No, it's because he got so much of it right! Comments:
I actually see the complexity of the ITSM suite and its built-in resistance to customization, as well as the additional costs for all of the necessary components if you want asset and change functions, driving many organizations back to custom applications. We ruled out home-built in 1997 and went with Help Desk 3 the following year, and took the "easy" route to upgrade to Help Desk 4 and then 5.5 since our customizations moved with them and expanded. The route to ITSM 7 from 5.5 isn't even easy, much less direct, it's a complete do-over! After looking at the complexity and costs of licensing the full ITSM suite, we have put the development of an in-house application back on the table for discussion. For the moment we are driving ahead towards a migration to ITSM 7, but if (a) they don't get the myriad bugs out, and (b) the costs keep escalating for additional pieces that you should have gotten in the first place but are no longer bundled (Requester Console within ServiceDesk versus separate Service Request Management application at additional cost, fixed licenses that used to be included with a new application licenses), or prices that triple because they can (Service Level Management), sooner or later my bosses will decide to start an in-house development effort, or to switch product vendors entirely. There is no commitment here at any level to ITIL, except as it represents some sort of a "best practice," so that is not a driver. BTW, when you buy/install SQL Server 2005 you DO get Visual Studio along with it - it is now the integration interface; you don't even have to buy it separately. It wouldn't surprise me to see part of the Visual Studio included in the Exchange 2007 install but I haven't run one yet. If you want to do serious development in .NET against SQL Server, you must buy the full version of Visual Studio. At least (for now) BMC still includes the Admin tool and full development capability with every AR Server; look out if that disappears, but I don't see that happening on Doug's watch! Christopher Strauss, Ph.D. Remedy Database Administrator University of North Texas Computing Center http://remedy.unt.edu/helpdesk/ > -----Original Message----- > From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Christian Janovic > Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2007 1:33 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: AW: ITSM 7 customizations > > "I'm convinced the reason why so many members of the ARSList > are on the ITSM/ITIL bandwagon is because they want to remain > gainfully employed and not because ITSM is a good product." > >>>>>>>>>> Is that the reason why nobody responds to Norms list entry? > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > Von: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Im Auftrag von Kaiser Norm E CIV > USAF 96 CS/SCCE > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 24. Mai 2007 18:55 > An: [email protected] > Betreff: Re: ITSM 7 customizations > > >I do believe Remedy is marketing this as a full-blown product suite > that, if configured correctly, shouldn't need or require the > services of anything other than a 'maintenance admin'. This > is why, no doubt, they always offer their professional > services if you want to step outside their new box. And, I > don't believe they are going to want to assist those > developers who insist on continuing to treat Remedy as a > development tool....sigh...... > > I just wonder if the handwriting is on the wall for us custom > Remedy developers. I know from my own first-hand experience > that Remedy sales is now hawking Remedy as a complete, > ITIL-driven IT enterprise management suite rather than as a > development platform. > > BMC jumped off the cliff when they decided to throw their hat > into the ITIL ring. To me, having to own and run ARS with an > alleged OOTB ITIL enterprise suite (the monster that it is) > is just a bizarre contrivance. > It "just wound up that way." If you buy Microsoft Exchange do > you have to buy the Microsoft Visual Studio along with it? > > Now I know people are going to throw out the, "Well they know > they can't make a perfect app for everyone so it has to be > customizable...blah, blah, blah..." > > No, it's not customizable. Not in a practical sense, anyway. Here's > why: > > A) It's a monster. Good luck trying to figure out what > everything does. > How do you figure it out? > Clickety-clickety...clickety-clickety...clickety-clickety...an d that's for over 20,000 code objects. At that rate it would > take a good developer a year or more to reverse engineer it all. > > B) If you somehow DO successfully customize it, as soon as > BMC releases a patch or an upgrade, your customization could > very well go BYE BYE! > > Any you know what? For what? What does a "successful" > deployment of ITSM get you? > > I'm convinced the reason why so many members of the ARSList > are on the ITSM/ITIL bandwagon is because they want to remain > gainfully employed and not because ITSM is a good product. > > Just my thoughts. > Norm > > ______________________________________________________________ > ______________ > ___ > 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" > _______________________________________________________________________________ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where the Answers Are"
