David, Why not have a Changes page like the patches page.. a nice need table with Version number and very short doc and a change in the text.. Page etc.. then Documentation folks can search it.. and so can we.. This seems very easy from a Remedy technilogical standpoint. Could you make this appeal ? Of course, they (being you BMC) would actually have to use it, so we can all be on the same page.. LACK of information is a Customer Killer.. you should know this.. My kids know this.. Just ask./// </please consider>
On 2/20/07, Easter, David <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Folks, I passed this "discussion" past the folks in our documentation area and they responded with the following info: In the past, release notes could be updated "on the fly" on the Remedy Support site. In other words, existing documents could be updated. Because of this ability, the following statement was in previous release notes: "Important: To obtain the most current version of release notes, which include all open issues, go to the Remedy Customer Support home page: http://supportweb.remedy.com"; For the first several months after a product was released, the release notes were updated with new defect information. When patches were sent out, Development wrote ReadMe files, but the release notes were not updated. When a new version was released, the release notes for the old version were no longer updated. On the topic of the 6.3 Release Notes dated January 2005, but the customer had a copy from August 2005 - that was probably was an error on our part because we did not update the date on the title page. For the issue of the short versus long versions of release notes: The reason for the difference is that the ESD (Electronic Software Download) version is translated into other languages and placed on the product CD and in the product kit. (This was the shorter version.) These release notes are completed early due to the lead time necessary to translate the documents. At release time, an updated version of the release notes is posted on the web. (This version includes Open and Fixed Issues, which are not translated.) The ability to update existing documents within the documentation section has been removed with the consolidation of the Remedy web site with the BMC web site. Documents can no longer be updated "on the fly" but rather a document would have to be retired/deleted and a new document posted with a new document number and URL. Because of this limitation, going forward BMC Remedy will create only one set of release notes that will go in the product kit and on the web. The release notes will not be updated. New critical information/issues will be distributed by way of Technical Bulletins. This will avoid the confusion of multiple versions of release notes. An example of this can be seen with the update to the AR System 7.0.01 release notes at: http://www.bmc.com/supportu/documents/77/36/67736/67736.pdf BMC Remedy will remove the statement about obtaining the "most current version" from future release notes as that statement is no longer valid. Thanks, -David J. Easter Sr. Product Manager, Service Management Business Unit BMC Software, Inc. -----Original Message----- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Carey Matthew Black Sent: Monday, February 19, 2007 1:55 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: (rant) BMC support web, obsolete docs? Doug, I actually reported ISS03048461 ( on 1/3/2007 ): " .... a problem with the release pdf (included in the product download doc set) as being incomplete. It was something like 28 pages in the docs download. However, if you find that pdf else were on BMC's website it was 98 pages long. " The PDF that is part of the software downloads was missing 70 (seventy) pages of information in the Release-Notes-701.pdf. That is 200%+ more content than the original document was as it was originally created! This is what I was told about this condition: " Here is the explanation for the discrepancy in pages: The ESD/download release notes are a previous (and shorter) version of the release notes. The Remedy writers added content to the release notes on the Support Documentation pages, while the ESD release notes weren't changed. The latest release notes are on the Support Documentation pages & going forward, the Remedy writers will no longer add content to release notes on the Support Documentation pages that aren't included in the download file. Instead they'll follow the process that the rest of BMC writers use , to issue technical bulletins with the additional information. The changes are a result of removing the previous database site and how documentation was delivered to the new database site. I hope this is sufficient explanation for you. Thank you, <STRIPED NAME> Customer Care BMC Web Support 1-800-537-1813 [EMAIL PROTECTED] " And my ticket was then closed. No resolution was provided. BMC support provided a statement that boils down to "we don't care that our posted docs are inconsistent and that the original docs are clearly lacking important information." They did not even offer to remove the "broken/poor" documentation when it was pointed out to them that it was missing 200%+ of material. Our support money appears to not be providing much more than a place to call/write and complain about the problems that BMC has. I can not remember the last time Tech Support actually helped to debug/diagnose and FIX a problem that I reported. <enter_support_mantra> <repeat_until_customer_gives_up> Send us your logs..... Send us your logs..... Send us your logs..... Try the latest patch.... Send us your logs..... <\repeat_until_customer_gives_up> <\enter_support_mantra> And the part that really gets my temperature rising is the phrases "Remedy writers" vs "BMC writers". As if BMC is some how "better" than "Remedy ever was". ( Ok... I will go count to 10 again....) --> So the poor initial released doc is Problem #1 --> So the poor maintenance of docs on the web site is Problem #2 --> The total lack of actually DOING anything for the customers are Problems #3 through #99 My guess is that you are seeing "another incident that is part of the larger problem that BMC has decided will NOT be fixed". ( To use ITIL terms to describe the state of the universe. ) I am sorry about _our_ luck, but BMC appears to not be listening. -- Carey Matthew Black Remedy Skilled Professional (RSP) ARS = Action Request System(Remedy) Love, then teach Solution = People + Process + Tools Fast, Accurate, Cheap.... Pick two. On 2/19/07, Anderson, Douglas W. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > ** > > > Hi ARSListers, > > Yes, I know, it's like shooting fish in a barrel to criticize > BMC/Remedy support but I am unable to resist joining in the chorus of > discontent/disgruntlement. > > The BMC "support" web site is supposedly one of the primary channels > via which we receive value in return for paying substantial annual support fees. > (Or maybe I am mistaken?) > > We're contemplating moving from ARS 6.0.1 to 6.3.0 to get the (broken) > DST patch, so I turned to the copy of the 6.3.0 release notes I'd > stashed on my trusty old Mac. The document, dated August 11, 2005, on > its first content page contains the following directive. "Important: > To obtain the most current version of release notes, which include all > open issues, go to the Remedy Customer Support home page: > http://supportweb.remedy.com. To access the Customer Support web site, you must have a support contract." > > I figured there might have been updates since August 2005. So, I > dutifully pulled up the BMC site, logged in to prove that my employer > had paid the big bucks for access to the latest documentation, and > went to the download page for the 6.3.0 docs. The ONLY version of the > release notes available to me there was dated *January* 2005! > > What am I to think, that errors were introduced into the release notes > between January and August 2005, corrected by reverting to the January > version? That *NO* issues have been discovered in the 6.3.0 release in > the past 25 months? > > I think a more likely interpretation of the circumstances is that > BMC/Remedy has an incompetent organization responsible for product documentation. > > I sure hope most of our support money is going to some more effective > part of the organization. > > Grrrr... > Doug Anderson > > Opinions expressed are necessarily mine, not necessarily those of the > Mayo Foundation. ________________________________________________________________________ _______ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where the Answers Are" _______________________________________________________________________________ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where the Answers Are"
-- Patrick Zandi _______________________________________________________________________________ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where the Answers Are"
