That's just a fundamentally different company you are describing. That's not the kind of company they wanted to build and that approach simply wouldn't result i

That's just a fundamentally different company you are describing. That's not the kind of company they wanted to build and that approach simply wouldn't result in the product they envisioned. If OCP stuff with some extra software could have easily enabled this kind of product, then the company wouldn't have to exist in the first place. > sourced from various suppliers They deliberately adopted a single supplier strategy. Again this is exactly what they did not want. See their 'Common Wisdom' podcast. Multiple suppliers have advantages, but also disadvantages. > What they seem to offer is mainframe-like throughput with generic software The software isn't generic at all, its very costume but unlike with a mainframe open all the way down. And a mainframe is just a very different architecture, the architecture isn't really like a mainframe at all. > and proprietary hardware made from generic parts Its their own costume board design both for the server and switch, a very different architecture overall. It depends what you mean by generic parts. Sure like everybody else they didn't design every single part themselves. But how the parts are combined and enabled with software is the unique selling point.