Re: AR User Tool Deprecated?
Susan's post brings up an excellent point. It is now 2010, and the current most-recent-version of ARS is 7.5. Susan's system is 8 years old. In 2002, she would have been installing a 5.X system. The 5.X releases were stable, reliable, and flexible. (Others may recall 2002 as the year of the P-word.) I recall being highly impressed with 5.X's flexibility and the ease of developing new applications. I believe that BMC announced with the release of 6.X that macros would not be supported in future versions. Those who moved on to more recent versions of ARS parted ways with macros along the way, often with users kicking and screaming; however, a number of organizations remain on 5.X and 6.X systems-and their users continue to use macros. The answer to Susan's question is that the 7.X experience is quite different from the 6.X or 5.X experience. The users will have to ditch their macros in any case and start over. 7.X introduced templates and decision trees to the ticket creation process. The Reporting Console will satisfy most of your users' reporting needs and Saved Searches will assist with the custom search and reporting issues without resorting to keystroke logging. Jennifer Meyer From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Shellman, David Sent: Tuesday, July 06, 2010 3:49 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? While I don't work for a government agency, I am sure they would frown on the use of mouse-and-keyboard recorders. Even with our company I'm sure our security architect would flag the existence of this type of product as a security issue. Dave From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of patrick zandi Sent: Tuesday, July 06, 2010 3:41 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? ** Government will not allow all these extra applications to be found, tested, 508 compliance, and installed on every box instead they will be saying.. One doesn't come with it? It won't do that? Didn't use to do that? It is the similar issue with Renaming all the BMC tools to something more beautiful, BMC EIE to BMC AIE -- now that software has to be tested, and retested, and a ton of paperwork has to be generated to get it approved, otherwise it goes through a 8 month technical insertion and testing plan and then you still have to attend a million meetings.. I am not complaining, just pointing this obvious issue.. in my 30 years of Gov work. On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 3:29 PM, Easter, David david_eas...@bmc.commailto:david_eas...@bmc.com wrote: ** In BMC's surveys of customers, it was found that the majority of macros are used to generate reports. Thus, a linking of saved searches to reports was created in AR System 7.5.00. Quick reports in a browser With the My Reports toolbar button, you can save reports from searches you perform on a form. Each report is saved per server, per form, and per user. For more information, see the Using the My Reports toolbar button section in the BMC Remedy Mid Tier Guide. If it is found that this isn't sufficient for the majority of cases, a richer macro-like capability could be considered for a future release. I have also heard of customers just utilizing the mouse-and-keyboard recorders now commonly available that work just fine within a browser. I personally use http://mouse-recorder.macro-expert.com/index.html, but there are lots of others out there. -David J. Easter Sr. Product Manager, Enterprise Service Management BMC Software, Inc. The opinions, statements, and/or suggested courses of action expressed in this E-mail do not necessarily reflect those of BMC Software, Inc. My voluntary participation in this forum is not intended to convey a role as a spokesperson, liaison or public relations representative for BMC Software, Inc. From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORGmailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Susan Palmer Sent: Tuesday, July 06, 2010 12:18 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORGmailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? ** One thing I haven't seen addressed very thoroughly in this thread, is macros. Our system is 8 years old and users have many macros to make their user experience more automated. We are upgrading to v7.5 and want to utilize mid-tier for everyone. I think users can adjust to most of the nuances, but the loss of macros will be painful for many. Has anyone found a good solution? Have I just missed the info on that solution? Thanks, Susan On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 8:47 AM, Meyer, Jennifer L jennifer.me...@nc.govmailto:jennifer.me...@nc.gov wrote: You've all been positing a lot of good arguments here. Let me put in my $.02... I've recently become a fan of Google's Chrome browser after yet another piece of malware
Re: AR User Tool Deprecated?
We replaced non-reporting macros - our users used a ton of them - with a control panel field with a menu of choices and a go button. The users didn't care if it was a macro or a button, as long as the result was the same. Joanne Mansur Client Systems Analyst Northeastern University (617) 373-3295 (office) (617) 373-5985 (fax) j.man...@neu.edumailto:j.man...@neu.edu From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Meyer, Jennifer L Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 2010 9:55 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: [ARSLIST] AR User Tool Deprecated? ** Susan's post brings up an excellent point. It is now 2010, and the current most-recent-version of ARS is 7.5. Susan's system is 8 years old. In 2002, she would have been installing a 5.X system. The 5.X releases were stable, reliable, and flexible. (Others may recall 2002 as the year of the P-word.) I recall being highly impressed with 5.X's flexibility and the ease of developing new applications. I believe that BMC announced with the release of 6.X that macros would not be supported in future versions. Those who moved on to more recent versions of ARS parted ways with macros along the way, often with users kicking and screaming; however, a number of organizations remain on 5.X and 6.X systems-and their users continue to use macros. The answer to Susan's question is that the 7.X experience is quite different from the 6.X or 5.X experience. The users will have to ditch their macros in any case and start over. 7.X introduced templates and decision trees to the ticket creation process. The Reporting Console will satisfy most of your users' reporting needs and Saved Searches will assist with the custom search and reporting issues without resorting to keystroke logging. Jennifer Meyer From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Shellman, David Sent: Tuesday, July 06, 2010 3:49 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? While I don't work for a government agency, I am sure they would frown on the use of mouse-and-keyboard recorders. Even with our company I'm sure our security architect would flag the existence of this type of product as a security issue. Dave From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of patrick zandi Sent: Tuesday, July 06, 2010 3:41 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? ** Government will not allow all these extra applications to be found, tested, 508 compliance, and installed on every box instead they will be saying.. One doesn't come with it? It won't do that? Didn't use to do that? It is the similar issue with Renaming all the BMC tools to something more beautiful, BMC EIE to BMC AIE -- now that software has to be tested, and retested, and a ton of paperwork has to be generated to get it approved, otherwise it goes through a 8 month technical insertion and testing plan and then you still have to attend a million meetings.. I am not complaining, just pointing this obvious issue.. in my 30 years of Gov work. On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 3:29 PM, Easter, David david_eas...@bmc.commailto:david_eas...@bmc.com wrote: ** In BMC's surveys of customers, it was found that the majority of macros are used to generate reports. Thus, a linking of saved searches to reports was created in AR System 7.5.00. Quick reports in a browser With the My Reports toolbar button, you can save reports from searches you perform on a form. Each report is saved per server, per form, and per user. For more information, see the Using the My Reports toolbar button section in the BMC Remedy Mid Tier Guide. If it is found that this isn't sufficient for the majority of cases, a richer macro-like capability could be considered for a future release. I have also heard of customers just utilizing the mouse-and-keyboard recorders now commonly available that work just fine within a browser. I personally use http://mouse-recorder.macro-expert.com/index.html, but there are lots of others out there. -David J. Easter Sr. Product Manager, Enterprise Service Management BMC Software, Inc. The opinions, statements, and/or suggested courses of action expressed in this E-mail do not necessarily reflect those of BMC Software, Inc. My voluntary participation in this forum is not intended to convey a role as a spokesperson, liaison or public relations representative for BMC Software, Inc. From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORGmailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Susan Palmer Sent: Tuesday, July 06, 2010 12:18 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORGmailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? ** One thing I haven't seen addressed very thoroughly in this thread, is macros. Our system is 8 years old and users have many
Re: AR User Tool Deprecated?
We're actually on v7.0.1 for the last couple of years. The macros our users utilize are mostly for convenience and time savings. Some have been accumulated over the years and work just fine and have been shared among others. All macros within workflow have long ago been removed. But if you have 100 users with 30-50 macros each it adds up. Some are remarkably complex and impressive. And as we all know behaviors are the hardest thing to change. And if we kept using the client rather than web, not a problem until v8+ which apparently is not right around the corner as expected. But in this world of web we want to be current too and know we have to make adjustments. Don't get me wrong, I certainly look forward to eliminating client installs! After David mentioned saved searches I recalled that point and actually use them myself and encourage others to use them for easier access. But after reading that email I went and checked for the form which exists but there are no records in it. It must need to be configured someplace and have not found that clue in a quick review of the documentation. Then thought it was directly related to preference server but I don't recognize a setting there either so obviously I have more research work to do. I want to experiment with it on our 7.5 test system and hopefully find a pathway to move the .arq's to records. With some regret I wish I had more free time to explore all new options when they are released but find with constant enhancements to be done I incorporate new options as appropriate. And since I don't believe in early adoption in our company setting I am somewhat removed from all the initial chatter when a new release comes out and I am envious of those of you and can utilize things immediately. The v7 upgrade was painful and we are custom. This v7.5 upgrade has been more painful. It used to be that platform upgrades were a snap, zip bang, run it, use it. Not the case anymore. We have decided to go with a completely new install, export/import our forms/workflow, and then move the data manually by form. The part that I find ridiculous is the data. Yes, rrrChive works great, but when you have 400 forms of data to move, it becomes shall we say ... time consuming and tedious. No different than migrator. But sometimes you have to bite the bullet. I was just trying to think back when I was bad enough to deserve this ... lol. Susan On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 8:54 AM, Meyer, Jennifer L jennifer.me...@nc.govwrote: ** Susan’s post brings up an excellent point. It is now 2010, and the current most-recent-version of ARS is 7.5. Susan’s system is 8 years old. In 2002, she would have been installing a 5.X system. The 5.X releases were stable, reliable, and flexible. (Others may recall 2002 as the year of the P-word.) I recall being highly impressed with 5.X’s flexibility and the ease of developing new applications. I believe that BMC announced with the release of 6.X that macros would not be supported in future versions. Those who moved on to more recent versions of ARS parted ways with macros along the way, often with users kicking and screaming; however, a number of organizations remain on 5.X and 6.X systems—and their users continue to use macros. The answer to Susan’s question is that the 7.X experience is quite different from the 6.X or 5.X experience. The users will have to ditch their macros in any case and start over. 7.X introduced templates and decision trees to the ticket creation process. The Reporting Console will satisfy most of your users’ reporting needs and Saved Searches will assist with the custom search and reporting issues without resorting to keystroke logging. Jennifer Meyer -- *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto: arsl...@arslist.org] *On Behalf Of *Shellman, David *Sent:* Tuesday, July 06, 2010 3:49 PM *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG *Subject:* Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? While I don't work for a government agency, I am sure they would frown on the use of mouse-and-keyboard recorders. Even with our company I'm sure our security architect would flag the existence of this type of product as a security issue. Dave -- *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto: arsl...@arslist.org] *On Behalf Of *patrick zandi *Sent:* Tuesday, July 06, 2010 3:41 PM *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG *Subject:* Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? ** Government will not allow all these extra applications to be found, tested, 508 compliance, and installed on every box instead they will be saying.. One doesn't come with it? It won't do that? Didn't use to do that? It is the similar issue with Renaming all the BMC tools to something more beautiful, BMC EIE to BMC AIE -- now that software has to be tested, and retested, and a ton of paperwork has to be generated to get it approved, otherwise
Re: AR User Tool Deprecated?
