Just to add my $0.02, we're close to moving to 8.1 in production, although 
we're past the technical team testing phase and about to go to UAT.  We did 
already get to 8.1 ARS in Production with ITSM 7.6.4 with no new problems so I 
can vouch for that as well.

There seem to be a few really good "new" features that come with 8.1 (as 
opposed to 7.6.4, we bypassed 8.0), such as the new SRM, restoring the 
Categorization tabs, the rules based email engine, the automatic screen 
refreshes on Change Management when you go to a new phase, etc.  Several of the 
same old bugs are still around though.  Global Search is still 50% useless, the 
Mid Tier crashes Tomcat as frequently as it had before, and you still have to 
have your users clear their browser cache as often as Windows ME users have to 
reboot their PCs.

Despite not fixing many defects, some of the new features make it worth 
upgrading just to have in place since the users are already used to Remedy's 
quirks.
Thanks,

Shawn Pierson
Remedy Developer | Energy Transfer

From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) 
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Kathy Morris
Sent: Wednesday, January 08, 2014 10:52 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Upgrade from 7.6.4 to 8.1

**
Hi,

We are planning the upgrade from 7.6.4 to 8.1.  Wondering what others have 
experienced with a 7.6.4 to 8x upgrade.  Our company feels this upgrade is 
going to be "very difficult." We have never archived any data.  There were over 
100 hotfixes applied to 7.6.4.  Besides the release notes, is there any 
documentation to help with this painful process :) Are there any gotchas? 
Recommendations?
_ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_

Private and confidential as detailed here: 
http://www.energytransfer.com/mail_disclaimer.aspx .  If you cannot access the 
link, please e-mail sender.

_______________________________________________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
"Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"

Reply via email to