eWEEK content and product recommendations are editorially independent. We may make money when you click on links to our partners. Learn More.
LAS VEGAS—Smaller wireless-switching companies are challenging incumbent hardware vendors for the attention of users looking to improve the manageability of their WLANs.
Cisco Systems Inc. garnered much attention at NetWorld+Interop here this week from prospective customers interested in Ciscos new wireless blade for its Catalyst 6500 switch, but many other persons took a long look at offerings from such companies as Trapeze Networks Inc., Airespace Inc. and Aruba Wireless Networks Inc.
Prospective buyers said the startups are attractive to companies that dont already have a wired Cisco infrastructure.
“Our market space is medium-to-small businesses and schools,” said Jim Ealer, vice president and chief technology officer of Generation IX Technologies Inc., a systems integrator in Los Angeles, while studying Arubas switching systems. “Our clients are not going to be the ones who have 500 access points and a [Catalyst] 6500 sitting around. Weve liked Aruba. They have a range of products, and theyre in our price range.” However, Ealer said he still planned to talk to Ciscos wireless representatives.
Others discussed the benefits of a system that keeps wireless network intelligence largely centralized, rather than housing such features in the access points, saying it makes for easier wireless LAN management. Most of the startups use so-called thin access points. Ciscos new system still uses Ciscos “fat” access points, which include security and management features.
“When a fat AP fails, you cant just stick a new one in,” said Jan Snyder, senior telecommunications consultant in the IS department of San Antonio Community Hospital, in Upland, Calif., which recently moved to a WLAN switching system from Trapeze Networks after a few years of using access points from Symbol Technologies Inc. “Weve had one or two failures [with the Trapeze access points], but we can replace them in 30 seconds.”
“I once got a 60-day trial of an access point from Cisco, and I could never get it to work,” said William Stuart, network system engineer at Logitech Inc., in Fremont, Calif.
Some users said the obvious downside of choosing a startup over an established vendor is that theres a better chance a startup will fail. Analysts have said there are more players in the WLAN switching space than the industry can handle.
“That was our only concern,” said San Antonios Snyder, who said the risk was worth it. The hospital uses eight wireless switches from Trapeze.
“Any time you go with a startup, you roll the dice,” said Coy Thorp, network systems architect at MDL Information Systems Inc., in San Leandro, Calif. “The benefit of rolling the dice is that a startup listens to all its customers. Ive never had that experience with a Cisco or an Alcatel [S.A.].”
And its often easier to consider a startup for a WLAN than for a more mission-critical purchase. “We looked at wireless as an add-on,” said Stuart. “Were not going to not ship product because the wireless network doesnt work. That could change in the future, though.”