I'm afraid I'm another vote for the CLI. I'm not a big fan of either java or javascript and usually have both disabled in my browser. Now IF Tivoli comes up with a GOOD java implementation (I haven't seen a really good java application yet) AND I can convince MS/AOL-Netscape/Opera/Mozilla to implement the java/javascript options for the current window only and not global to all instances on the browser I'd be willing to reconsider . . .
But I don't have boatloads of clients to administer, so I'm probably not seeing the issues the rest of you are fighting. :-) Tom Kauffman NIBCO, Inc > -----Original Message----- > From: Prather, Wanda [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, August 12, 2002 2:17 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Antwort: Web Admin Interface - grrr > > > SHARE requirements get a fair amount of attention from Tivoli. > Talk to Paul Seay to find out what requirements have already > been voted in, > the next SHARE US is next week. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Rupp Thomas (Illwerke) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, August 12, 2002 3:10 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: AW: Antwort: Web Admin Interface - grrr > > > > Well, not really meaning to be on either one side or the > other, 1-valid > > point for the web version is not needing to install the gui on every > > machine you may want to use to administer the server(s). > > That's why I'm dreaming of a Java Applet. Tivoli has done it for the > B/U client that I can use over the web - so why shouldn't it > be possible > to write a Java Applet for the admin interface? > > What would be the correct way to tell Tivoli what the customers want? > > Kind regards > Thomas Rupp > > > -------------------------------------------------------------- > -------------- > -------------- > Dieses eMail wurde auf Viren geprueft. > > Vorarlberger Illwerke AG > -------------------------------------------------------------- > -------------- > -------------- >
