Option 1: If you’ve already been proactive about your management of and containment of expensive SMARTnet support, you’ve likely asked yourself, “Can I get all the value of Cisco SMARTnet for the assets that require it, yet also drive cost savings, reduce waste and do so without running completely afoul of all these new Cisco policies?”
If you’re not yet monitoring essential Hardware Lifecycle Milestone dates, this ALERT provides a quick-glance review of popular OEM models that have reached (or about to reach) End of Software Support (EoSW) or End of Support (EoS). For these hardware asset models, it no longer makes financial sense to rely on expensive OEM support – but instead, should move to independent (Third Party Maintenance) support.
For those of you with any knowledge of Hardware Lifecycle Management practices, you likely understand that to reduce TCO, extend the useful life of and contain OpEx budgets, you need to ensure that:
Just last week, I attended an industry conference in Madrid and listened to an IDC presentation, in which the analyst explained that 42 percent of the world’s enterprise IT departments are now using Third Party Maintenance (TPM) and the two primary reasons: “Cost savings” and “easier to do business with.”
Driving significant cost savings is only one of the benefits of adopting a Hybrid Hardware Support model, or engaging XSi. This blog will identify what I believe to be the top five benefits (value propositions) for those of you with IT operations and/or IT budget responsibilities within our country’s federal agencies.
If you are already familiar with Independent Hardware Support, also known as Third Party Maintenance (TPM), it’s likely that you’ve previously chosen to adopt Hardware Lifecycle Management Best Practices, or even a Hybrid Hardware Support model. If you have, this blog is for you. If you have not yet done so, we can suggest other blogs to help you in answering “why,” along with estimating the value to transitioning your support model.
By now, you have undoubtedly heard the stories of Cisco conducting entitlement audits to verify compliance or impose penalties on those who are unable. If you are not familiar with this issue or its history, I would highly encourage you to read Grant Patten’s (our VP, Service Delivery) article from a few weeks ago. The article is entitled (click the link to read): What Cisco and Traditional TPMs Don’t Want You To Know; Why We Need a Better Maintenance Solution.
“Educate them. But don’t OVER-educate them,” that was a former boss’s direction before pitching my former company’s solution to a client. He was afraid that if a prospect truly understood the economics of Cisco third party maintenance (“TPM”), they would choose to do it themselves rather than buying maintenance from us. My goal today is to “OVER-educate” you by opening the kimono on the economics of the industry.