IMS and their call servers are “next gen” products. If the optical layer ever goes GMPLS (doubtful I think now) nortel had a good handle on that technology. Nortel has a lot of dwdm/cwdm sonet gear out there, and I think they were working on a sonet GFP mapper. That might have legs. There are a lot of technologies considered “old” that are still widely deployed and requiring new development (AIN/Camel triggers for example)

In the transport area, nortel is very much a layer 2 company. Their layer 1 and layer 2 products are top notch and they often do things out of the box that pretenders to layer 2 (cisco, juniper, tellabs 8860 etc.) do not do.

A juniper/nortel or tellabs/nortel alliance would be a good fit for nortel, not sure if there is as much of a(any?) benefit to juniper or tellabs.

The wild card is management. If nortel management prevails history shows they will drag down the other company and its products.

If I might argue what they had once is gone and I disagree the SMB products you listed lead with plenty of competition. They are even providing them to India at a discount.

Nortel was also king of optics and Northern Telecom as a manufacturer was a proud icon indeed but that was then, look at now.

I am not familiar with their contemporary software products you mentioned or what percentage they might contribute to EBT but Neptune, Titan, and Dolphin speak volumes if we look at past aspirations, let alone past and ongoing acquisitions, as they head into WiMax/MIMO and IPTV, assimilating Voice into Microsoft’s server software with plenty of competition and ongoing decline everywhere. Even their accountability in what sells is unreliable.

Everyone knows the embarrassing management is still greedy to this day with so many still there as the SEC and police investigate but who’s fault is it they can’t sell product? Marketshare declines right accross the board, excluding backbones which accounts for peanuts? I think this is the only area BT was interested in using everyone else for everything else. This is the only area they have the best of anything, my mistake, make that one.

Without making money selling anything, how long can they survive printing paper. I do not see a rosy future or that any product is the best or leads anywhere.

Nortel delivered when I was there In fact the equal access and centrex products are what gave nortel the edge over at&t and gained them 40% of the NA switching market. Nortel was once a “startup”, but your too young or damaged to remember that fact, sonny.

I asserted that tasman and pec were not in response to the sa acquisition by cisco. I don’t think they are in the same market niches. I stand by that hope.

I applaud roese for talking about what he does and thinks. Though you are right, it might be just a pr stunt

The passport atm product is “the best” atm product out there. Yes it is dated and the backplane throughput is not as high as it could be, but it is running many-many teracells of data in many-many of the largest networks out there. The fact that these boxes are embedded into the network gives nortel a possible way to “evergreen’ their product by evolving it in the network, this is one thing they need to do if they can. So far, I have not seen it.

The call server/mgw combination based on the dms software is much better (both from a stability and feature content perspective) than lucent, cisco or anyone else can muster

The ims product is certainly as good as anyone else’s.

The operta metro optical products are very good (although I do submit fujitsu has an easier to use adm). It is certainly better than ciscos ons454 and 327.

They used to have a better vpn and branch vpn product than cisco until they ruined (and finally spun off) contivity.

Nortel is very adept at security, although the alteon blade has not done as well as I think it should have, their crypto sw is some of the best in the world.

Sure anyone can point out flaws in any product but nortel still has some world class technology and software that competes favorably with anyone else’s. What drags them down is their bumbling greedy management.

I never asked you to restate anything for my benefit as you claim, don’t flatter yourself, the arrogance is overwhelming.

The comprehension in who I was addressing is as obvious as your response. Obviously, an issue you just as soon circumvent.

At least to seem objective and gain credibility you agree to the obvious in that PEC and Tasman are a joke compared to Cisco’s acquisitions. However, having what you ambiguously term as “vision” is like asking for telepathy as there are no miracles, albeit the sharpy inspiration is commendable.

You are also correct in that much of Roese’s posts are above my head, but don’t appologize, it isn’t sincere, and besides it goes over most peoples heads too. Ironic they addressed the general public in their ad campaigns though, especially when they are the only ones without a consumer product.

I am sure you have many friends at Nortel as you claim. I think this is an understatement. I appreciate the entertainment.

Your attempts to gain credibility admitting the obvious is deterred by the subliminal and unsubstantiated cheer-leading. If you care to humor me further, elaborate on what you state, “Some of their products are the best there are.” Name them, name any, name even one.

I have asked specific questions, posted specific criticism. I see no need to restate them here for your benefit.

I really hope the Tasman and PEC acquisitions were not a response to cisco’s scientific atlanta acquisition? If it was, then IMO nortel completely missed the mark.

Which “cash cow” are you referring to? Wireless base stations? Hahahahahaha. The “visionary leadership” before the last two sabotaged the access business a long time ago, including wireless access.

As for restating numbers, cisco does it all the time, no one ever says anything about it because they make money. Nortel management makes a complete mockery of a process that is widespread, embarrassing themselves repeatedly for no good reason. If the average nortel employee had to rework their work product as often as nortel’s finance department, they would be fired.

Yes I do read roese’s verbose “techno-hype” (your words). I find quite a bit of what he says interesting and relevant. I am interested in his perspective, especially coming from broadcom. I am sorry if it goes over your head.

Unlike some, I do not bash nortel for the sake of bashing nortel. I have many friends still there and I respect their technical abilities. Some of their products are the best there are. I think nortel could be a player in several areas if they would only get focused leadership that had the courage to adhere to their own stated principles and had vision beyond the end of their nose.

As for the rest of your post, I an nonplused.

The above posts focus on no concrete area of aspiration or where they have improved. Why not say where? Why not point out anything you disagree with then? Was my commentary misleading or unethical with your claiming it was bias and bitter? What you mentioned to look objective are not only lack of profits but the endless events, and trend, outlook, etc., endless facts and the truth of the matter.

You admit the obvious claiming they need to churn a profit but they haven’t for many years. While you blaming increased criticism on management for being more vocal, since when haven’t they, let alone ever delivered?

As for your other post, look how Cisco bought Sci Atlanta and how Nortel bought Tasman and PEC. Cisco makes money, Nortel borrows theirs. Outlook is bright in acquisitions and mergers with peers such as Cisco or Alcatel+Lucent, no one wants NT, their liabilities, even if the board allowed their cash cow to be bought contrary to their owners/shareholder’s intent, their numbers were reliable or correct, they were credible, had anything at all short of cutting and selling assets everywhere than growing the business, it is endless. We can go on forever. Where do you see hope, enlighten us then.

Not only are what you term attempting a sophist twist as painting something irrelevant as welcome here, I think posts like this are necessary in exposing ongoing questionable practices in blogs and who the authors really are.

As for the last post to circumvent issues to bury others. Are you suggest anyone actually read Roese’s verbose techno-hype too? Sounds like you do.

Posts are “welcome and appropriate” painting another stage before accounting for why they are “bitter” in contradiction? Facts are necessary and informative to expose the truth as you can see.

I do not think he needs to answer for all of the past nortel drama, but I think he really should respond to posts that ask about the content of his posts.

Two monologs don’t make a dialog.

Cisco’s model is very much like the cell phone handset model, sell as many as you possibly can. Margins are made up in volume and service contracts. What annoys the customer about this is that cisco has so many different boxes running so many different software loads and some many add on “daughter boards” out there that keeping track of it an any large sized LAN/WAN is a major PitA.

I don’t think nortel is prepared to interested in competing on this playing field?

So the channel/deleivery and margins would not be apples to apples comparable between the two correct?

I think this Channel issue is one of the fudamental areas Nortel has to solve. Box versus box in most areas their products are more than a match for Cisco. But can they get them to the table, put forward by credible partners?

Interesting times.