I did ask if that was your real name…this is the first time I have seen that 
you said it is…I was simply curious and asked a question.  Sorry that you 
consider that question harassment.  I’ll consider the matter closed if you 
would like.

 

From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of John Doe
Sent: Saturday, October 15, 2011 10:50 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Windows 7 and Internet Explorer version 9

 

** 


Joe,

You logic is off. How do I know your real name is Joe? I don't and neither of 
you know if my real name is NOT Jonathan Doe. There are a few people who have 
that name. But see I don't accuse you of this as you both have now done. 

If your way of saying hello is accusing someone of hiding their real name when 
it might be their real name then you have some serious problems. This has 
nothing to do with the subject matter, sorry.

I have identified myself and you continually harass me. It doesn't matter how 
senior you are harassment is harassement and I am asking nicely to please stop.

Thank you,
Jonathan Doe

 

  _____  

From: Joe Martin D'Souza <[email protected]>; 
To: <[email protected]>; 
Subject: Re: Windows 7 and Internet Explorer version 9 
Sent: Fri, Oct 14, 2011 5:30:41 PM 


 

LJ has been known to this forum for a few years and I can assure you he doesn’t 
harass people participating on here..

 

It is one of the forums etiquette if you are not aware, to identify yourself 
instead of coming in as John Smith. Dan Bloom the founder of this list had 
compiled a few list etiquette a few years ago, and identifying yourself was one 
of them. If you do not wish to identify because it may be against your 
corporation policies or whatever other reasons, you could say so and we all 
understand that, but its presumptions to assume that a long timer such as LJ is 
harassing you by asking to identify yourself.. Its an attempt to keep this list 
not just rich in its technical content, but to build a true social circle of 
Remedy professionals..

 

I do understand you may be relatively new on here so may not be aware of this 
lists etiquettes, but I’m sure Dan would be happy to send them to you if you do 
wish to go through them..

 

Cheers

 

Joe

 

From: John Doe <javascript:return>  

Sent: Friday, October 14, 2011 12:59 PM

Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general

To: [email protected] <javascript:return>  

Subject: Re: Windows 7 and Internet Explorer version 9

 

** 


What does my login ID have to do with the subject matter, sir?
Please do not harass fellow posters or it will be reported.
Thank you.

 

  _____  

From: LJ LongWing <[email protected]>; 
To: <[email protected]>; 
Subject: RE: Windows 7 and Internet Explorer version 9 
Sent: Fri, Oct 14, 2011 3:29:30 PM 


John,

I noticed your name on the list a few days ago, and thought to myself ‘who is 
that, why are they trying to hide’…so I looked back through the archives and 
found posts going back to Feb timeframe…and all of the post I found are well 
worded and such….just wondering if your name really is John Doe, or if you have 
a different name that you are hiding for some reason.

 

From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of John Doe
Sent: Friday, October 14, 2011 8:29 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Windows 7 and Internet Explorer version 9

 

** 

Oh Matt...here we go again my friend, 

 

Unfortunately, this compatibility matrix answer falls into the all to familiar 
category of "latest versions and higher are supported."  This was also the 
answer to Windows 2008 server 64 bit.  Because the compatibility matrix states 
as long as the VENDOR does not significantly change their software higher 
versions are supported.  When is their a higher version not supported?  Answer 
- there isn't a time. Respectfully, this falls under the SDLC of release it and 
the community will find the bugs.    I never used to see this happen before the 
exponential growth of ARS into the BMC movement.  Mostly, after 7.6.  I 
understand with growth, this happens.  But at what point to engineers tell 
management this type of reasoning does not work in the technical world?  I 
appreciate the need to grow.  Certainly, but at what cost?  Why did Firefox 
become a replacement for IE?  IE had much larger growth.  The answer is because 
Firefox was engineered better and due to this performed better on javascript.  
Sometimes, it is not always about growth.  

 

In the case of Windows 2008 server 64 bit the OS location for the ODBC drivers 
(folder location) were changed.  This was not caught when you would think, 
during testing of the product.  We (the customer) caught this after the 
official release.  We filed an RFE, which has been out in RFE land somewhere 
since.  The official explanation and fix was blamed on Microsoft because, you 
guessed it, they changed the software.  My question is, when is it ever BMC's 
responsibility to test the software for complete compatibility prior to 
release.  Not just operational compatibility?  Since this fell under the 
statement "compatible unless the vendor has any significant changes" we fell 
under the party line of "it's compatible".  When we demonstrated the 
incompatibility with the ODBC we were met with silence.  As seems to be a 
popular technique currently employed by premier support.  I mean no disrespect 
because I know those engineers are doing the best they can.  But they are 
handcuffed.  

