The truth is finally revealed and Cisco is not happy about it! Find out what Cisco doesn't want you to know about WAAS...

"This is a MUST READ report if you are considering WAN acceleration technology!"

- Justin Lofton, VP of Engineering, Tredent Data Systems

"Hi Justin, First Id like to thank you for the Reports. Interesting reading!" - Henric Arvidsson, CCIE 7375

"Thanks a ton Justin!" - Peter Bier, CIO - Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt LLP

"Justin, Thank you for your prompt response I have scanned the documents you attached and they look extremely helpful." - Steve, IT Manager

As you use Cisco for your networking infrastructure, I'm sure you are also considering Cisco for WAN optimization and application acceleration. We believe at this stage, Riverbed is by far the best of breed solution for WAN acceleration.

Below you will discover key information from research groups and actual customers who have tested and reviewed both solutions.

Disclaimer: We encourage you to test each WAN acceleration vendor in your own production environment to make the right choice for your particular network and goals.

Research Groups - Cisco WAAS versus Riverbed Steelhead

Piper Jaffray Research - December 18th 2007

Nearly all of the Cisco resellers we spoke with said it is very hard to beat Riverbed if the customer has already demoed the Riverbed appliance. This highlights the technical superiority of the Steelhead appliance and the ease with which integrators can implement the device for evaluation at a customer site.

Forrester Q3 2007 - View Full Report

Riverbed - Riverbed and its Steelhead appliance is the clear Leader of the WAN optimization market. It has a top-notch product, and it will continue to expand on its strategy as the best standalone optimization vendor.

Cisco WAAS - However, its current technology does not scale as well as other devices, which limits its appeal for companies that run high-octane WANs. If you prioritize cost and interoperability over best-of-breed features, then look no further. More demanding customers should hold off until Cisco executes on a few key milestones, like additional application response-time monitoring and application-specific protocol optimizations.

Citigroup - Riverbed Analysis April 2007

At present, we understand Cisco's solution to be somewhat loosely pieced together, including separate management interfaces (CLI and GUI) and administration points (server and network). As such, feedback around management and scalability has been mixed....Reflecting this, to date the company has found the bulk of its success in accounts it already owns versus "purist" deals.

Customer Testimonials - Riverbed vs Cisco WAAS

Cisco WAAS Exposed!

I am a former Cisco WAAS customer. "Former" being the operative word. The WAAS product looked great on paper, but completely tanked in our large infrastructure. After literally thousands of man-hours trying to get WAAS to work (it never did) we switched to Riverbed. We will never look back. If anyone wants 150+ WAAS devices, let me know. You can have them.
Source: Network World

We are a large Cisco customer with multiple CCIE's working for us. We did extensive testing with Cisco and Riverbed before deciding to buy Riverbed. Someone at Cisco needs to get the word out that there product is not Superior. The SE's continued to spout that out even with clear testing results that proved their product did not work "consistently". Interestingly they did outperform Riverbed in certain optimization tests. However, when we tested writing office documents back to a file share they would work about 75% of the time. The end users who were participating in extended testing clearly developed a favorite and even though Cisco was faster they prefered Riverbed because of the consistent performance. Basically, Cisco just did not work about 25% of the time for several Microsoft applications. Also, I have to say that I am not convinced that the seperate storage areas on the head end for each remote location is a great architecture. They tried to tell me that they did that because of performance but I really never bought it. I am a believer in Cisco's core products but I believe they have stretched themselves a little thin on some of these products. Try to find someone in TAC that knows a darn thing about these devices. Good luck.
Source: Network World

March 3rd, 2008 - We were looking at the WAAS box last year while taking a look at VOIP through the WAN. It went absolutely no where. Cisco themselves couldn't really work it out after we had given them samples files and such that are opened over the WAN link. - Source: CCIE Blog

We are a cisco shop - i too have had many sips of the Cisco juice. I will totally agree - CIFS, MAPI, HTTP - i have actually seen both in production...would not trade my steelheads for anything. Getting usable Solidworks (3d modeling) connectivity from China using the products. Gotta love that. - Source: CCIE Blog

Chief Information Officer at FHI, Mark Dronzek evaluated several alternatives for WAN optimization, including wide-area augmentation system (WAAS) products from Cisco, Packeteer, and Juniper. Cisco was a natural choice for FHI since it is a Cisco partner, but FHI encountered challenges based on installation and functionality that caused it to halt that evaluation. Source: Technology News Blog

Dave Edgecomb, Timex's Manager of Global Technical Operations, gave each vendor four hours to set up a demonstration in the test environment. After two days, Cisco's WAAS, which is an offline system, still wasn't up, and Timex cancelled Packeteer's demonstration since they also utilized an offline approach. The easiest system to set up was Riverbed's Steelhead appliance. You have to look at the eight pictures that show you where to plug in the color coded cables, you turn it on and then you answer the four questions on the screen, he says. I installed it myself for the second round of testing over lunch. Source: Plixer

We evaled all products in this marketspace in my company, in real world test terms on WAN links with high bandwidth (4Mbit+), but 180-220ms latency (speed of light to datacentre due to location). 3 final contenders, Riverbed, Cisco, and another which I forget. Cisco was the weakest in terms of features, and we went with the Riverbed.. - Dan Jones Source: Velocity Reviews

The Cisco WAAS has some interesting ideas going, but I just threw it off my network because it's not compatible with my Cisco hardware nor is it compatible with my Cisco high availability AVVID design. - Jim Kirby Source: Network World

CCIE# 18559 - Last time I looked into this type of technology the Cisco solution wasn't all that hot. At the time the only product that could somewhat help out with HTTPS/SSL connections was actually the Riverbed. I believe it was just coming to the public release and never got a chance to test the SSL. I did have Riverbeds installed at several sites and they reduced traffic by as much as 90% - pretty impressive. Maybe the Cisco product has more features now, however this was only 6 months ago. It seemed HTTP and CIFS were its semi strong points. Source: Networking Forum

Being a self-confessed "Cisco fan" wasn't enough to convince Adam Rasner, director of corporate network services at Rayonier, to give Cisco the prize of consolidating locations at the forestry and real estate company. Instead, that contract went to Riverbed Technologies and its Steelhead appliance. The company chose Riverbed after a 30-day bake-off between a Steelhead appliance and Cisco's Wide Area Application Service. Rayonier tested a 10Mb PowerPoint file over the 30-day period and found that the Riverbed appliance showed an 85% to 90% average data reduction rate, while the Cisco product averaged 77%. Response time opening the PowerPoint was also 35% faster with Riverbed's product. Rasner also said configuration problems with Cisco's product also turned him off. Rayonier runs 250 servers spread over multiple locations serving 3Tb of data before the consolidation. Source: SearchStorage.com

It's apparently worth it. Says Yankee's Keravalla: "Any company I've ever talked to that's done a technical bake-off says Riverbed performs best." - David Kirkpatrick Source: CNN