On Tue, 7 Apr 2009 15:22:26 -0400, Dave Barry <[email protected]> wrote:
>... IMHO, feature-by-feature comparisons are less important than the >total solution. It depends on how the performance analyst's role is >defined in your organization. >... I'd say that feature-by-feature comparisons are VERY important if the you-bet-your-future features are either missing or are too difficult to use in some of the products. The total solution is surely the way to go if you are starting from scratch, but if you are contemplating switching products and certain features are mission-critical for your current environment you had better do feature-by-feature comparisons. We went through a sucession of monitor products. I think our MVS folks were pretty much ok with all 3 products, but our CICS / DB2 / MQ people were essentially flying blind for a year or so while we were on the 2nd of the 3 products. I don't know if the middle product simply didn't have the needed features or if it just took so much customization that the features were not usable. Our shop junked it and went to a 3rd that provided the needed features. I'm not supposed to make any statement that might be construed an endorsing (or unendorsing) a product, so I won't. But if you feel like assuming the 1st product as TMON, the 2nd was OMEGAMON, and the 3rd was SysView, I won't argue. Pat O'Keefe ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