Firstly, I have to echo Jennifer's comments. Secondly, being a consultant, I work with various companies using Remedy and I know of companies still using 5.X and 6.X systems because they built their own custom applications and the migration path to the new versions of ARS sometimes seems too painful and costly, especially when it comes to paying to evaluate and convert thousands of (working) user macro's before re-training your user base again. Even though 7.X has come a long way (especially if you look at the performance gains of Mid-Tier 7.5) many people are still wary of upgrading just for the sake of upgrading - especially if ...the system isn't broken to begin with RANT So many users have become accustomed to creating their own macro's to automate various things and without having to wait for the red tape associated with a change management process, so it is sad to know that yet another selling point for Remedy is being canned as macro's will disappear when the AR User Tool is finally deprecated. There was a time when we sold Remedy (very successfully) with the slogan ...Run your business YOUR way... (remember that one Doug?). That, in practice, has unfortunately changed with the growing popularity of ITIL and the OOTB modules. It feels like the end of an era, where we now sell OOTB applications instead of having fun with writing our own reliable apps faster than anyone else on any other platform... /RANT In spite of all that, there is still light at the end of the tunnel: 1) There are shiny new features with each new major version of ARS that help in some or another way...and with that the OOTB apps are getting better too... 2) Going forward, with Remedy's Adapt-Or-Die capabilities still (largely) intact, an attitude of ...You cannot prevent change ... but you can adapt... still gives those investing in Remedy a leading edge to do things in a better way and to stay ahead of the curve... (IMHO, even if you are still running on 5.X) Best Regards, Theo From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Meyer, Jennifer L Sent: 07 July 2010 03:55 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? ** Susan's post brings up an excellent point. It is now 2010, and the current most-recent-version of ARS is 7.5. Susan's system is 8 years old. In 2002, she would have been installing a 5.X system. The 5.X releases were stable, reliable, and flexible. (Others may recall 2002 as the year of the P-word.) I recall being highly impressed with 5.X's flexibility and the ease of developing new applications. I believe that BMC announced with the release of 6.X that macros would not be supported in future versions. Those who moved on to more recent versions of ARS parted ways with macros along the way, often with users kicking and screaming; however, a number of organizations remain on 5.X and 6.X systems-and their users continue to use macros. The answer to Susan's question is that the 7.X experience is quite different from the 6.X or 5.X experience. The users will have to ditch their macros in any case and start over. 7.X introduced templates and decision trees to the ticket creation process. The Reporting Console will satisfy most of your users' reporting needs and Saved Searches will assist with the custom search and reporting issues without resorting to keystroke logging. Jennifer Meyer ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are
Re: AR User Tool Deprecated?
Theo, It was - Your Business Your Way :) Doug Tanner From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Theo Fondse (RIS) Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 2010 1:36 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? ** Firstly, I have to echo Jennifer's comments. Secondly, being a consultant, I work with various companies using Remedy and I know of companies still using 5.X and 6.X systems because they built their own custom applications and the migration path to the new versions of ARS sometimes seems too painful and costly, especially when it comes to paying to evaluate and convert thousands of (working) user macro's before re-training your user base again. Even though 7.X has come a long way (especially if you look at the performance gains of Mid-Tier 7.5) many people are still wary of upgrading just for the sake of upgrading - especially if ...the system isn't broken to begin with RANT So many users have become accustomed to creating their own macro's to automate various things and without having to wait for the red tape associated with a change management process, so it is sad to know that yet another selling point for Remedy is being canned as macro's will disappear when the AR User Tool is finally deprecated. There was a time when we sold Remedy (very successfully) with the slogan ...Run your business YOUR way... (remember that one Doug?). That, in practice, has unfortunately changed with the growing popularity of ITIL and the OOTB modules. It feels like the end of an era, where we now sell OOTB applications instead of having fun with writing our own reliable apps faster than anyone else on any other platform... /RANT In spite of all that, there is still light at the end of the tunnel: 1) There are shiny new features with each new major version of ARS that help in some or another way...and with that the OOTB apps are getting better too... 2) Going forward, with Remedy's Adapt-Or-Die capabilities still (largely) intact, an attitude of ...You cannot prevent change ... but you can adapt... still gives those investing in Remedy a leading edge to do things in a better way and to stay ahead of the curve... (IMHO, even if you are still running on 5.X) Best Regards, Theo From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Meyer, Jennifer L Sent: 07 July 2010 03:55 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? ** Susan's post brings up an excellent point. It is now 2010, and the current most-recent-version of ARS is 7.5. Susan's system is 8 years old. In 2002, she would have been installing a 5.X system. The 5.X releases were stable, reliable, and flexible. (Others may recall 2002 as the year of the P-word.) I recall being highly impressed with 5.X's flexibility and the ease of developing new applications. I believe that BMC announced with the release of 6.X that macros would not be supported in future versions. Those who moved on to more recent versions of ARS parted ways with macros along the way, often with users kicking and screaming; however, a number of organizations remain on 5.X and 6.X systems-and their users continue to use macros. The answer to Susan's question is that the 7.X experience is quite different from the 6.X or 5.X experience. The users will have to ditch their macros in any case and start over. 7.X introduced templates and decision trees to the ticket creation process. The Reporting Console will satisfy most of your users' reporting needs and Saved Searches will assist with the custom search and reporting issues without resorting to keystroke logging. Jennifer Meyer _attend WWRUG10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are_ DISCLAIMER Important! This message is intended for the above named person(s) only and is CONFIDENTIAL AND PROPRIETARY. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail and have received it in error, please immediately notify the sender by return email and then delete it from your mailbox. This message may be protected by the attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. Accessing, copying, disseminating or re-using any of the information contained in this e-mail by anyone other than the intended recipient is strictly prohibited. Finally, you should check this email and any attachments for the presence of viruses, as the sender accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this email. Thank you. ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are
Re: AR User Tool Deprecated?
One must make a difference between ARS 7.x AR System server and the ITSM 7.x app. All of our apps are home grown. We have not had issues caused by upgrading the ARS AR System server. There may have been minor issues with macros but those were often because of a bug in a particular patch of the desktop client. Like many others with home grown apps, we often have to change processes to take advantage of new features that are available with each new version of the server app. Our users will need to learn to switch from macros to saved searches. MidTier 7.5 does not contain all the functionality of the desktop client. However I will say that MidTier 7.5 is a lot closer than it was with 7.0. It is also light years ahead of AR Web and Remedy Web. Dave From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Theo Fondse (RIS) Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 2010 1:36 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? ** Firstly, I have to echo Jennifer's comments. Secondly, being a consultant, I work with various companies using Remedy and I know of companies still using 5.X and 6.X systems because they built their own custom applications and the migration path to the new versions of ARS sometimes seems too painful and costly, especially when it comes to paying to evaluate and convert thousands of (working) user macro's before re-training your user base again. Even though 7.X has come a long way (especially if you look at the performance gains of Mid-Tier 7.5) many people are still wary of upgrading just for the sake of upgrading - especially if ...the system isn't broken to begin with RANT So many users have become accustomed to creating their own macro's to automate various things and without having to wait for the red tape associated with a change management process, so it is sad to know that yet another selling point for Remedy is being canned as macro's will disappear when the AR User Tool is finally deprecated. There was a time when we sold Remedy (very successfully) with the slogan ...Run your business YOUR way... (remember that one Doug?). That, in practice, has unfortunately changed with the growing popularity of ITIL and the OOTB modules. It feels like the end of an era, where we now sell OOTB applications instead of having fun with writing our own reliable apps faster than anyone else on any other platform... /RANT In spite of all that, there is still light at the end of the tunnel: 1) There are shiny new features with each new major version of ARS that help in some or another way...and with that the OOTB apps are getting better too... 2) Going forward, with Remedy's Adapt-Or-Die capabilities still (largely) intact, an attitude of ...You cannot prevent change ... but you can adapt... still gives those investing in Remedy a leading edge to do things in a better way and to stay ahead of the curve... (IMHO, even if you are still running on 5.X) Best Regards, Theo From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Meyer, Jennifer L Sent: 07 July 2010 03:55 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? ** Susan's post brings up an excellent point. It is now 2010, and the current most-recent-version of ARS is 7.5. Susan's system is 8 years old. In 2002, she would have been installing a 5.X system. The 5.X releases were stable, reliable, and flexible. (Others may recall 2002 as the year of the P-word.) I recall being highly impressed with 5.X's flexibility and the ease of developing new applications. I believe that BMC announced with the release of 6.X that macros would not be supported in future versions. Those who moved on to more recent versions of ARS parted ways with macros along the way, often with users kicking and screaming; however, a number of organizations remain on 5.X and 6.X systems-and their users continue to use macros. The answer to Susan's question is that the 7.X experience is quite different from the 6.X or 5.X experience. The users will have to ditch their macros in any case and start over. 7.X introduced templates and decision trees to the ticket creation process. The Reporting Console will satisfy most of your users' reporting needs and Saved Searches will assist with the custom search and reporting issues without resorting to keystroke logging. Jennifer Meyer _attend WWRUG10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are_ ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are
Re: AR User Tool Deprecated?
David beat me to it. I sent you Mark's contact info off list. I was going to run the blurb about RED from their website through Google Translate and post it in my reply but it is done in Flash and wasn't to translation friendly. One correction, RED stands for REM Event Drive not Remedy Event Drive. Jason On Sun, Jul 4, 2010 at 3:03 AM, Angus Comber arsl...@iteloffice.com wrote: ** Sounds interesting, I will investigate. Any link to RED? - Original Message - *From:* Jason Miller jason.mil...@gmail.com *Newsgroups:* public.remedy.arsystem.general *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG *Sent:* Saturday, July 03, 2010 10:25 PM *Subject:* Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? ** Fred already mentioned that web services are used for back-end data and not user interaction. However that isn't to say that push events that can interact with a user's session haven't been done. Mark Gemmell showed of RED (Remedy Event Drive) at WWRUG09. He demoed their very cool telephony integration. His team built custom code that taps into the Mid-Tier's back channel (if I remember correctly) and will send server events (triggered by filters) to a username or group (received by Active Links). It also works with WUT. He let me try it out to build a chat module in Remedy and it worked very well. Hopefully BMC will include something similar in the future (looking through the archives he stated in March 09 that BMC licensed it). Jason On Sat, Jul 3, 2010 at 3:29 AM, Angus Comber arsl...@iteloffice.comwrote: Hi Joe Our thin client integrations do in fact use javascript for integration. In a nutshell the client programming issues with web are as follows: 1. To access the javascript you need to first latch onto the web browser instance which requires custom code for each web browser. 2. WUT has a MDI interface which yes is a proprietary Windows technology but you can have powerful control of form instances etc. This is harder with web clients. 2. WUT has more control from Remedy client - third party client due to the fact that there are not the same security restrictions as on a web browser. Eg you can't run process with a web client. We support whichever versions of Remedy clients are likely to be using. The ideal interface from our point of view would be a interface which we can access via the server but which would provide the ability to 'push' to the relevant client. I am thinking the Remedy soap interface may provide this. We need to test. Service Desk Express have something like this with their push service. We also need a way for a user to send a message from web client and be able to detect this message - hopefully via soap or some other interface. Does anyone know if the soap interface could provide this? I have doc, just need to get reading. Angus - Original Message - From: Joe D'Souza jdso...@shyle.net Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 9:44 PM Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? Hello Angus, I would agree with some of your statements a few versions ago when Remedy Web was the web application tool. Mid-Tier since then has evolved to a much better product, and sometimes there is a very thin difference between the performance gains experienced on the thick client as opposed to the web. In fact in my experience the web client tends to be a lot more faster on remote connections than the native thick client. Yes you are going to loose and have to give up on client based API customizations that use the COM libraries, but many of these can be re-engineered or re-written using JavaScript that would work from the web client. I think it would be a good idea for Remedy to focus on continuing to improve the already 'much improved' web client, rather than utilize their resources developing and improving a client that is lesser and lesser used with every passing version. Many of the sites I have recently been to use only the thin client. Just curious, but what versions do you currently work on? Joe -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org]on Behalf Of Angus Comber Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 4:19 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? I believe this is true and think BMC are making a big mistake for the following reasons: 1. The thick client has a client based API, using COM, which is used by many third party products, including our own, and this capability is really useful for integration with other products. All this functionality will be lost. 2. It is administrators, not users, pushing for web front ends, simply for deployment reasons. Users prefer responsive, rich functionality applications. Anyone who has used Siebel will know what I mean. I have no problem with a web alternative but if they go for thin client only, then that is not good news
Re: AR User Tool Deprecated?
