TCP/UDP
re-classification. The Cisco 3500 series can do re-classification on a per
port basis.
Another good point is stacking. Our solution scales to hundreds of ports at
a very low cost while their solution is extremely expensive (around $900 per
switch to stack). They really do not even position these
switches for stacking. I know that this may not be a priority now, but you
have to factor in some type of growth in the future.
Poor VLAN support is another point. They only support 30, where we support
250 and support both ISL and 802.1Q.
Another big future thinking point is their lack of application support. HP
is NOT able to put together a network solution or even participate in one
that has the promise and capability to scale to future converged networking.
To the extent that most customers have a vision to scale to VoIP and video,
HP in the LAN won't support it. Cisco is all about selling that integrated
solution proposition based upon QoS, Inline Power, Call Mgr, resiliency
features, IP Phone mgmt integration, etc...
Hope these points help in your decision, if you need any additional
information please let me know.
Tim
----Original Message-----
From: Denis A. Baldwin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2000 4:41 PM
To: 'Tim O'Brien'
Subject: RE: Cisco vs. HP Switches
The Cisco 3524 Catalyst and the HP Procurve 2524.
Denis
-----Original Message-----
From: Tim O'Brien [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2000 4:10 PM
To: Denis Baldwin
Subject: RE: Cisco vs. HP Switches
What model of switches are you looking at?
Tim
----- Original Message -----
From: "Denis A. Baldwin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2000 1:30 PM
Subject: Cisco vs. HP Switches
We are looking at four new 24 port switches for our network. We have Cisco
and HP as our final contenders. Both the HP Procurve and the Cisco
Catalyst carry similar specs, but the HP is about 20% of the cost of the
Cisco. Can someone give me a REAL reason why the Cisco Catalyst would be a
better choice. Our network is all 10/100 for now and we won't need Gigabit
for at least a couple of years. We need these switches to be in 24 port
configurations as the company is going to split in two in a couple of months
and move half of the operations to another building, so we need to be able
to split the network as needed. I know this is a Cisco group, which is why
I am asking it here, because I want a BIASED opinion of why Cisco would be
better in this situation. Thank you all for your suggestions.
Denis
Denis A. Baldwin
Network Administrator - CAE, Inc.
A+, MCP, i-Net+, Network+
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
810-231-9373, ext. 229
_________________________________
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_________________________________
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
