back to article Cisco axes unloved M-Series modular servers two years after launch

Cisco will kill off its M-Series modular server line, citing lack of customer interest. In an internal company memo, seen by The Register, Cisco data center/virtualization VP Frank Palumbo said stalled demand for the modular line convinced Cisco to end sales for the compact servers less than two years after their introduction …

  1. Crazy Operations Guy

    The M-series aren't blades

    The M stands for "modular". The B_Series (which according to the story is what customer are asking for) are their blade offerings. The C-series are their stand-alone rack boxes.

    This all makes sense to me since the M-series were a weird hybrid of both, but lacked the features that made the others desirable. The M-series only put 8 wimpy servers into a 2U machine, yet required the XFP connectors that the B-series chassis used. It was a weird middle-child product that didn't really fit into a specific role. They might've been able to save the line if they used common parts as the C- and B- series (EG, a 1- or 2-slot blade chassis that used standard network interfaces)

    1. diodesign (Written by Reg staff) Silver badge

      Re: The M-series aren't blades

      Yeah sure - we know. Typo in the sub-head. It's fixed. Don't forget to email if you spot any problems.


    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: The M-series aren't blades

      I am thinking of buying this on the cheap from the secondary market. What are some of the things I should lookout for?

  2. Commswonk


    I managed to get as far as we have established thought leadership before a mixture of dread and expectation nearly overcame me.

    density-optimized segment... shifting our investment focus for composable infrastructure...product-level decision... form factors... scale-out workloads; it's all too much to bear, and I need to lie down in a darkened room until the pain subsides. Just as well it's time for bed...


    1. xperroni

      Re: Bingo!!

      My thoughts exactly. Time was when only turd-polishing PR bods would resort to this sort of BS jargon, but now it seems even internal communications are written in it, lest management's real thoughts be known through a leaked memo. Which, as it turns out, was actually a sensible concern?

      1. Fatman

        Re: turd polishng

        <quote>Time was when only turd-polishing PR bods would resort to this sort of BS jargon..</quote>

        Time to get out some Dr Guff's:

        1. TRT Silver badge

          Re: turd polishng

          Apparently to "cloud" something now means "to share it". Management have taken this on board quite readily and are now happy to cloud the issues for staff, partners and customers alike.

    2. BitterExScientist

      Re: Bingo!!

      I think you can estimate the number of department heads involved in a project by the number of buzzwords in a PR statement; and in this case confirm the root cause of the failure.

  3. Sgt_Oddball Silver badge

    I thought.

    HP got there first with idea? (along with standard power/networking connections to boot)

    1. Lusty

      Re: I thought.

      If by "got there first" you mean "were also over a decade late" then probably yes. Just as public cloud adoption started to ramp up server vendors started bringing out server hardware for a pre-virtualisation era - what could go wrong? Let's face it, any cloud scale solution using kit this expensive was also doomed to fail, hence the need for AWS and Azure in the first place where they understand that paying a middleman to put a badge on server hardware really hurts at scale.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: I thought.

      Yup absolutely HPE coined the term "Converged Infrastructure" it took Cisco and DELL a few years to start using that terminology. This is why a year ago as soon as HPE launched "Composable Infrastructure" and HPE Synergy, Cisco marketeers jump straight on that bandwagon and changed all of their online material for one very small segment of their product offering. Seriously, no thought leadership there. There is only so many times Cisco can sell you high margin Nexus projects and "hide the margin" oh I mean "give you" UCS products for "nothing" before something gives. Oh whats that ? Could it be the sound of SDN and Vmware NSX causing you massive headaches in your "lock-in" technology. Don't swallow the Cisco Kool-aide people .. "No one got fired for buying Cisco" bah .. seriously not in today's business..

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022