Here's a blurb from their documentation if it helps. Might be a little outdated (got it in 2009) but gives the general idea: REM Event Drive Professional Edition v2.1 for BMC Action Request System is a technology that allows real time events to be received in any Remedy client. In this way instant communications between server and client are possible, without having to periodically check with the server and therefore obtaining rapid response for low network and server overhead. The uses for this technology include for example: * Real time instant data updates in tables, status fields, buttons etc. * Initiation of automated actions from one event without the user needing to interact. * Integration of multiple applications in a single Remedy window, being able to interact with these systems and see their responses asynchronously without having to juggle multiple Windows etc. REM Event Drive has been built on BMC Remedy Action Request System(r) and Java, Making its installation and operation possible on any machine that runs BMC Remedy ARS 7.0 or higher, regardless of the operating system. -David J. Easter Sr. Product Manager, Enterprise Service Management BMC Software, Inc. The opinions, statements, and/or suggested courses of action expressed in this E-mail do not necessarily reflect those of BMC Software, Inc. My voluntary participation in this forum is not intended to convey a role as a spokesperson, liaison or public relations representative for BMC Software, Inc. From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Jason Miller Sent: Tuesday, July 06, 2010 10:15 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? ** David beat me to it. I sent you Mark's contact info off list. I was going to run the blurb about RED from their website through Google Translate and post it in my reply but it is done in Flash and wasn't to translation friendly. One correction, RED stands for REM Event Drive not Remedy Event Drive. Jason On Sun, Jul 4, 2010 at 3:03 AM, Angus Comber arsl...@iteloffice.commailto:arsl...@iteloffice.com wrote: ** Sounds interesting, I will investigate. Any link to RED? - Original Message - From: Jason Millermailto:jason.mil...@gmail.com Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORGmailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Sent: Saturday, July 03, 2010 10:25 PM Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? ** Fred already mentioned that web services are used for back-end data and not user interaction. However that isn't to say that push events that can interact with a user's session haven't been done. Mark Gemmell showed of RED (Remedy Event Drive) at WWRUG09. He demoed their very cool telephony integration. His team built custom code that taps into the Mid-Tier's back channel (if I remember correctly) and will send server events (triggered by filters) to a username or group (received by Active Links). It also works with WUT. He let me try it out to build a chat module in Remedy and it worked very well. Hopefully BMC will include something similar in the future (looking through the archives he stated in March 09 that BMC licensed it). Jason On Sat, Jul 3, 2010 at 3:29 AM, Angus Comber arsl...@iteloffice.commailto:arsl...@iteloffice.com wrote: Hi Joe Our thin client integrations do in fact use javascript for integration. In a nutshell the client programming issues with web are as follows: 1. To access the javascript you need to first latch onto the web browser instance which requires custom code for each web browser. 2. WUT has a MDI interface which yes is a proprietary Windows technology but you can have powerful control of form instances etc. This is harder with web clients. 2. WUT has more control from Remedy client - third party client due to the fact that there are not the same security restrictions as on a web browser. Eg you can't run process with a web client. We support whichever versions of Remedy clients are likely to be using. The ideal interface from our point of view would be a interface which we can access via the server but which would provide the ability to 'push' to the relevant client. I am thinking the Remedy soap interface may provide this. We need to test. Service Desk Express have something like this with their push service. We also need a way for a user to send a message from web client and be able to detect this message - hopefully via soap or some other interface. Does anyone know if the soap interface could provide this? I have doc, just need to get reading. Angus - Original Message - From: Joe D'Souza jdso...@shyle.netmailto:jdso...@shyle.net Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORGmailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 9:44 PM Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? Hello Angus, I would agree with some of your statements a few versions ago when Remedy Web was the web
Re: AR User Tool Deprecated?
One thing I haven't seen addressed very thoroughly in this thread, is macros. Our system is 8 years old and users have many macros to make their user experience more automated. We are upgrading to v7.5 and want to utilize mid-tier for everyone. I think users can adjust to most of the nuances, but the loss of macros will be painful for many. Has anyone found a good solution? Have I just missed the info on that solution? Thanks, Susan On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 8:47 AM, Meyer, Jennifer L jennifer.me...@nc.govwrote: You've all been positing a lot of good arguments here. Let me put in my $.02... I've recently become a fan of Google's Chrome browser after yet another piece of malware/spyware waltzed past Internet Explorer and Norton Antivirus on my home pc. Our team is testing ITSM 7.6 on ARS 7.5 right now in preparation for an upgrade. Out of curiosity, I decided to compare the relative merits of the major browsers. I have discovered that Internet Explorer performs at about the same speed as the WUT, but Chrome, Safari, and Firefox move much faster. Also, IE requires a plug-in to get spell-check capabilities which come automatically with the other three browsers, and has to be built or bought for the WUT. Not that there aren't drawbacks to the other browsers: Chrome doesn't play well with Remedy's calendars, and some of the buttons refuse to work at all. (Chrome is not a supported browser.) Firefox does something annoying with scroll bars on unlimited character fields. Safari on a pc hangs up if you're trying to create an incident with decision trees enabled but not defined. (In its defense, Safari for pcs isn't supported, either.) Overall, I'm impressed with the performance of the mid-tier on ARS 7.5. In the past I've developed applications intended for use with the native client, but I think I'm going to change my focus toward the mid-tier in the future. Rather than losing the WUT, I am gaining three fallback browsers and smartphone support without the additional expense of a smartphone-only application. We may even decide to upgrade to ARS 7.6.3, depending on the timing of the release. There are a lot of things to like when you consider not supporting the WUT. Jennifer Meyer -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto: arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of LJ LongWing Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 5:22 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? Angus...I'm a fan of the native client as well...but tell me thiswould you use Amazon or Ebay if you needed to load a client to get to it? Maybe, maybe not...but I doubt that you WOULDN'T use it if you had to use the web browser, right? The default delivery method for this type of software these days is web...maintaining clients is a royal pain in the ARS (sorry...couldn't resist the pun)...web applications are robust and those apps that rely on client based interactions need to update their interfaces to allow for newer technologies. E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties by an authorized state official. ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are
Re: AR User Tool Deprecated?
In BMC's surveys of customers, it was found that the majority of macros are used to generate reports. Thus, a linking of saved searches to reports was created in AR System 7.5.00. Quick reports in a browser With the My Reports toolbar button, you can save reports from searches you perform on a form. Each report is saved per server, per form, and per user. For more information, see the Using the My Reports toolbar button section in the BMC Remedy Mid Tier Guide. If it is found that this isn't sufficient for the majority of cases, a richer macro-like capability could be considered for a future release. I have also heard of customers just utilizing the mouse-and-keyboard recorders now commonly available that work just fine within a browser. I personally use http://mouse-recorder.macro-expert.com/index.html, but there are lots of others out there. -David J. Easter Sr. Product Manager, Enterprise Service Management BMC Software, Inc. The opinions, statements, and/or suggested courses of action expressed in this E-mail do not necessarily reflect those of BMC Software, Inc. My voluntary participation in this forum is not intended to convey a role as a spokesperson, liaison or public relations representative for BMC Software, Inc. From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Susan Palmer Sent: Tuesday, July 06, 2010 12:18 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? ** One thing I haven't seen addressed very thoroughly in this thread, is macros. Our system is 8 years old and users have many macros to make their user experience more automated. We are upgrading to v7.5 and want to utilize mid-tier for everyone. I think users can adjust to most of the nuances, but the loss of macros will be painful for many. Has anyone found a good solution? Have I just missed the info on that solution? Thanks, Susan On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 8:47 AM, Meyer, Jennifer L jennifer.me...@nc.govmailto:jennifer.me...@nc.gov wrote: You've all been positing a lot of good arguments here. Let me put in my $.02... I've recently become a fan of Google's Chrome browser after yet another piece of malware/spyware waltzed past Internet Explorer and Norton Antivirus on my home pc. Our team is testing ITSM 7.6 on ARS 7.5 right now in preparation for an upgrade. Out of curiosity, I decided to compare the relative merits of the major browsers. I have discovered that Internet Explorer performs at about the same speed as the WUT, but Chrome, Safari, and Firefox move much faster. Also, IE requires a plug-in to get spell-check capabilities which come automatically with the other three browsers, and has to be built or bought for the WUT. Not that there aren't drawbacks to the other browsers: Chrome doesn't play well with Remedy's calendars, and some of the buttons refuse to work at all. (Chrome is not a supported browser.) Firefox does something annoying with scroll bars on unlimited character fields. Safari on a pc hangs up if you're trying to create an incident with decision trees enabled but not defined. (In its defense, Safari for pcs isn't supported, either.) Overall, I'm impressed with the performance of the mid-tier on ARS 7.5. In the past I've developed applications intended for use with the native client, but I think I'm going to change my focus toward the mid-tier in the future. Rather than losing the WUT, I am gaining three fallback browsers and smartphone support without the additional expense of a smartphone-only application. We may even decide to upgrade to ARS 7.6.3, depending on the timing of the release. There are a lot of things to like when you consider not supporting the WUT. Jennifer Meyer -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORGmailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of LJ LongWing Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 5:22 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORGmailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? Angus...I'm a fan of the native client as well...but tell me thiswould you use Amazon or Ebay if you needed to load a client to get to it? Maybe, maybe not...but I doubt that you WOULDN'T use it if you had to use the web browser, right? The default delivery method for this type of software these days is web...maintaining clients is a royal pain in the ARS (sorry...couldn't resist the pun)...web applications are robust and those apps that rely on client based interactions need to update their interfaces to allow for newer technologies. E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties by an authorized state official. ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.orghttp://www.arslist.org/ attend wwrug10 www.wwrug.comhttp://www.wwrug.com
Re: AR User Tool Deprecated?