 

I am not trying to sandbag here.  What I am trying to say is that statement on 
the compatibility matrix is a catch all and an example of a greater problem.  
If you use that statement, one could logically say that as long as the 
date/version of the vendor's release is a higher more current version, BMC is 
compatible.  Which is extremely presumptuous and the flaw with that logic is 
demonstrated above.  That is just one of so many examples.  This is the 
unfortunate case with the compatibility matrix and strategically, BMC 
currently.  I understand your explanation Matt.  I respect it.  However, it's 
just not technically sound from an engineer standpoint. It is sales and 
management coating over a technical flaw with the system.  A wise salesman once 
told me, never invite engineers to a demo.  Why?  Because sales explanations 
are not compatible with engineers.  

 

Back to the point.  In order for this compatibility matrix statement to really 
work, Microsoft, Oracle/Sun and Red Hat would need to go to BMC and explain 
every change that was made to the OS (and DB's etc).  I don't believe that will 
happen and honestly, BMC has probably realized this too.  BMC is a one customer 
among millions to these companies. However, in lue of this, complete and 
correctly engineered test scenarios would catch things like ODBC folders simply 
being placed in a different directory. Instead this compatibility matrix is the 
fix.  I am not trying to be blunt or short in any way but I have seen this 
become the standard answer from BMC during 7.5 and after 7.6 release.  
Unfortunately, it appears the user community is becoming the test engineers for 
BMC. 

 

Matt, this is one of the specific problems we spoke about in the other posts.

 

 

 

 

  _____  

From: "Chowdhury, Tauf" <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Friday, October 14, 2011 8:31 AM
Subject: Re: Windows 7 and Internet Explorer version 9

** 

You’re a lucky man. 

 

Tauf Chowdhury | Forest Laboratories, Inc.

Service Portfolio Manager

Infrastructure – Service Management

Office: 631.858.7765

 

From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Shafqat Ayaz
Sent: Friday, October 14, 2011 4:22 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Windows 7 and Internet Explorer version 9

 

** 

I have been using IE9 with Windows 7 with ITSM 7.6.04 without any problems for 
a while now.

 



Shafqat Ayaz                    



 

  _____  

From: Jason Miller <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 7:03 PM
Subject: Re: Windows 7 and Internet Explorer version 9

** 

Could these tips be added to a BMCDN document to make them available without 
having to open a support issue?


Jason


On Oct 12, 2011, at 12:30 PM, Matt Laurenceau <[email protected]> wrote:

** 

The "or higher" statement on the compatibility matrix is the answer: IE9 is 
supported :)

 

BMC Support has tips to optimize performances.

 

Take care,

Matt Laurenceau

Senior Community Ambassador, BMC Communities

[email protected]

Follow me @Matt_L

Skype: matt.laurenceau

 


On 12 oct. 2011, at 20:54, Guillaume Rheault <[email protected]> wrote:

** 

There have been posts that there are problems with ITSM 7.6.04 and IE 9
Whether ITSM 7.6.00 is compatible with IE 9... you may be the first one to find 
out!

Guillaume


  _____  


From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [[email protected]] on 
behalf of Spangler Robert C CIV USSTRATCOM/JWAC [[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 2:30 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Windows 7 and Internet Explorer version 9

** 

We are getting ready to upgrade to Windows 7 and Internet Explorer version 9.  
Does ARS 7.5 and ITSM 7.6 support these?  Thanks

_attend WWRUG11 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ 

_attend WWRUG11 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ 

_attend WWRUG11 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ 

_attend WWRUG11 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ 

 

_attend WWRUG11 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_

  _____  

This e-mail and its attachments may contain Forest Laboratories, Inc. 
proprietary information that is privileged, confidential or subject to 
copyright belonging to Forest Laboratories, Inc. This e-mail is intended solely 
for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are 
not the intended recipient of this e-mail, or the employee or agent responsible 
for delivering this e-mail to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified 
that any dissemination, distribution, copying or action taken in relation to 
the contents of and attachments to this e-mail is strictly prohibited and may 
be unlawful. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the 
sender immediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of this 
e-mail and any printout.

_attend WWRUG11 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_ 

 

_attend WWRUG11 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_

_attend WWRUG11 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_

_attend WWRUG11 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"_


_______________________________________________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
attend wwrug11 www.wwrug.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"

Reply via email to