Hi Kathy! Please let me reflect on your post: > They not only participated in defining what they were looking > for but also participated in early design reviews. I know, as a matter of fact I was invited by IBM, but my boss didn't allow me to go at that time... I would have definitely advised IBM not to go for the AC solution.
> We understand that it is hard to give up an interface you know well and > switch to a new one. Well, the old web interface was far from perfect. Personally, I think the old ADSM interface was the most intuitive one. But I'm open to new options, but to my opinion and to most of the other TSM users I spoke in the Netherlands, the AC interface is far from intuitive. One really has to search through the panels to find the option you need. In a really intuitive user interface the user doesn't have to search at all! > 1. The command line interface (dsmadmc) is still available in TSM 5.3. We > have no plans to remove dsmadmc from future releases. We recognize that a > great many of our customers use automated scripts with dsmadmc. That's good news, because for most 5.3 users it will probably be the only available interface... > 2. A separate machine is NOT required for the ISC/Administration Center > installation. It can run on the same hardware as your TSM Server, provided > you meet the minimum system requirements, as described in the version > release page referenced below. True, but only if you have a fat TSM server with a LOT of free memory!! > Since the Administration Center is accessed via a browser, it is > accessible from any operating system, including XP. The old web admin was also accessible from any operating system... > 5. We?ve heard your concern and complaint about the footprint of the > Administration Center. We don?t have a quick fix for this but are > continuing to look at ways to reduce this. Even when IBM reduces the footprint, I doubt that any small TSM customer will install AC. You have to make your server bigger to install AC on it or you have to install a separate management server, just for managing a backup server. For those customers AC is really overdone. > 6. We have heard your requests to bring back the old interface. Since > that interface was not uplifted with the new TSM 5.3 function and our > intent is to only enhance the new interface, we decided not to release > it. Instead we are focusing on continued enhancements to the new > interface at as rapid a rate as is possible. So although you say you hear our complaints, you say: don't complain and get used to AC. To my opinion that's not how IBM should handle this. What IBM could do is wait for a few months until several customers migrated to 5.3 (most people will probably wait until 5.3.1) and keep a customer survey. If the majority of the people don't like AC, IBM should re-evaluate their decision. To be clear, I'm really open to new software and new designs. I personally participated in the 5.3 beta program, but with AC IBM really took the wrong turn... Kindest regards, Eric van Loon ********************************************************************** For information, services and offers, please visit our web site: http://www.klm.com. This e-mail and any attachment may contain confidential and privileged material intended for the addressee only. If you are not the addressee, you are notified that no part of the e-mail or any attachment may be disclosed, copied or distributed, and that any other action related to this e-mail or attachment is strictly prohibited, and may be unlawful. If you have received this e-mail by error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, and delete this message. Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij NV (KLM), its subsidiaries and/or its employees shall not be liable for the incorrect or incomplete transmission of this e-mail or any attachments, nor responsible for any delay in receipt. **********************************************************************