Government will not allow all these extra applications to be found, tested, 508 compliance, and installed on every box instead they will be saying.. One doesn't come with it? It won't do that? Didn't use to do that? It is the similar issue with Renaming all the BMC tools to something more beautiful, BMC EIE to BMC AIE -- now that software has to be tested, and retested, and a ton of paperwork has to be generated to get it approved, otherwise it goes through a 8 month technical insertion and testing plan and then you still have to attend a million meetings.. I am not complaining, just pointing this obvious issue.. in my 30 years of Gov work. On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 3:29 PM, Easter, David david_eas...@bmc.com wrote: ** In BMC’s surveys of customers, it was found that the majority of macros are used to generate reports. Thus, a linking of saved searches to reports was created in AR System 7.5.00. *Quick reports in a browser* With the My Reports toolbar button, you can save reports from searches you perform on a form. Each report is saved per server, per form, and per user. For more information, see the “Using the My Reports toolbar button” section in the *BMC Remedy Mid Tier Guide*. If it is found that this isn’t sufficient for the majority of cases, a richer macro-like capability could be considered for a future release. I have also heard of customers just utilizing the mouse-and-keyboard recorders now commonly available that work just fine within a browser. I personally use http://mouse-recorder.macro-expert.com/index.html, but there are lots of others out there. -David J. Easter Sr. Product Manager, Enterprise Service Management BMC Software, Inc. The opinions, statements, and/or suggested courses of action expressed in this E-mail do not necessarily reflect those of BMC Software, Inc. My voluntary participation in this forum is not intended to convey a role as a spokesperson, liaison or public relations representative for BMC Software, Inc. *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto: arsl...@arslist.org] *On Behalf Of *Susan Palmer *Sent:* Tuesday, July 06, 2010 12:18 PM *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG *Subject:* Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? ** One thing I haven't seen addressed very thoroughly in this thread, is macros. Our system is 8 years old and users have many macros to make their user experience more automated. We are upgrading to v7.5 and want to utilize mid-tier for everyone. I think users can adjust to most of the nuances, but the loss of macros will be painful for many. Has anyone found a good solution? Have I just missed the info on that solution? Thanks, Susan On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 8:47 AM, Meyer, Jennifer L jennifer.me...@nc.gov wrote: You've all been positing a lot of good arguments here. Let me put in my $.02... I've recently become a fan of Google's Chrome browser after yet another piece of malware/spyware waltzed past Internet Explorer and Norton Antivirus on my home pc. Our team is testing ITSM 7.6 on ARS 7.5 right now in preparation for an upgrade. Out of curiosity, I decided to compare the relative merits of the major browsers. I have discovered that Internet Explorer performs at about the same speed as the WUT, but Chrome, Safari, and Firefox move much faster. Also, IE requires a plug-in to get spell-check capabilities which come automatically with the other three browsers, and has to be built or bought for the WUT. Not that there aren't drawbacks to the other browsers: Chrome doesn't play well with Remedy's calendars, and some of the buttons refuse to work at all. (Chrome is not a supported browser.) Firefox does something annoying with scroll bars on unlimited character fields. Safari on a pc hangs up if you're trying to create an incident with decision trees enabled but not defined. (In its defense, Safari for pcs isn't supported, either.) Overall, I'm impressed with the performance of the mid-tier on ARS 7.5. In the past I've developed applications intended for use with the native client, but I think I'm going to change my focus toward the mid-tier in the future. Rather than losing the WUT, I am gaining three fallback browsers and smartphone support without the additional expense of a smartphone-only application. We may even decide to upgrade to ARS 7.6.3, depending on the timing of the release. There are a lot of things to like when you consider not supporting the WUT. Jennifer Meyer -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto: arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of LJ LongWing Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 5:22 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? Angus...I'm a fan of the native client as well...but tell me thiswould you use Amazon or Ebay if you needed to load a client to get to it? Maybe, maybe not...but I doubt that you WOULDN'T use it if you
Re: AR User Tool Deprecated?
While I don't work for a government agency, I am sure they would frown on the use of mouse-and-keyboard recorders. Even with our company I'm sure our security architect would flag the existence of this type of product as a security issue. Dave From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of patrick zandi Sent: Tuesday, July 06, 2010 3:41 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? ** Government will not allow all these extra applications to be found, tested, 508 compliance, and installed on every box instead they will be saying.. One doesn't come with it? It won't do that? Didn't use to do that? It is the similar issue with Renaming all the BMC tools to something more beautiful, BMC EIE to BMC AIE -- now that software has to be tested, and retested, and a ton of paperwork has to be generated to get it approved, otherwise it goes through a 8 month technical insertion and testing plan and then you still have to attend a million meetings.. I am not complaining, just pointing this obvious issue.. in my 30 years of Gov work. On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 3:29 PM, Easter, David david_eas...@bmc.commailto:david_eas...@bmc.com wrote: ** In BMC's surveys of customers, it was found that the majority of macros are used to generate reports. Thus, a linking of saved searches to reports was created in AR System 7.5.00. Quick reports in a browser With the My Reports toolbar button, you can save reports from searches you perform on a form. Each report is saved per server, per form, and per user. For more information, see the Using the My Reports toolbar button section in the BMC Remedy Mid Tier Guide. If it is found that this isn't sufficient for the majority of cases, a richer macro-like capability could be considered for a future release. I have also heard of customers just utilizing the mouse-and-keyboard recorders now commonly available that work just fine within a browser. I personally use http://mouse-recorder.macro-expert.com/index.html, but there are lots of others out there. -David J. Easter Sr. Product Manager, Enterprise Service Management BMC Software, Inc. The opinions, statements, and/or suggested courses of action expressed in this E-mail do not necessarily reflect those of BMC Software, Inc. My voluntary participation in this forum is not intended to convey a role as a spokesperson, liaison or public relations representative for BMC Software, Inc. From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORGmailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Susan Palmer Sent: Tuesday, July 06, 2010 12:18 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORGmailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? ** One thing I haven't seen addressed very thoroughly in this thread, is macros. Our system is 8 years old and users have many macros to make their user experience more automated. We are upgrading to v7.5 and want to utilize mid-tier for everyone. I think users can adjust to most of the nuances, but the loss of macros will be painful for many. Has anyone found a good solution? Have I just missed the info on that solution? Thanks, Susan On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 8:47 AM, Meyer, Jennifer L jennifer.me...@nc.govmailto:jennifer.me...@nc.gov wrote: You've all been positing a lot of good arguments here. Let me put in my $.02... I've recently become a fan of Google's Chrome browser after yet another piece of malware/spyware waltzed past Internet Explorer and Norton Antivirus on my home pc. Our team is testing ITSM 7.6 on ARS 7.5 right now in preparation for an upgrade. Out of curiosity, I decided to compare the relative merits of the major browsers. I have discovered that Internet Explorer performs at about the same speed as the WUT, but Chrome, Safari, and Firefox move much faster. Also, IE requires a plug-in to get spell-check capabilities which come automatically with the other three browsers, and has to be built or bought for the WUT. Not that there aren't drawbacks to the other browsers: Chrome doesn't play well with Remedy's calendars, and some of the buttons refuse to work at all. (Chrome is not a supported browser.) Firefox does something annoying with scroll bars on unlimited character fields. Safari on a pc hangs up if you're trying to create an incident with decision trees enabled but not defined. (In its defense, Safari for pcs isn't supported, either.) Overall, I'm impressed with the performance of the mid-tier on ARS 7.5. In the past I've developed applications intended for use with the native client, but I think I'm going to change my focus toward the mid-tier in the future. Rather than losing the WUT, I am gaining three fallback browsers and smartphone support without the additional expense of a smartphone-only application. We may even decide to upgrade to ARS 7.6.3, depending on the timing of the release
Re: AR User Tool Deprecated?
That will work. We do use saved searches but not preference server, so I guess we have some prework to do before the upgrade to mid-tier. Get those macros into save searches in the form and use preference server. After looking at the documentation I could find no quantity limitation and since it's a form I believe we will be ok. Thanks David ... Susan On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 2:29 PM, Easter, David david_eas...@bmc.com wrote: ** In BMC’s surveys of customers, it was found that the majority of macros are used to generate reports. Thus, a linking of saved searches to reports was created in AR System 7.5.00. *Quick reports in a browser* With the My Reports toolbar button, you can save reports from searches you perform on a form. Each report is saved per server, per form, and per user. For more information, see the “Using the My Reports toolbar button” section in the *BMC Remedy Mid Tier Guide*. If it is found that this isn’t sufficient for the majority of cases, a richer macro-like capability could be considered for a future release. I have also heard of customers just utilizing the mouse-and-keyboard recorders now commonly available that work just fine within a browser. I personally use http://mouse-recorder.macro-expert.com/index.html, but there are lots of others out there. -David J. Easter Sr. Product Manager, Enterprise Service Management BMC Software, Inc. The opinions, statements, and/or suggested courses of action expressed in this E-mail do not necessarily reflect those of BMC Software, Inc. My voluntary participation in this forum is not intended to convey a role as a spokesperson, liaison or public relations representative for BMC Software, Inc. *From:* Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto: arsl...@arslist.org] *On Behalf Of *Susan Palmer *Sent:* Tuesday, July 06, 2010 12:18 PM *To:* arslist@ARSLIST.ORG *Subject:* Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? ** One thing I haven't seen addressed very thoroughly in this thread, is macros. Our system is 8 years old and users have many macros to make their user experience more automated. We are upgrading to v7.5 and want to utilize mid-tier for everyone. I think users can adjust to most of the nuances, but the loss of macros will be painful for many. Has anyone found a good solution? Have I just missed the info on that solution? Thanks, Susan On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 8:47 AM, Meyer, Jennifer L jennifer.me...@nc.gov wrote: You've all been positing a lot of good arguments here. Let me put in my $.02... I've recently become a fan of Google's Chrome browser after yet another piece of malware/spyware waltzed past Internet Explorer and Norton Antivirus on my home pc. Our team is testing ITSM 7.6 on ARS 7.5 right now in preparation for an upgrade. Out of curiosity, I decided to compare the relative merits of the major browsers. I have discovered that Internet Explorer performs at about the same speed as the WUT, but Chrome, Safari, and Firefox move much faster. Also, IE requires a plug-in to get spell-check capabilities which come automatically with the other three browsers, and has to be built or bought for the WUT. Not that there aren't drawbacks to the other browsers: Chrome doesn't play well with Remedy's calendars, and some of the buttons refuse to work at all. (Chrome is not a supported browser.) Firefox does something annoying with scroll bars on unlimited character fields. Safari on a pc hangs up if you're trying to create an incident with decision trees enabled but not defined. (In its defense, Safari for pcs isn't supported, either.) Overall, I'm impressed with the performance of the mid-tier on ARS 7.5. In the past I've developed applications intended for use with the native client, but I think I'm going to change my focus toward the mid-tier in the future. Rather than losing the WUT, I am gaining three fallback browsers and smartphone support without the additional expense of a smartphone-only application. We may even decide to upgrade to ARS 7.6.3, depending on the timing of the release. There are a lot of things to like when you consider not supporting the WUT. Jennifer Meyer -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto: arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of LJ LongWing Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 5:22 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? Angus...I'm a fan of the native client as well...but tell me thiswould you use Amazon or Ebay if you needed to load a client to get to it? Maybe, maybe not...but I doubt that you WOULDN'T use it if you had to use the web browser, right? The default delivery method for this type of software these days is web...maintaining clients is a royal pain in the ARS (sorry...couldn't resist the pun)...web applications are robust and those apps that rely on client based interactions need to update
Re: AR User Tool Deprecated?
