Cisco is not the powerhouse leader they used to be, but they are still relevant. I think one of their problems is (or at least was) their sales and marketing tactics could be a bit too aggressive, if not underhanded.
We once requested proposals and bids for new routers for a major military installation and decided to go with HP since, at the time, their products more closely met our current and projected needs, did so more cheaply (always important when spending taxpayer's moneys) and they could deliver much more quickly - with on-site engineers who would help with the installations and most importantly, training. On-site support and training was something Cisco wanted more $$$ for.
Cisco sent a bunch of salesmen and shysters... err... lawyers to the commanding general (the 4-star!) back at command headquarters and claimed we didn't know what we were doing, HP didn't know what they were doing, and we were about to waste taxpayer's money! They then proceeded to falsely claim how their products were so much better. Cisco products were good - no doubt. But they could not do the job better.
This resulted in a hold on the purchase and we had to go back and totally re-justify our decision. Several weeks of delays ensued - which ultimately impacted mission readiness for several major systems that were waiting for this major network to go live.
Not good.
I don't know if that was typical behavior for Cisco, but it sure left a bad taste in our mouths. And when other sites came to us to see how we "did it", we did not hesitate warn those sites of those tactics.