Where's WAAS 4.5.1?

When is a release not really a release?  When it’s a Cisco WAAS release.

Some background to help  explain that cryptic opening: Cisco promised last year as part of their announcement with Citrix that a new release of WAAS with optimization for ICA was “targeted for Q4”.  At the end of Q4, still no new version of WAAS.

Well, that’s not all that interesting.  Lots of companies don’t quite make their targets or deadlines, especially in software development.  It’s the next part that gets interesting.

The release note for WAAS 4.5.1 finally showed up on cisco.com on January 31^st. I was checking pretty much every day, and I guess someone decided that one month past the end of Q4 was as late as they could manage.  But already things were looking weird.   For one thing, the release notes showed a date on the index page of “23/Nov/2011” which I knew wasn’t true (see screen shot below)

Reading the release note itself, it told a different lie about its release date: “November 30, 2011” (see screen shot below)

 

And the strangest part? The software isn’t really there.  The latest release showing on the “Download Software” page even on February 8^th was still 4.4.3c, and the highest release number showing under All Releases was still 4.4 (see screen shot below):

What the heck is going on here? The sort-of-explanation from Cisco appears in a support forum:  

“[WAAS 4.5.1] is available internally but it was not posted publicly on CCO because Citrix deployments are still very new and thus, may require some tweaking of the configuration to operate properly.”

 (see screen shot below)

Most people in the software business would say that something “available internally” that “may require some tweaking… to operate properly” is beta code, not released code.  Cisco seems to want to have its cake and eat it too – they want to claim that they’ve released 4.5.1 even though something in the new features seems to be causing them challenges.

(So much for the vaunted “Citrix-Ready” certification that Cisco has been touting. Apparently WAAS 4.5.1 managed to get this badge from Citrix, even though Cisco thinks it’s not stable enough to release without babysitting.  Incredible.)

I'm sure that Cisco will fix these problems.  But it's interesting how the WAAS team can get itself tied into knots on something that just doesn't seem that complicated.  After all, you'd expect them to have their software qualification and release processes solid by now. And I can't resist pointing out that Riverbed has been releasing RiOS versions supporting ICA optimization since February 2010 without any of this kind of weirdness.

Comments

[CJ Murphy]

You guys must be feeling a bunch of pressure from Cisco. They've got a better cache these days. And more powerful platforms. And the only supported solutions for Citrix. Golly, maybe that's Riverbed were nearly flat last quarter. And why Q3 was flat in the Enterprise sector. And why you missed expectations in Q2.

Could be. And maybe, Cisco is keeping the product on hold so they can monitor every deal in the pipeline and increase the pressure of you guys. Maybe they have decided to take this market back. And maybe you're cracking under the pressure. Could be that's why you accuse Cisco of lying. Could be that's why you have to recruit your resellers and their SEs to post and comment. (And no, I don't work for Cisco or make a dime from networking. Could be I just know people who do.)

[Mark Day]

We always feel pressure from Cisco. But in the context of 7+ years of experience competing with them, the current situation isn't particularly worrisome.

There was a short interval between the Cisco announcement of new platforms and the Riverbed announcement of new platforms where Cisco looked pretty good. But that's past. And similarly, there was a period when Cisco talked about their cache improvements but hadn't actually shipped the WAAS 4.4 release. In that interval, people thought they might have something better than Riverbed. But that's past, too.

Now the message from Cisco is that WAAS 4.5 has some wonderful Citrix-optimizing features, but for some reason that release isn't actually widely available. I think it's fair to be a little skeptical, given the track record.

I don't think there's anything wrong with Cisco holding back a release for any of a number of reasons. Your idea that they want to monitor it carefully is quite plausible, and they would be smart to do that. That said, I do think it's wrong for Cisco to post "release" notes for something that's not released, and I think it's even worse to post those "release" notes with bogus dates. I hope you'd agree.

[CJ Murphy]

Well shucks. I'm not sure why you wanna go all moralistic. Accusations of lying. "Wrong." Is this is the Republican debate? I thought you folks were based in San Francisco? How about we go psychological instead? Perchance you're projecting your own unacceptable thoughts on the Cisco. Lying. "Wrong." ¡Tú protesta demasiado! (inverted question mark--BAZINGA!) Your projection makes you feel better about your own marketing spin and your misleading claims, but it doesn't help anyone else. Or maybe it's a conspiracy. Let's call Jesse "The Body" Ventura and ask him if maybe Cisco isn't just filtering the info when a Riverbed fanatic goes to the site to check on things. Maybe the system is working against you. You should occupy Cisco! Who knows? I checked with a buddy who is a Cisco customer. She says it's released. She said it's been available since October. And she said that people should just go to the Citrix site and see if there is a Citrix-Ready solution from Cisco. Although, she might be part of the conspiracy--or crazy. But I do agree: your misleading projectile marketing is wrong.

[Mark Day]

Why not go check the download link yourself? That's why it's in the article. No need to check with your Cisco buddy.

Now, if the release isn't there, I suppose it could be filtered out because you're a known reader of the Riverbed blog. But as I noted, at least one loyal Cisco customer was also asking about the release in a Cisco forum. So perhaps this filtering you mention is a little too broad?

I do expect that Cisco will post the release eventually. But when I checked just now it still wasn't there.

I hope you don't find the references to Cisco's own websites to be "misleading projectile marketing."

[CJ Murphy]

Now then, young puppy, don't you take that tone with me! Manage that anger. Exercise. Stay away from the juice. I don't know much about your magical snake oil pixie dust. And I know more about SYSCOM than Cisco. But I do know the smell of hooey. And this here is hooey. I think you might be channeling a reality distortion field. How 'bout you stop all this bunk and admit that you've taken a job spreading misinformation? You twist the words of Cisco execs. (OK, that's easy sometimes) You pretend that your resellers are journalists. (is that honest? is it wrong?) You're like an evil Ron Paul. Cisco is here http://bit.ly/AjkAPM . And Citrix-Ready, Baby! I think they need to ship something to be ready like that. I don't see Riverbed, so maybe that means there is conspiracy of wrong-ousity and dishonest-ifcation. (Hurl.)

[Mark Day]

I'm not sure what you are interpreting as "anger" but I can assure you that I am more bemused and amused than anything else.

I find it intriguing that in this thread about whether Cisco has or hasn't released a piece of software, you repeatedly cite a link on the Citrix web site. I acknowledged the WAAS "Citrix-Ready" certification in my original posting. It seems strange keep pointing out the Citrix credential as though it somehow rebuts the (continued) absence of the actual released Cisco software.

If your point is that the Citrix-Ready logo couldn't be awarded without testing some version of the code, I completely agree... but apparently whatever was used for the certification wasn't solid enough for a conventional general release.

I respect your statements that you are not a Cisco employee and that you don't make your living from networking. But as a result, I find both your continued interest in this issue and your approach rather puzzling. For whatever reason, your tone is very similar to what I would expect from a WAAS product manager. I wonder what we have done at Riverbed to prompt such negativity from an otherwise-neutral party, and I'd like to do what I can to improve the situation.

[CJ Murphy]

Well, hey now, simmer down there Buttercup. No need for insults. I don't know WAAS from dead fish; I engineer things, real things, not software. What do product managers do anyway? Write stuff on blogs for money? Production needs managing. People need managers. Products just sit there, humming and blinking. Build it. Sell it. I just know that a friend sent me a mail and said, "look at the hurl these people are spewing now." he also said "LOL," which is somewhat lame. But I am of a curious nature, and now I have a new friend.