By sending a message do you mean something interactive like an instant message? If so, you could develop something like that using a table field that is set to refresh every 3 seconds or so, but you would need to enforce some sort of limitations on it so that the underlying table that stores those messages would not get too large. Something like a 20 or 30 minute session limit, and once that is reached it would automatically 'disconnect' that session. It might require some work and planning else you might end up with rather large archives of 'instant messages' in that table.. Joe -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org]on Behalf Of Angus Comber Sent: Saturday, July 03, 2010 6:29 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? Hi Joe Our thin client integrations do in fact use javascript for integration. In a nutshell the client programming issues with web are as follows: 1. To access the javascript you need to first latch onto the web browser instance which requires custom code for each web browser. 2. WUT has a MDI interface which yes is a proprietary Windows technology but you can have powerful control of form instances etc. This is harder with web clients. 2. WUT has more control from Remedy client - third party client due to the fact that there are not the same security restrictions as on a web browser. Eg you can't run process with a web client. We support whichever versions of Remedy clients are likely to be using. The ideal interface from our point of view would be a interface which we can access via the server but which would provide the ability to 'push' to the relevant client. I am thinking the Remedy soap interface may provide this. We need to test. Service Desk Express have something like this with their push service. We also need a way for a user to send a message from web client and be able to detect this message - hopefully via soap or some other interface. Does anyone know if the soap interface could provide this? I have doc, just need to get reading. Angus - Original Message - From: Joe D'Souza jdso...@shyle.net Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 9:44 PM Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? Hello Angus, I would agree with some of your statements a few versions ago when Remedy Web was the web application tool. Mid-Tier since then has evolved to a much better product, and sometimes there is a very thin difference between the performance gains experienced on the thick client as opposed to the web. In fact in my experience the web client tends to be a lot more faster on remote connections than the native thick client. Yes you are going to loose and have to give up on client based API customizations that use the COM libraries, but many of these can be re-engineered or re-written using JavaScript that would work from the web client. I think it would be a good idea for Remedy to focus on continuing to improve the already 'much improved' web client, rather than utilize their resources developing and improving a client that is lesser and lesser used with every passing version. Many of the sites I have recently been to use only the thin client. Just curious, but what versions do you currently work on? Joe -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org]on Behalf Of Angus Comber Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 4:19 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? I believe this is true and think BMC are making a big mistake for the following reasons: 1. The thick client has a client based API, using COM, which is used by many third party products, including our own, and this capability is really useful for integration with other products. All this functionality will be lost. 2. It is administrators, not users, pushing for web front ends, simply for deployment reasons. Users prefer responsive, rich functionality applications. Anyone who has used Siebel will know what I mean. I have no problem with a web alternative but if they go for thin client only, then that is not good news from my perspective. Angus - Original Message - From: NNMN naveen...@gmail.com Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 8:40 AM Subject: AR User Tool Deprecated? Hi ARSers, I have been hearing that AR User tool is getting deprected. I have few questions on this. - Is it really going to get deprecated? Is ARS8.0 going to have a thick client? - If it is just through mid-tier then will the DDE, OLE, macros etc be removed from active link actions. - Is mid-tier expected to come up with more capabilities so as to tackle client dependencies? Not sure who can answer this. But would also be cool to get your own views on this. Cheers, Naveen
Re: AR User Tool Deprecated?
REM Solutions - the folks that created the Remedy Event Drive, was acquired by Devoteam. http://investing.businessweek.com/businessweek/research/stocks/private/snapshot.asp?privcapId=61340919 However, their site (in Spanish) is still up and can be found here: www.remsolu.comhttp://www.remsolu.com -David J. Easter Sr. Product Manager, Enterprise Service Management BMC Software, Inc. The opinions, statements, and/or suggested courses of action expressed in this E-mail do not necessarily reflect those of BMC Software, Inc. My voluntary participation in this forum is not intended to convey a role as a spokesperson, liaison or public relations representative for BMC Software, Inc. From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Angus Comber Sent: Sunday, July 04, 2010 3:03 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? ** Sounds interesting, I will investigate. Any link to RED? - Original Message - From: Jason Millermailto:jason.mil...@gmail.com Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORGmailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Sent: Saturday, July 03, 2010 10:25 PM Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? ** Fred already mentioned that web services are used for back-end data and not user interaction. However that isn't to say that push events that can interact with a user's session haven't been done. Mark Gemmell showed of RED (Remedy Event Drive) at WWRUG09. He demoed their very cool telephony integration. His team built custom code that taps into the Mid-Tier's back channel (if I remember correctly) and will send server events (triggered by filters) to a username or group (received by Active Links). It also works with WUT. He let me try it out to build a chat module in Remedy and it worked very well. Hopefully BMC will include something similar in the future (looking through the archives he stated in March 09 that BMC licensed it). Jason On Sat, Jul 3, 2010 at 3:29 AM, Angus Comber arsl...@iteloffice.commailto:arsl...@iteloffice.com wrote: Hi Joe Our thin client integrations do in fact use javascript for integration. In a nutshell the client programming issues with web are as follows: 1. To access the javascript you need to first latch onto the web browser instance which requires custom code for each web browser. 2. WUT has a MDI interface which yes is a proprietary Windows technology but you can have powerful control of form instances etc. This is harder with web clients. 2. WUT has more control from Remedy client - third party client due to the fact that there are not the same security restrictions as on a web browser. Eg you can't run process with a web client. We support whichever versions of Remedy clients are likely to be using. The ideal interface from our point of view would be a interface which we can access via the server but which would provide the ability to 'push' to the relevant client. I am thinking the Remedy soap interface may provide this. We need to test. Service Desk Express have something like this with their push service. We also need a way for a user to send a message from web client and be able to detect this message - hopefully via soap or some other interface. Does anyone know if the soap interface could provide this? I have doc, just need to get reading. Angus - Original Message - From: Joe D'Souza jdso...@shyle.netmailto:jdso...@shyle.net Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORGmailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 9:44 PM Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? Hello Angus, I would agree with some of your statements a few versions ago when Remedy Web was the web application tool. Mid-Tier since then has evolved to a much better product, and sometimes there is a very thin difference between the performance gains experienced on the thick client as opposed to the web. In fact in my experience the web client tends to be a lot more faster on remote connections than the native thick client. Yes you are going to loose and have to give up on client based API customizations that use the COM libraries, but many of these can be re-engineered or re-written using JavaScript that would work from the web client. I think it would be a good idea for Remedy to focus on continuing to improve the already 'much improved' web client, rather than utilize their resources developing and improving a client that is lesser and lesser used with every passing version. Many of the sites I have recently been to use only the thin client. Just curious, but what versions do you currently work on? Joe -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORGmailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG]On Behalf Of Angus Comber Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 4:19 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORGmailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? I believe this is true and think BMC
Re: AR User Tool Deprecated?
Sounds interesting, I will investigate. Any link to RED? - Original Message - From: Jason Miller Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Sent: Saturday, July 03, 2010 10:25 PM Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? ** Fred already mentioned that web services are used for back-end data and not user interaction. However that isn't to say that push events that can interact with a user's session haven't been done. Mark Gemmell showed of RED (Remedy Event Drive) at WWRUG09. He demoed their very cool telephony integration. His team built custom code that taps into the Mid-Tier's back channel (if I remember correctly) and will send server events (triggered by filters) to a username or group (received by Active Links). It also works with WUT. He let me try it out to build a chat module in Remedy and it worked very well. Hopefully BMC will include something similar in the future (looking through the archives he stated in March 09 that BMC licensed it). Jason On Sat, Jul 3, 2010 at 3:29 AM, Angus Comber arsl...@iteloffice.com wrote: Hi Joe Our thin client integrations do in fact use javascript for integration. In a nutshell the client programming issues with web are as follows: 1. To access the javascript you need to first latch onto the web browser instance which requires custom code for each web browser. 2. WUT has a MDI interface which yes is a proprietary Windows technology but you can have powerful control of form instances etc. This is harder with web clients. 2. WUT has more control from Remedy client - third party client due to the fact that there are not the same security restrictions as on a web browser. Eg you can't run process with a web client. We support whichever versions of Remedy clients are likely to be using. The ideal interface from our point of view would be a interface which we can access via the server but which would provide the ability to 'push' to the relevant client. I am thinking the Remedy soap interface may provide this. We need to test. Service Desk Express have something like this with their push service. We also need a way for a user to send a message from web client and be able to detect this message - hopefully via soap or some other interface. Does anyone know if the soap interface could provide this? I have doc, just need to get reading. Angus - Original Message - From: Joe D'Souza jdso...@shyle.net Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 9:44 PM Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? Hello Angus, I would agree with some of your statements a few versions ago when Remedy Web was the web application tool. Mid-Tier since then has evolved to a much better product, and sometimes there is a very thin difference between the performance gains experienced on the thick client as opposed to the web. In fact in my experience the web client tends to be a lot more faster on remote connections than the native thick client. Yes you are going to loose and have to give up on client based API customizations that use the COM libraries, but many of these can be re-engineered or re-written using JavaScript that would work from the web client. I think it would be a good idea for Remedy to focus on continuing to improve the already 'much improved' web client, rather than utilize their resources developing and improving a client that is lesser and lesser used with every passing version. Many of the sites I have recently been to use only the thin client. Just curious, but what versions do you currently work on? Joe -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org]on Behalf Of Angus Comber Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 4:19 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? I believe this is true and think BMC are making a big mistake for the following reasons: 1. The thick client has a client based API, using COM, which is used by many third party products, including our own, and this capability is really useful for integration with other products. All this functionality will be lost. 2. It is administrators, not users, pushing for web front ends, simply for deployment reasons. Users prefer responsive, rich functionality applications. Anyone who has used Siebel will know what I mean. I have no problem with a web alternative but if they go for thin client only, then that is not good news from my perspective. Angus - Original Message - From: NNMN naveen...@gmail.com Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Re: AR User Tool Deprecated?
Currently our integration product can pop a web client but the level of control is less. I need to investigate the recent Remedy interfaces. For example, the soap interface may provide what we need. When software developers have to write new code it does cause annoyance. That is why Intel are such a success I suppose making everything backward compatible. Angus - Original Message - From: LJ LongWing lj.longw...@gmail.com Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 10:24 PM Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? Agreed, But why can't the screen pop technology launch a web browser instead of a Submit window in a clientwhy?...because they aren't currently tooled to do that...but could be if they want, and should be because not all apps that need screen pops reside on the workstation -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Grooms, Frederick W Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 2:40 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? While web services are the present and future of integrations, they are only useful in Application/System integrations. Web services are not useful in a screen pop type of integration (between say a phone system and a customer rep person taking a call). -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Pierson, Shawn Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 3:35 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? I've been thinking about this sort of thing lately, and I think that it's not necessarily a bad move from a corporate perspective, despite my personal desire to continue using WUT. 1) Web services are the present and future of integrations, at least in the near term. Older APIs and such should be replaced soon, if they haven't been already. I'm not saying that this blanket statement will be entirely possible right now, as there are many applications that integrate with Remedy through APIs and such, but in my opinion it's not good practice to do integrations on the user interface anymore if you can help it. 2) If you look at the overall trends in computing, it seems like every manager now operates primarily from a Blackberry/iPhone/Android device. That trend is creeping down to the rank and file employees of a company, and it's easier to support the lowest common denominator in computing, which in this case will be the handheld devices. As a result, you're better off developing a web-based app that runs on an iPhone as well as IE in Windows. Also, management doesn't look at the user experience as the top priority, but rather how to use the tool to make or save money for the company. A standard UI is going to save money over variously installed versions of WUT that require admin rights that are more expensive to support. Do you ever have to tell users, Hey delete your *.ARF and *.ARV files and try again? There is a cost associated with that which isn't present on the web. Overall, IT seems to be trending away from executables and towards remotely-based applications much like the days of terminals and mainframes. Sure, you can run one copy of WUT from a Citrix server, but is that really ideal? I think it's more headache than it's worth. Thanks, Shawn Pierson -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Angus Comber Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 3:19 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? I believe this is true and think BMC are making a big mistake for the following reasons: 1. The thick client has a client based API, using COM, which is used by many third party products, including our own, and this capability is really useful for integration with other products. All this functionality will be lost. 2. It is administrators, not users, pushing for web front ends, simply for deployment reasons. Users prefer responsive, rich functionality applications. Anyone who has used Siebel will know what I mean. I have no problem with a web alternative but if they go for thin client only, then that is not good news from my perspective. Angus - Original Message - From: NNMN naveen...@gmail.com Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 8:40 AM Subject: AR User Tool Deprecated? Hi ARSers, I have been hearing that AR User tool is getting deprected. I have few questions on this. - Is it really going to get deprecated? Is ARS8.0 going to have a thick client? - If it is just through mid-tier then will the DDE, OLE, macros etc be removed from active link actions. - Is mid-tier expected to come up with more capabilities so as to tackle client dependencies? Not sure who can answer this. But would also be cool to get your own
Re: AR User Tool Deprecated?
