Cisco IOS vs. Junos Network Operating System (Junos OS)

I've worked with several network device vendors in my 10+ years of being in the industry and my favorite continues to be Cisco IOS. Overall, Cisco IOS tends to be the most stable, the most intuitive, has the best TAC support, and has the best knowledge base articles and white papers.

Incentivized

Juniper Operating systems are well suited for distribution and edge networks. When we evaluated them for a proposal to core networks we decided to go with other vendors, as the processing capacity of core routers was lower. Typical environments Junos OS has fit in our organization are enterprise, customer edge, distribution networks.

Incentivized

• User friendly CLI.
• Quick fixes for critical bugs.
• Longer uptime.

Incentivized

• BGP auto-peering
• Juniper ATP cloud for threat profiling
• Segment Routing algorithms allows customization

Incentivized

• By this point, there are several "flavors" of the Cisco IOS such as XE, XR, and the standard Cisco IOS. While they are all fairly similar, there does exist syntax differences between them. It would be ideal if at some point in the future, Cisco is able to unify all of them into one standard operating system which would use the same syntax across all platforms.
• While overall Cisco does a great job of QA'ing their IOS, no matter the release, there's always some minor bugs. I think it's important that Cisco continue to pour resources into their QA team to test their software.
• While I'm very familiar with the graphical readouts of "show processes cpu history" I would love for Cisco to eventually find a more intuitive way to display this data. I can't begin to count how many times I've had to teach more entry level (and even mid level) engineers how this graph is interpreted.
• I do wish that Cisco had something similar to Juniper's "commit check" or "commit confirmed". This helps validate the changes you're about to apply, and catch errors, so that you have a better idea of the impact of the change.

Incentivized

• GUI has come a long way, but can be improved
• SDN features
• Training, documentations and online discussion forums can be improved.

Incentivized

The data that Cisco IOS is able to provide is extremely relevant, it's fast, and it's intuitive. I also love that you're able to leverage things like macros or EEM scrips to run multiple commands at once. This is especially useful when you have more junior or entry level engineers in your environment and you want to provide them with a "shortcut" by having them type a single command to execute multiple commands.

Incentivized

We have found other Cisco software to be filled with added functionalities as compared to iOS. New NCS software has certain programmability features that are advantageous to legacy iOS software but are more complex to use for some users. Hence, we still have most areas of the network that functions using iOS software.

Incentivized

We have stuck to iOS for datacenter networks for many years due to familiarity and ease of use. Junos OS is well suited for business customers, due to cost-effectiveness and not frequent changes to end routers. Junos OS is very comparable to its competitors, but it bit behind on core layer solutions.

Incentivized

• Great uptimes on proven availability/reliability.
• Longevity of these switches ensures great ROI.
• Easy to learn for new users.

Incentivized

• Junos OS is cost effective
• Uptime is impressive and has proven availability
• Lack of training among employees has made it harder for few teams to troubleshoot

Incentivized