hi LJ, I don't think the ARS platform will die or diminish any time soon.... BMC keeps investing in it a whole lot. If ARS dies, BMC might die with it, or at least it would be seriously handicapped. That's just my opinion.
The point that I am trying to make is this, and I will try to explain in simple terms: There are two types of application development environments: 1. A development environment where the programmer/developer can create an application and sell it to the public, without licensing limitations or hindrances and without having to pay somebody for the platform license. This is the case I believe with java, .net, PHP, etc. AR System does not fall in this category, because the customer still needs to pay BMC for the AR Server license and the ARS user licenses for any custom application, in addition to support fees. 2. A development environment where the programmer/developer extends and customizes a vendor application, and creates new modules that will serve exclusively his organization needs/requirements. This is the category where AR System is, and maybe Sharepoint, although I do now know the licensing restrictions with Microsoft (and I don't care). Two very different scenarios and really two different worlds. I personally think BMC has done a tremendous job with the AR System, and I trust they will keep up the good work there. The evidence is promising; overlays, better mid-tier architecture, better performance and manageability, new UI features, etc etc. A++++++ for Doug, David Easter and all the programmers at BMC. Let's squash CA, HP and service-now. However, this does not mean that I would develop an application from scratch in AR System and try to sell it to the public: that's a non-starter under the present circumstances, specially the licensing. I hope I was able to clarify my point of view Guillaume ________________________________________ From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [[email protected]] on behalf of LJ LongWing [[email protected]] Sent: Friday, January 13, 2012 10:33 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Script Generation Guillaume, I will agree that ever since 'Remedy' sold out the first time to make it owned by someone else, the drive for 'Remedy as a platform' has diminished if not entirely died. I have built my career around Remedy and don't want to see the platform die as a platform...but that's truly not up to me. -----Original Message----- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Guillaume Rheault Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2012 4:48 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Script Generation Shawn , I need to chive in because I think everybody that has replied to the threads is missing the point, except you. You got it. When you state that BMC seems to be going away from AR System as a development platform, I think you are almost right: I do not think that BMC has ever really intended for AR System to be a development environment where third parties can build their applications on ARS and sell them. Case in point: you may remember the deployable applications in version ARS 6.0 (if my memory serves me well) had the ability for a license key to be entered. Therefore, the application would run, but without the license key the end user (the customer) could not view or update the objects in the application with the admin tool. Well all that stuff was done away with and scrapped in ARS 7.0 (if my memory serves me right). That feature was marketed by then by BMC as a step in the direction for allowing third parties to build their applications, and possibly sell them in what was referred to as the BMC MarketPlace (if I remeber well). Well that whole thing fell apart. Since then, I have not heard anything to suggest that BMC is even considering that again. Therefore all these wishes about better version control, scripting and such, are really not that important if BMC does not really make the ARS a development platform that would be used for applications other than ITSM, or for custom modules developed at customer sites that complement the ITSM suite. Sure it would make the life of the Remedy administrator/developer easier, and BMC is taking steps into that direction. But that is not enough. There is the issue of licensing. If I was going to develop applications from scratch and sell them to the public, I would not consider doing that with AR System at all. 8 years ago when the license-able deployable application was conceived in ARS 6.0, I really considered that, but the issue then was always that customers need to still pay an ARS server license key and ARS user licenses, in addition to whatever they would pay for your app. So I was waiting for BMC to see what was the next step. And the next step was to kill that feature and the market place concept. It seems to me ARS and ITSM/RKM/SRM/CMDB/ITBM need to be considered as a whole nowadays, because whatever new features need to be developed in those apps/suites, that will force new features to be developed in ARS. But I don't think new ARS features will be conceived for their own good/merit. You correctly point this out in your reply. So that's why in my previous replies, I believe that it is not accurate anymore to compare ARS by itself, with other programming languages or development frameworks. I would say it is more accurate to compare the ARS ITSM suite (with all the modules SRM, RKM, SLM, etc) with the equivalent suites from the competition, mostly HP, CA, IBM and service-now. -Guillaume _______________________________________________________________________________ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug12 www.wwrug12.com ARSList: "Where the Answers Are"