I am sorry but a call centre and a home user wanting to buy a book are not the same thing. Maybe things are moving in that direction but in my experience call centre agents do work in a fairly controlled environment. web/http or whatever you want to call it is like all these new technologies, great, but there is some catching up to do in terms of specific areas of functionality. But you are right. Everyone is moving in that direction. Yes, the product being called ARS amuses me too :) - Original Message - From: LJ LongWing lj.longw...@gmail.com Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 10:21 PM Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? Angus...I'm a fan of the native client as well...but tell me thiswould you use Amazon or Ebay if you needed to load a client to get to it? Maybe, maybe not...but I doubt that you WOULDN'T use it if you had to use the web browser, right? The default delivery method for this type of software these days is web...maintaining clients is a royal pain in the ARS (sorry...couldn't resist the pun)...web applications are robust and those apps that rely on client based interactions need to update their interfaces to allow for newer technologies. -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Angus Comber Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 2:19 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? I believe this is true and think BMC are making a big mistake for the following reasons: 1. The thick client has a client based API, using COM, which is used by many third party products, including our own, and this capability is really useful for integration with other products. All this functionality will be lost. 2. It is administrators, not users, pushing for web front ends, simply for deployment reasons. Users prefer responsive, rich functionality applications. Anyone who has used Siebel will know what I mean. I have no problem with a web alternative but if they go for thin client only, then that is not good news from my perspective. Angus - Original Message - From: NNMN naveen...@gmail.com Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 8:40 AM Subject: AR User Tool Deprecated? Hi ARSers, I have been hearing that AR User tool is getting deprected. I have few questions on this. - Is it really going to get deprecated? Is ARS8.0 going to have a thick client? - If it is just through mid-tier then will the DDE, OLE, macros etc be removed from active link actions. - Is mid-tier expected to come up with more capabilities so as to tackle client dependencies? Not sure who can answer this. But would also be cool to get your own views on this. Cheers, Naveen - With Warm Regards, Naveen -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/AR-User-Tool-Deprecated--tp28979740p28979740.html Sent from the ARS (Action Request System) mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are
Re: AR User Tool Deprecated?
Hi Joe Our thin client integrations do in fact use javascript for integration. In a nutshell the client programming issues with web are as follows: 1. To access the javascript you need to first latch onto the web browser instance which requires custom code for each web browser. 2. WUT has a MDI interface which yes is a proprietary Windows technology but you can have powerful control of form instances etc. This is harder with web clients. 2. WUT has more control from Remedy client - third party client due to the fact that there are not the same security restrictions as on a web browser. Eg you can't run process with a web client. We support whichever versions of Remedy clients are likely to be using. The ideal interface from our point of view would be a interface which we can access via the server but which would provide the ability to 'push' to the relevant client. I am thinking the Remedy soap interface may provide this. We need to test. Service Desk Express have something like this with their push service. We also need a way for a user to send a message from web client and be able to detect this message - hopefully via soap or some other interface. Does anyone know if the soap interface could provide this? I have doc, just need to get reading. Angus - Original Message - From: Joe D'Souza jdso...@shyle.net Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 9:44 PM Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? Hello Angus, I would agree with some of your statements a few versions ago when Remedy Web was the web application tool. Mid-Tier since then has evolved to a much better product, and sometimes there is a very thin difference between the performance gains experienced on the thick client as opposed to the web. In fact in my experience the web client tends to be a lot more faster on remote connections than the native thick client. Yes you are going to loose and have to give up on client based API customizations that use the COM libraries, but many of these can be re-engineered or re-written using JavaScript that would work from the web client. I think it would be a good idea for Remedy to focus on continuing to improve the already 'much improved' web client, rather than utilize their resources developing and improving a client that is lesser and lesser used with every passing version. Many of the sites I have recently been to use only the thin client. Just curious, but what versions do you currently work on? Joe -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org]on Behalf Of Angus Comber Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 4:19 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? I believe this is true and think BMC are making a big mistake for the following reasons: 1. The thick client has a client based API, using COM, which is used by many third party products, including our own, and this capability is really useful for integration with other products. All this functionality will be lost. 2. It is administrators, not users, pushing for web front ends, simply for deployment reasons. Users prefer responsive, rich functionality applications. Anyone who has used Siebel will know what I mean. I have no problem with a web alternative but if they go for thin client only, then that is not good news from my perspective. Angus - Original Message - From: NNMN naveen...@gmail.com Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 8:40 AM Subject: AR User Tool Deprecated? Hi ARSers, I have been hearing that AR User tool is getting deprected. I have few questions on this. - Is it really going to get deprecated? Is ARS8.0 going to have a thick client? - If it is just through mid-tier then will the DDE, OLE, macros etc be removed from active link actions. - Is mid-tier expected to come up with more capabilities so as to tackle client dependencies? Not sure who can answer this. But would also be cool to get your own views on this. Cheers, Naveen - With Warm Regards, Naveen ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are
Re: AR User Tool Deprecated?
The SOAP interface is Web Services. Web Services are used to push/get data from a server. They do not interface directly to a user interface (i.e. You can use SOAP to push data to a Remedy server, but that will not pop up anything on a user's machine). You could do some fancy coding (with interval Active Links) to continuously check a form for new records and use that method to pop up a client screen. Fred -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Angus Comber Sent: Saturday, July 03, 2010 5:29 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? Hi Joe Our thin client integrations do in fact use javascript for integration. In a nutshell the client programming issues with web are as follows: 1. To access the javascript you need to first latch onto the web browser instance which requires custom code for each web browser. 2. WUT has a MDI interface which yes is a proprietary Windows technology but you can have powerful control of form instances etc. This is harder with web clients. 2. WUT has more control from Remedy client - third party client due to the fact that there are not the same security restrictions as on a web browser. Eg you can't run process with a web client. We support whichever versions of Remedy clients are likely to be using. The ideal interface from our point of view would be a interface which we can access via the server but which would provide the ability to 'push' to the relevant client. I am thinking the Remedy soap interface may provide this. We need to test. Service Desk Express have something like this with their push service. We also need a way for a user to send a message from web client and be able to detect this message - hopefully via soap or some other interface. Does anyone know if the soap interface could provide this? I have doc, just need to get reading. Angus - Original Message - From: Joe D'Souza jdso...@shyle.net Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 9:44 PM Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? Hello Angus, I would agree with some of your statements a few versions ago when Remedy Web was the web application tool. Mid-Tier since then has evolved to a much better product, and sometimes there is a very thin difference between the performance gains experienced on the thick client as opposed to the web. In fact in my experience the web client tends to be a lot more faster on remote connections than the native thick client. Yes you are going to loose and have to give up on client based API customizations that use the COM libraries, but many of these can be re-engineered or re-written using JavaScript that would work from the web client. I think it would be a good idea for Remedy to focus on continuing to improve the already 'much improved' web client, rather than utilize their resources developing and improving a client that is lesser and lesser used with every passing version. Many of the sites I have recently been to use only the thin client. Just curious, but what versions do you currently work on? Joe -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org]on Behalf Of Angus Comber Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 4:19 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? I believe this is true and think BMC are making a big mistake for the following reasons: 1. The thick client has a client based API, using COM, which is used by many third party products, including our own, and this capability is really useful for integration with other products. All this functionality will be lost. 2. It is administrators, not users, pushing for web front ends, simply for deployment reasons. Users prefer responsive, rich functionality applications. Anyone who has used Siebel will know what I mean. I have no problem with a web alternative but if they go for thin client only, then that is not good news from my perspective. Angus - Original Message - From: NNMN naveen...@gmail.com Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 8:40 AM Subject: AR User Tool Deprecated? Hi ARSers, I have been hearing that AR User tool is getting deprected. I have few questions on this. - Is it really going to get deprecated? Is ARS8.0 going to have a thick client? - If it is just through mid-tier then will the DDE, OLE, macros etc be removed from active link actions. - Is mid-tier expected to come up with more capabilities so as to tackle client dependencies? Not sure who can answer this. But would also be cool to get your own views on this. Cheers, Naveen - With Warm Regards, Naveen ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives
Re: AR User Tool Deprecated?
Fred already mentioned that web services are used for back-end data and not user interaction. However that isn't to say that push events that can interact with a user's session haven't been done. Mark Gemmell showed of RED (Remedy Event Drive) at WWRUG09. He demoed their very cool telephony integration. His team built custom code that taps into the Mid-Tier's back channel (if I remember correctly) and will send server events (triggered by filters) to a username or group (received by Active Links). It also works with WUT. He let me try it out to build a chat module in Remedy and it worked very well. Hopefully BMC will include something similar in the future (looking through the archives he stated in March 09 that BMC licensed it). Jason On Sat, Jul 3, 2010 at 3:29 AM, Angus Comber arsl...@iteloffice.com wrote: Hi Joe Our thin client integrations do in fact use javascript for integration. In a nutshell the client programming issues with web are as follows: 1. To access the javascript you need to first latch onto the web browser instance which requires custom code for each web browser. 2. WUT has a MDI interface which yes is a proprietary Windows technology but you can have powerful control of form instances etc. This is harder with web clients. 2. WUT has more control from Remedy client - third party client due to the fact that there are not the same security restrictions as on a web browser. Eg you can't run process with a web client. We support whichever versions of Remedy clients are likely to be using. The ideal interface from our point of view would be a interface which we can access via the server but which would provide the ability to 'push' to the relevant client. I am thinking the Remedy soap interface may provide this. We need to test. Service Desk Express have something like this with their push service. We also need a way for a user to send a message from web client and be able to detect this message - hopefully via soap or some other interface. Does anyone know if the soap interface could provide this? I have doc, just need to get reading. Angus - Original Message - From: Joe D'Souza jdso...@shyle.net Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 9:44 PM Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? Hello Angus, I would agree with some of your statements a few versions ago when Remedy Web was the web application tool. Mid-Tier since then has evolved to a much better product, and sometimes there is a very thin difference between the performance gains experienced on the thick client as opposed to the web. In fact in my experience the web client tends to be a lot more faster on remote connections than the native thick client. Yes you are going to loose and have to give up on client based API customizations that use the COM libraries, but many of these can be re-engineered or re-written using JavaScript that would work from the web client. I think it would be a good idea for Remedy to focus on continuing to improve the already 'much improved' web client, rather than utilize their resources developing and improving a client that is lesser and lesser used with every passing version. Many of the sites I have recently been to use only the thin client. Just curious, but what versions do you currently work on? Joe -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org]on Behalf Of Angus Comber Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 4:19 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? I believe this is true and think BMC are making a big mistake for the following reasons: 1. The thick client has a client based API, using COM, which is used by many third party products, including our own, and this capability is really useful for integration with other products. All this functionality will be lost. 2. It is administrators, not users, pushing for web front ends, simply for deployment reasons. Users prefer responsive, rich functionality applications. Anyone who has used Siebel will know what I mean. I have no problem with a web alternative but if they go for thin client only, then that is not good news from my perspective. Angus - Original Message - From: NNMN naveen...@gmail.com Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 8:40 AM Subject: AR User Tool Deprecated? Hi ARSers, I have been hearing that AR User tool is getting deprected. I have few questions on this. - Is it really going to get deprecated? Is ARS8.0 going to have a thick client? - If it is just through mid-tier then will the DDE, OLE, macros etc be removed from active link actions. - Is mid-tier expected to come up with more capabilities so as to tackle client dependencies? Not sure who can answer this. But would also be cool to get your own
Re: AR User Tool Deprecated?
