Even accounting for the number of changes that might be found in a GA release, do you have any specific experiences you can cite that would lead you to believe that VMWare will have been that much more deficient in the QA processes of 5.0 vs 5.0.1? Or, are you simply adhering to some standard process that you feel works for you?
Like I suggested earlier, I prefer to tailor my deployment approach to the specific of the products and organizations that I'm dealing with. Given that there was nothing in Martin's post which specifically suggested a production deployment sans testing, I'm rather intrigued that you would infer such. * * *ASB* *http://XeeMe.com/AndrewBaker* *Harnessing the Advantages of Technology for the SMB market… * On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 11:07 PM, Harry Singh <[email protected]> wrote: > No crime of negligence would be committed if you apply this process to a > lab environment or pilot deployment, absolutely. But, there are some cases, > in my experience, where either preparing your lab environment for the right > amount of compatibility prerequisites or allocating enough resources and > time to a lab environment become time consuming or considerably drawn out. > That being said, considering VMware isn't considerably slow to release their > first update to their GA products, in my opinion, it would take a strong > business (read: financial, compliance) requirement not to wait and deploy > their updated product in my lab environment or pilot deployment. But again, > that's my opinion for this particular vendor, which in my environment is the > "mothership". Notwithstanding the urging of some external forces and > considering the update release frequency of this vendor, I wonder why would > anyone touch a GA release, especially if you're primarily a VMware shop, but > different strokes for different folks i suppose. > > Harry. > > > > On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 10:26 PM, Andrew S. Baker <[email protected]>wrote: > >> While there are some vendors that I might be inclined to wait for an >> update from before tackling a major release, this is not some universally >> true rule -- at least not for me. I'm not suggesting that major software >> needs to be downloaded and installed before the "wet paint" sign is taken >> down, but if you have a lab environment and proper test procedures, and the >> vendor's recent history does not lend itself to waiting six months before >> implementation, then there is no reason not to pursue a test or pilot >> deployment as soon as you are able. >> >> No crime or negligence is being committed. >> >> >> * * >> >> *ASB* *http://XeeMe.com/AndrewBaker* *Harnessing the Advantages of >> Technology for the SMB market… >> >> * >> >> >> >> On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 9:11 PM, Harry Singh <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> There must be an extremely urgent business reason why you have to go >>> to a GA release of a major platform upgrade (vSphere 5) instead of >>> waiting for update 1 of said release. >>> >>> On Thursday, August 18, 2011, Martin Blackstone <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> > It sounds to me like they are talking about the reporting features and >>> they will offer a standalone reporting tool for now. From: Ben N [mailto: >>> [email protected]] >>> > Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2011 5:11 PM >>> > To: NT System Admin Issues >>> > Subject: Re: VMware vSphere 5 Licensing and Pricing Update So... what >>> does this mean? we have to wait for an update to v5 before this new vRAM >>> entitlement is out? [i] < >>> http://blogs.vmware.com/rethinkit/2011/08/changes-to-the-vram-licensing-model-introduced-on-july-12-2011.html#_ednref1> >>> Note: this change will NOT be reflected in the native vCenter Server 5 vRAM >>> reporting capability at GA time; it will be included in a future vCenter >>> Server 5 update release. However, before such update release is available, >>> customers will be able to use a stand-alone free utility for tracking vRAM >>> usage that will reflect this change. from >>> http://blogs.vmware.com/rethinkit/2011/08/changes-to-the-vram-licensing-model-introduced-on-july-12-2011.html >>> -Ben On >>> Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 10:26 AM, Andrew S. Baker <[email protected]> >>> wrote:Indeed. ASBhttp://about.me/Andrew.S.BakerHarnessing the Advantages >>> of Technology for the SMB market… >>> > >>> > On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 11:34 AM, Free, Bob <[email protected]> wrote:AKA- >>> The “Let’s throw this up against the wall and see if it sticks mentality” J >>> >>> >> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to [email protected] with the body: unsubscribe ntsysadmin
