--- "Howard C. Berkowitz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Anthony Kim continued,
> >Intersting thread. I didn't know cisco defined a small business so
> >strictly. Is that an exam question? :)
>
> Historically, commercial data networking started with mainframes
> interconnected with leased lines. These machines were either in
> large enterprises or in academic/research institutions. SNA, for
> example, gave extensive operational control, and needed a
> considerable staff to support it.
>
> I've seen a market research report that said:
>
> in 1982, 86% of networking customers could build and support their
> own networks
> in 1996, 14% of customers could do so.
I really don't agree with these figures, but anyway...
>
> It's not necessarily that enterprises are more or less clueful --
> it's that the enterprises that get into communications are much
> smaller or more poorly budgeted. The distinction has been made that
> networking began with the Fortune 500, but now has spread to the
> Fortune 5,000,000.
>
> As business dependence on networking grows, the smaller companies
> have the alternatives:
>
> Without internal or external network support staff,
> wait for a major failure (hard downtime, or inability to service
> their customers) and go into bankruptcy.
>
> Hire from a scarce pool of qualified (certified?) people and watch
> their margins go down, if they don't have enough networking
> activity
> to keep these (expensive) people busy. Go into bankruptcy.
>
> Buy networking products that are as turnkey as possible.
>
> Buy support, which may or may not stay within their margins.
SMBs go bankrupt with and without technology failure - I'd be interested
to know if there were statistical correlation.
Back to the point, is it so either/or? Is it so? SMB without support staff
or SMB with support staff who are overpriced and underbusy? There's more
going on in this sector than that, I think.
It has been my experience with SMBs, they tend to manage on their own and
prefer it that way. There will always be the clueless and the clued. Like
the naked and the dead. But most businesses fall between half-dressed and
mummified.
> >
> >Of course the bottom line is, you make technology recommendations on
> >what the business can handle, what they require, and what they can
> >afford. At some intersection of this triad, an answer may surface.
> >
> >I am fortunate in that my experience with networking people have all
> >been with knowledgable and clever folks.
> >
>
>
> It has long been a valid assumption that no one ever went broke by
> underestimating the intelligence or taste of the public.
In fact, you grow quite rich.
anthony
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
_________________________________
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