You've all been positing a lot of good arguments here. Let me put in my $.02... I've recently become a fan of Google's Chrome browser after yet another piece of malware/spyware waltzed past Internet Explorer and Norton Antivirus on my home pc. Our team is testing ITSM 7.6 on ARS 7.5 right now in preparation for an upgrade. Out of curiosity, I decided to compare the relative merits of the major browsers. I have discovered that Internet Explorer performs at about the same speed as the WUT, but Chrome, Safari, and Firefox move much faster. Also, IE requires a plug-in to get spell-check capabilities which come automatically with the other three browsers, and has to be built or bought for the WUT. Not that there aren't drawbacks to the other browsers: Chrome doesn't play well with Remedy's calendars, and some of the buttons refuse to work at all. (Chrome is not a supported browser.) Firefox does something annoying with scroll bars on unlimited character fields. Safari on a pc hangs up if you're trying to create an incident with decision trees enabled but not defined. (In its defense, Safari for pcs isn't supported, either.) Overall, I'm impressed with the performance of the mid-tier on ARS 7.5. In the past I've developed applications intended for use with the native client, but I think I'm going to change my focus toward the mid-tier in the future. Rather than losing the WUT, I am gaining three fallback browsers and smartphone support without the additional expense of a smartphone-only application. We may even decide to upgrade to ARS 7.6.3, depending on the timing of the release. There are a lot of things to like when you consider not supporting the WUT. Jennifer Meyer -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of LJ LongWing Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 5:22 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? Angus...I'm a fan of the native client as well...but tell me thiswould you use Amazon or Ebay if you needed to load a client to get to it? Maybe, maybe not...but I doubt that you WOULDN'T use it if you had to use the web browser, right? The default delivery method for this type of software these days is web...maintaining clients is a royal pain in the ARS (sorry...couldn't resist the pun)...web applications are robust and those apps that rely on client based interactions need to update their interfaces to allow for newer technologies. E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties by an authorized state official. ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are
Re: AR User Tool Deprecated?
I agree. I've been contemplating a change in workstation OS. Need to stay with Windows for a little while longer to run things natively and not need to go through a Citrix environment. One of the draw backs with going with the MidTier is the hoops we need to go through to make it function like the desktop client. Being able to display an Object List is a great example. This is something that should be native to the MidTier without needing to import a def file, set the check box in the MidTier config and then add a button/url to all forms in order to make the Object List display. Again this should be native within the AR System server for it to display in the MidTier. Dave From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Axton Sent: Friday, June 25, 2010 10:54 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? ** I can't wait to be rid of Windows as my workstation OS. Remedy is the only tool in my stack that has a hard requirement for Windows as the OS. Axton Grams The opinions, statements, and/or suggested courses of action expressed in this E-mail do not necessarily reflect those of BMC Software, Inc. My voluntary participation in this forum is not intended to convey a role as a spokesperson, liaison or public relations representative for BMC Software, Inc. On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 10:14 PM, Jason Miller jason.mil...@gmail.commailto:jason.mil...@gmail.com wrote: ** I agree it is a bummer that RKM doesn't work in Firefox but I think there are some changes in a future release of RKM that will make it work just as well as Mid-Tier does. Jason On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 7:10 AM, Pierson, Shawn shawn.pier...@sug.commailto:shawn.pier...@sug.com wrote: I understand your point, but in my experience they've done a decent job with the Mid Tier working according to generic standards rather than picking IE6 and refusing to work on anything else like some other applications have done. Unfortunately, RKM seems to be one of those applications. I primarily use Firefox because I really like having a built in spell check, but RKM has a lot of issues with it. Generally though, companies standardize on java versions, browser versions, etc. As companies continue to move towards platforms such as VM and mobile phones for their employees, I think we will see the standardization locked in even more. I know in my company, standardizing on a Java platform makes things a lot easier from a support standpoint, so it was well worth the money to spend time testing it against all of our Java-based IT apps before we implement it, and we fix, work with the vendor, or drop any application that would require some ancient JRE. In my experience the tradeoffs are outweighed by the decrease in time I spend supporting WUT issues. The Remedy power users at my company who wrote macros and did all sorts of amazing things have retired or moved on. The client-related issues have decreased tremendously by standardizing my user base on the web rather than the WUT. It's been a big help for my group, and now the vast majority of the questions and issues we help users on are related to the actual applications, not the tool that delivers them to us. Anyway, these are my thoughts as someone that used to hate Remedy Web and the first versions of the Mid Tier. Thanks, Shawn Pierson -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORGmailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Juan Ingles Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 5:10 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORGmailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? TANSTAAFL! - There Aint No Such Thing As A Free Lunch for those of you that haven't read Heinlein... Yea, we might not have to ask What version of the user tool do you use or Have you tried deleting ARF/ARV files? But those questions are quickly replaced by What browser (and what version) are you using and Have you tried deleting your cookies? And then add to those: What are your browser security settings? Do you have popups blocked? Are you using No Script? etc. Standardization or simplification at the End User Level usually comes at the cost of complexity in the underlying infrastructure. And the taller the stack gets, the more pieces there are to break or be mis-configured. ( How may of us have had to resort to the 7.1 Admin tool reg-edit hack because you had a server that was unresponsive to the User Tool? ) Note that I'm not necessarily saying that It's a BAD (tm) thing, I'm just saying that it does NOT make things simpler or lower the total cost and to use that as a primary selling point is a fallacy, IMHO. Juan Ingles On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 1:34 PM, Pierson, Shawn shawn.pier...@sug.commailto:shawn.pier...@sug.com wrote: I've been thinking about this sort of thing lately, and I think that it's not necessarily a bad move
Re: AR User Tool Deprecated?
I understand your point, but in my experience they've done a decent job with the Mid Tier working according to generic standards rather than picking IE6 and refusing to work on anything else like some other applications have done. Unfortunately, RKM seems to be one of those applications. I primarily use Firefox because I really like having a built in spell check, but RKM has a lot of issues with it. Generally though, companies standardize on java versions, browser versions, etc. As companies continue to move towards platforms such as VM and mobile phones for their employees, I think we will see the standardization locked in even more. I know in my company, standardizing on a Java platform makes things a lot easier from a support standpoint, so it was well worth the money to spend time testing it against all of our Java-based IT apps before we implement it, and we fix, work with the vendor, or drop any application that would require some ancient JRE. In my experience the tradeoffs are outweighed by the decrease in time I spend supporting WUT issues. The Remedy power users at my company who wrote macros and did all sorts of amazing things have retired or moved on. The client-related issues have decreased tremendously by standardizing my user base on the web rather than the WUT. It's been a big help for my group, and now the vast majority of the questions and issues we help users on are related to the actual applications, not the tool that delivers them to us. Anyway, these are my thoughts as someone that used to hate Remedy Web and the first versions of the Mid Tier. Thanks, Shawn Pierson -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Juan Ingles Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 5:10 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? TANSTAAFL! - There Aint No Such Thing As A Free Lunch for those of you that haven't read Heinlein... Yea, we might not have to ask What version of the user tool do you use or Have you tried deleting ARF/ARV files? But those questions are quickly replaced by What browser (and what version) are you using and Have you tried deleting your cookies? And then add to those: What are your browser security settings? Do you have popups blocked? Are you using No Script? etc. Standardization or simplification at the End User Level usually comes at the cost of complexity in the underlying infrastructure. And the taller the stack gets, the more pieces there are to break or be mis-configured. ( How may of us have had to resort to the 7.1 Admin tool reg-edit hack because you had a server that was unresponsive to the User Tool? ) Note that I'm not necessarily saying that It's a BAD (tm) thing, I'm just saying that it does NOT make things simpler or lower the total cost and to use that as a primary selling point is a fallacy, IMHO. Juan Ingles On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 1:34 PM, Pierson, Shawn shawn.pier...@sug.com wrote: I've been thinking about this sort of thing lately, and I think that it's not necessarily a bad move from a corporate perspective, despite my personal desire to continue using WUT. 1) Web services are the present and future of integrations, at least in the near term. Older APIs and such should be replaced soon, if they haven't been already. I'm not saying that this blanket statement will be entirely possible right now, as there are many applications that integrate with Remedy through APIs and such, but in my opinion it's not good practice to do integrations on the user interface anymore if you can help it. 2) If you look at the overall trends in computing, it seems like every manager now operates primarily from a Blackberry/iPhone/Android device. That trend is creeping down to the rank and file employees of a company, and it's easier to support the lowest common denominator in computing, which in this case will be the handheld devices. As a result, you're better off developing a web-based app that runs on an iPhone as well as IE in Windows. Also, management doesn't look at the user experience as the top priority, but rather how to use the tool to make or save money for the company. A standard UI is going to save money over variously installed versions of WUT that require admin rights that are more expensive to support. Do you ever have to tell users, Hey delete your *.ARF and *.ARV files and try again? There is a cost associated with that which isn't present on the web. Overall, IT seems to be trending away from executables and towards remotely-based applications much like the days of terminals and mainframes. Sure, you can run one copy of WUT from a Citrix server, but is that really ideal? I think it's more headache than it's worth. Thanks, Shawn Pierson -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Angus
Re: AR User Tool Deprecated?
