Title: RE: Windows VISTA
**
Fair point, but even on the client base XP has been working incredibly well, and as Vista is (apparently) not close to being production ready, then any current testing could be seriously knocked out of kilter by possible changes to the OS?  Could depend on resources though - if you have the time and money to spend on it, I'm sure that both Microsoft and BMC would be happy for any feedback, and I'm pretty sure that this community would be interested in any such results.
 
Depending on the scale of the installations, the cost of upgrading the hardware to cope with the slick new features of Vista could be prohibitive.  having said that, we've gone through this before when moving from 2k to XP, its an inevitable part of this industry.
 
And of course there is also the issue of support - companies such as ours seriously dislike working on unsupported platforms.  i haven't looked at the Microsoft OS support calendar, but Win2k can't be supported for much longer.
 
Good luck with the testing!

Regards

Dave


From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kaiser Norm E CIV USAF 96 CG/SCWOE
Sent: 12 September 2006 16:20
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Windows VISTA

**

Also, while Win2K might be bulletproof for your current SERVER instance, James is probably trying to prepare himself for the inevitable upgrade to Vista amongst his CLIENT base (users getting a new workstation or upgraded to Vista to take advantage of all its slick new features).

-----Original Message-----
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Axton
Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2006 10:11 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Windows VISTA

Mmmm, all new ip stack.  Tasty

Axton Grams

On 9/12/06, Barber, Dave <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> **
> Are there any over-riding reasons for trying Vista at the moment?  From what
> I've read elsewhere (mainly slashdot), Vista isn't particularly close to
> being ready for production.
>
> Our production servers are running on Win2k, and are turning out to be
> pretty much bulletproof - they've been running reliably (albeit increasingly
> slowly) for over 5 years.  In fact, as far as I'm aware, they are probably
> the most reliable Windows servers that we have here.  Pretty much every
> other application server seems to regularly need rebooting (exchange being
> the main culprit).
>
> Regards
>
> Dave
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Heider, Stephen
> Sent: 12 September 2006 15:51
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: Windows VISTA
>
>
> **
>
> I haven't tried it... but do you know if the 7.0 Remedy User Tool works?
> ________________________________
> From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Hall, James (West Chester)
> Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2006 10:40 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Windows VISTA
>
> **
>
>
> Hello List,
>
>
>
> Our IT team is evaluating Windows VISTA.   When they attempted to install
> the 6.3 AR System User tool the installation failed.  This didn't come as a
> huge surprise considering the compatibility matrix makes no mention of VISTA
> that I could find.  During the installation, an error pops up saying "could
> not determine operating system version" and then setup fails.
>
>
>
> Have any of you succeeded installing an AR System User tool on a machine
> running the Windows VISTA OS?
>
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> James W. Hall
>
>
>
>  __20060125_______________________This posting was
> submitted with HTML in it___
> __20060125_______________________This posting was submitted
> with HTML in it___
> __20060125_______________________This posting was submitted
> with HTML in it___

_______________________________________________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at http://www.wwrug.org

__20060125_______________________This posting was submitted with HTML in it___ __20060125_______________________This posting was submitted with HTML in it___

Reply via email to