I would add that a big problem with this is that ITSM 7 is extremely buggy,
harder to use than previous versions, and extremely expensive. AR System
development is what kept Remedy alive, and by de-emphasizing the strong point
of Remedy, I see AR System and ITSM usage declining in the future. I have
heard from a lot of people that their management is looking forward to the ITSM
release from Microsoft because they think it will be more integrated with other
systems. While I think the Microsoft product is not going to be that good in
the first release, it will improve, and if BMC does not improve the quality of
ITSM and go back to selling AR System itself as a major product, Microsoft will
put them out of the IT service management business.
Shawn
-----Original Message-----
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL
PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rick Cook
Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2007 7:18 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: BUW 2007 Track Sessions Announced
**
I think that Susan has a point, and to make a more specific
observation, the de-emphasis of the AR System as a development platform, making
BMC's defacto focus on it just being a willing and able container for the
ITSM/CMDB, has led to less custom work going on these days. This in turn leads
to fewer people able to talk about innovative things they're doing, because
it's increasingly out of the mainstream that it once would have been in the
middle of. Not to say that there isn't custom work, it's just that privacy
concerns are probably keeping most govt. apps private, and most private
entities are going ITIL/ITSM these days, because that's all that BMC sells to
them.
Not necessarily blaming BMC for that, just saying that this is a
foreseeable byproduct of their product direction, exacerbated by the fact that
many of us are neck deep in trying to figure out what the **** BMC was thinking
in some of the feature decisions with ITSM.
Maybe THAT would be a good breakout - Gap analysis between ITSM 7.0.2
delivered functionality and what customers are actually wanting it to do, both
raising awareness for prospective customers and giving some ideas for bridging
those gaps for both future and present deployers of the apps.
Rick
On 7/19/07, Susan Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
**
David,
Maybe there is an unspoken message that bmc should be listening
too. There generally is no lack of submissions by non-host presenters. Since
the advent of the various version 7 products there has been an aura around
Remedy that is disconcerting to some degree. Last year we gathered over a 100
topics of interest. This year few if any topics were suggested here. That in
itself is very unusual.
Thoughts to mull over ....
Susan
On 7/19/07, Easter, David <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:
**
> I, too, was disappointed with the dearth of non-BMC
presenters.
We too were disappointed in the number of customer
submissions. If anyone missed the submission deadline but has a desire to
present, please feel free to send me a direct E-mail with your topic and
synopsis. We still have some ability to move things around to accommodate
customer presentations. It doesn't necessarily have to be a development
training session - we'd love to have customers present their honest (but
hopefully positive) experience with BMC products too!
Thanks,
-David J. Easter
Sr. Product Manager, Service Management Business Unit
BMC Software, Inc.
The opinions, statements, and/or suggested courses of
action expressed in this E-mail do not necessarily reflect those of BMC
Software, Inc. My voluntary participation in this forum is not intended to
convey a role as a spokesperson, liaison or public relations representative for
BMC Software, Inc.
________________________________
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:[email protected] ] On Behalf Of Rick Cook
Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2007 3:27 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: BUW 2007 Track Sessions Announced
**
I, too, was disappointed with the dearth of non-BMC
presenters. I think the submission time was far earlier than it had been in
years past - that may have had a bit to do with it.
Rick
On 7/19/07, Bill Estep <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:
** I didn't see any development sessions. They
are all BMC product related. Did anyone see anything that's not BMC product
related, but Remedy development?
Thanks, we're still trying to decide if we are
sending folks.
Bill Estep
Nemours
On 7/18/07, Geoffrey Endresen <[EMAIL
PROTECTED] > wrote:
** For some reason it's not on the list
I want the session called "Remedy
Licenses for Dummies" with tips and tricks to using the minimum amount of
floating licenses while staying within the License Agreement.
-Geoff
On 7/18/07, Jarl Grøneng < [EMAIL
PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote:
Pretty much the same, but also
AR System Plug-in Server 7.1 and Java
SDK and AR System 7.1 API enhancements
-
Jarl
On 7/17/07, Jon Chau < [EMAIL
PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote:
> **
https://bmcuserworld.com/catalog/catalog/catalog.jsp
>
> What are some of the topics that most
interest you?
>
> I'm interested in:
>
> The Definitive Pure Java Single Sign
On Integration of Remedy Web
> Making DVF Development Easier: A
High-Level API and a Case Study
> Taking Advantage of New Features in
AR System Server 7.1
>
> Jon
__20060125_______________________This posting was submitted with HTML
in it___
Private and confidential as detailed <a
href="http://www.sug.com/disclaimers/default.htm#Mail";>here</a>. If you cannot
access hyperlink, please e-mail sender.
_______________________________________________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where the
Answers Are"
