Even their larger fiber optics installs are re-engineered each time adding to costs than modifying previous models, and they sure havn’t had stellar reliability in San Fran with or without all of the bells and whistles he boasts, most won’t need let alone want and especially from them. A whole bunch of little bad pieces don’t add up to one good piece.

Perhaps Nortel put him in therapy after the crtique of selling UMTS to the point he has become an anointed blabbering parrot hyping up traditional future contradictions. Who knows what part of their business they can or will sell next now that assets are exhausted.

Others who feel these issues are more of a thorn than a benefit have been right with PEC, especially if they sell it less than half price they paid, which really may not be a bad idea because they can use all the money they can get.

Even Neptune, BSNL, IBM, Putian, Huawei, etc., never panned out as they said and they still have “no substantial returns” from any of their desperate manoevers and gambles.

Now being an everything to everyone is a plus all of sudden as they cut product after BT used everyone and anyone but them, or Sprint went with Samsung/Motorola in WiMax as they contradict long boasted cuts to R&D, etc…

How many will need all of what they have to offer anyways overlooking features or price for what he feels will be a single vendor benefit.

Speaking of the gone IBM’s blade server, notice of how they try and align themselves with companies who have consumer products and sell shares successfully when NT really is the only one who has no consumer products, like RIM, Symantec, IBM, now Microsoft that Dvorak’s article summed up neatly if you want a different view to what they say and what really is what:

http://www.marketwatch.com/News/Story/Story.aspx?guid=%7B9D898B31%2DA37F%2D4D7E%2DA2DF%2DA83C8A201AB7%7D&source=blq%2Fyhoo&dist=yhoo&siteid=yhoo

ah, this company’s punch lines never cease to amaze…