I agree it is a bummer that RKM doesn't work in Firefox but I think there are some changes in a future release of RKM that will make it work just as well as Mid-Tier does. Jason On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 7:10 AM, Pierson, Shawn shawn.pier...@sug.comwrote: I understand your point, but in my experience they've done a decent job with the Mid Tier working according to generic standards rather than picking IE6 and refusing to work on anything else like some other applications have done. Unfortunately, RKM seems to be one of those applications. I primarily use Firefox because I really like having a built in spell check, but RKM has a lot of issues with it. Generally though, companies standardize on java versions, browser versions, etc. As companies continue to move towards platforms such as VM and mobile phones for their employees, I think we will see the standardization locked in even more. I know in my company, standardizing on a Java platform makes things a lot easier from a support standpoint, so it was well worth the money to spend time testing it against all of our Java-based IT apps before we implement it, and we fix, work with the vendor, or drop any application that would require some ancient JRE. In my experience the tradeoffs are outweighed by the decrease in time I spend supporting WUT issues. The Remedy power users at my company who wrote macros and did all sorts of amazing things have retired or moved on. The client-related issues have decreased tremendously by standardizing my user base on the web rather than the WUT. It's been a big help for my group, and now the vast majority of the questions and issues we help users on are related to the actual applications, not the tool that delivers them to us. Anyway, these are my thoughts as someone that used to hate Remedy Web and the first versions of the Mid Tier. Thanks, Shawn Pierson -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto: arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Juan Ingles Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 5:10 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? TANSTAAFL! - There Aint No Such Thing As A Free Lunch for those of you that haven't read Heinlein... Yea, we might not have to ask What version of the user tool do you use or Have you tried deleting ARF/ARV files? But those questions are quickly replaced by What browser (and what version) are you using and Have you tried deleting your cookies? And then add to those: What are your browser security settings? Do you have popups blocked? Are you using No Script? etc. Standardization or simplification at the End User Level usually comes at the cost of complexity in the underlying infrastructure. And the taller the stack gets, the more pieces there are to break or be mis-configured. ( How may of us have had to resort to the 7.1 Admin tool reg-edit hack because you had a server that was unresponsive to the User Tool? ) Note that I'm not necessarily saying that It's a BAD (tm) thing, I'm just saying that it does NOT make things simpler or lower the total cost and to use that as a primary selling point is a fallacy, IMHO. Juan Ingles On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 1:34 PM, Pierson, Shawn shawn.pier...@sug.com wrote: I've been thinking about this sort of thing lately, and I think that it's not necessarily a bad move from a corporate perspective, despite my personal desire to continue using WUT. 1) Web services are the present and future of integrations, at least in the near term. Older APIs and such should be replaced soon, if they haven't been already. I'm not saying that this blanket statement will be entirely possible right now, as there are many applications that integrate with Remedy through APIs and such, but in my opinion it's not good practice to do integrations on the user interface anymore if you can help it. 2) If you look at the overall trends in computing, it seems like every manager now operates primarily from a Blackberry/iPhone/Android device. That trend is creeping down to the rank and file employees of a company, and it's easier to support the lowest common denominator in computing, which in this case will be the handheld devices. As a result, you're better off developing a web-based app that runs on an iPhone as well as IE in Windows. Also, management doesn't look at the user experience as the top priority, but rather how to use the tool to make or save money for the company. A standard UI is going to save money over variously installed versions of WUT that require admin rights that are more expensive to support. Do you ever have to tell users, Hey delete your *.ARF and *.ARV files and try again? There is a cost associated with that which isn't present on the web. Overall, IT seems to be trending away from executables and towards remotely-based applications much like the days of terminals and mainframes. Sure, you
Re: AR User Tool Deprecated?
I can't wait to be rid of Windows as my workstation OS. Remedy is the only tool in my stack that has a hard requirement for Windows as the OS. Axton Grams The opinions, statements, and/or suggested courses of action expressed in this E-mail do not necessarily reflect those of BMC Software, Inc. My voluntary participation in this forum is not intended to convey a role as a spokesperson, liaison or public relations representative for BMC Software, Inc. On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 10:14 PM, Jason Miller jason.mil...@gmail.comwrote: ** I agree it is a bummer that RKM doesn't work in Firefox but I think there are some changes in a future release of RKM that will make it work just as well as Mid-Tier does. Jason On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 7:10 AM, Pierson, Shawn shawn.pier...@sug.comwrote: I understand your point, but in my experience they've done a decent job with the Mid Tier working according to generic standards rather than picking IE6 and refusing to work on anything else like some other applications have done. Unfortunately, RKM seems to be one of those applications. I primarily use Firefox because I really like having a built in spell check, but RKM has a lot of issues with it. Generally though, companies standardize on java versions, browser versions, etc. As companies continue to move towards platforms such as VM and mobile phones for their employees, I think we will see the standardization locked in even more. I know in my company, standardizing on a Java platform makes things a lot easier from a support standpoint, so it was well worth the money to spend time testing it against all of our Java-based IT apps before we implement it, and we fix, work with the vendor, or drop any application that would require some ancient JRE. In my experience the tradeoffs are outweighed by the decrease in time I spend supporting WUT issues. The Remedy power users at my company who wrote macros and did all sorts of amazing things have retired or moved on. The client-related issues have decreased tremendously by standardizing my user base on the web rather than the WUT. It's been a big help for my group, and now the vast majority of the questions and issues we help users on are related to the actual applications, not the tool that delivers them to us. Anyway, these are my thoughts as someone that used to hate Remedy Web and the first versions of the Mid Tier. Thanks, Shawn Pierson -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto: arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Juan Ingles Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 5:10 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? TANSTAAFL! - There Aint No Such Thing As A Free Lunch for those of you that haven't read Heinlein... Yea, we might not have to ask What version of the user tool do you use or Have you tried deleting ARF/ARV files? But those questions are quickly replaced by What browser (and what version) are you using and Have you tried deleting your cookies? And then add to those: What are your browser security settings? Do you have popups blocked? Are you using No Script? etc. Standardization or simplification at the End User Level usually comes at the cost of complexity in the underlying infrastructure. And the taller the stack gets, the more pieces there are to break or be mis-configured. ( How may of us have had to resort to the 7.1 Admin tool reg-edit hack because you had a server that was unresponsive to the User Tool? ) Note that I'm not necessarily saying that It's a BAD (tm) thing, I'm just saying that it does NOT make things simpler or lower the total cost and to use that as a primary selling point is a fallacy, IMHO. Juan Ingles On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 1:34 PM, Pierson, Shawn shawn.pier...@sug.com wrote: I've been thinking about this sort of thing lately, and I think that it's not necessarily a bad move from a corporate perspective, despite my personal desire to continue using WUT. 1) Web services are the present and future of integrations, at least in the near term. Older APIs and such should be replaced soon, if they haven't been already. I'm not saying that this blanket statement will be entirely possible right now, as there are many applications that integrate with Remedy through APIs and such, but in my opinion it's not good practice to do integrations on the user interface anymore if you can help it. 2) If you look at the overall trends in computing, it seems like every manager now operates primarily from a Blackberry/iPhone/Android device. That trend is creeping down to the rank and file employees of a company, and it's easier to support the lowest common denominator in computing, which in this case will be the handheld devices. As a result, you're better off developing a web-based app that runs on an iPhone as well as IE in Windows. Also, management doesn't look at the user experience
Re: AR User Tool Deprecated?
I heard the same thing too about the user tool. But then I had pretty much heard that about 7 ARS was current on 5.1.x. Irrespective of when it finally happens it is on the cards so it would be a better idea to start preparing for that and not develop code that is supported only on the thick client.. Joe -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org]on Behalf Of NNMN Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 3:40 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: AR User Tool Deprecated? Hi ARSers, I have been hearing that AR User tool is getting deprected. I have few questions on this. - Is it really going to get deprecated? Is ARS8.0 going to have a thick client? - If it is just through mid-tier then will the DDE, OLE, macros etc be removed from active link actions. - Is mid-tier expected to come up with more capabilities so as to tackle client dependencies? Not sure who can answer this. But would also be cool to get your own views on this. Cheers, Naveen ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are
Re: AR User Tool Deprecated?
Yes, the User Tool is nearing the end of its life but we're not quite there yet. BMC are encouraging users to switch to the web client and there are already features in the product (particularly interface enhancements) that are only available via the web. Please see this statement of direction - http://documents.bmc.com/products/documents/61/94/106194/106194.pdf Mark -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of NNMN Sent: 24 June 2010 08:40 To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: AR User Tool Deprecated? Hi ARSers, I have been hearing that AR User tool is getting deprected. I have few questions on this. - Is it really going to get deprecated? Is ARS8.0 going to have a thick client? - If it is just through mid-tier then will the DDE, OLE, macros etc be removed from active link actions. - Is mid-tier expected to come up with more capabilities so as to tackle client dependencies? Not sure who can answer this. But would also be cool to get your own views on this. Cheers, Naveen - With Warm Regards, Naveen -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/AR-User-Tool-Deprecated--tp28979740p28979740.html Sent from the ARS (Action Request System) mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are
Re: AR User Tool Deprecated?
1 - Based on public statements to that effect for about the last year...yes I believe 7.6.3 will be the last version with a thick client 2 - Not likely, they will probably still be available for quite some time to come, simply because not everyone will go to web and will likely still use the older user tool for some things 3 - According to info I got from somewhere (don't remember where), JavaScripting can do very similar things to DDE/OLE, so they consider that to be taking care of the switch to web... -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of NNMN Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 1:40 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: AR User Tool Deprecated? Hi ARSers, I have been hearing that AR User tool is getting deprected. I have few questions on this. - Is it really going to get deprecated? Is ARS8.0 going to have a thick client? - If it is just through mid-tier then will the DDE, OLE, macros etc be removed from active link actions. - Is mid-tier expected to come up with more capabilities so as to tackle client dependencies? Not sure who can answer this. But would also be cool to get your own views on this. Cheers, Naveen - With Warm Regards, Naveen -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/AR-User-Tool-Deprecated--tp28979740p28979740.html Sent from the ARS (Action Request System) mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are
Re: AR User Tool Deprecated?
Actually Version 8.0 is the last expected version with the User Client. Version 8.[1-9] and beyond wont have a User client. On Jun 24, 9:19 am, LJ LongWing lj.longw...@gmail.com wrote: 1 - Based on public statements to that effect for about the last year...yes I believe 7.6.3 will be the last version with a thick client 2 - Not likely, they will probably still be available for quite some time to come, simply because not everyone will go to web and will likely still use the older user tool for some things 3 - According to info I got from somewhere (don't remember where), JavaScripting can do very similar things to DDE/OLE, so they consider that to be taking care of the switch to web... -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of NNMN Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 1:40 AM To: arsl...@arslist.org Subject: AR User Tool Deprecated? Hi ARSers, I have been hearing that AR User tool is getting deprected. I have few questions on this. - Is it really going to get deprecated? Is ARS8.0 going to have a thick client? - If it is just through mid-tier then will the DDE, OLE, macros etc be removed from active link actions. - Is mid-tier expected to come up with more capabilities so as to tackle client dependencies? Not sure who can answer this. But would also be cool to get your own views on this. Cheers, Naveen - With Warm Regards, Naveen -- View this message in context:http://old.nabble.com/AR-User-Tool-Deprecated--tp28979740p28979740.html Sent from the ARS (Action Request System) mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ____ ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives atwww.arslist.org attend wwrug10www.wwrug.comARSlist: Where the Answers Are ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives atwww.arslist.org attend wwrug10www.wwrug.comARSlist: Where the Answers Are- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are
Re: AR User Tool Deprecated?
Are you taking into effect there that what was originally called 8 has been renamed to 7.6.3? Based on a meeting I was in I heard that 7.6.3 was the last version with Client. -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Chuck Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 8:44 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? Actually Version 8.0 is the last expected version with the User Client. Version 8.[1-9] and beyond wont have a User client. On Jun 24, 9:19 am, LJ LongWing lj.longw...@gmail.com wrote: 1 - Based on public statements to that effect for about the last year...yes I believe 7.6.3 will be the last version with a thick client 2 - Not likely, they will probably still be available for quite some time to come, simply because not everyone will go to web and will likely still use the older user tool for some things 3 - According to info I got from somewhere (don't remember where), JavaScripting can do very similar things to DDE/OLE, so they consider that to be taking care of the switch to web... -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of NNMN Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 1:40 AM To: arsl...@arslist.org Subject: AR User Tool Deprecated? Hi ARSers, I have been hearing that AR User tool is getting deprected. I have few questions on this. - Is it really going to get deprecated? Is ARS8.0 going to have a thick client? - If it is just through mid-tier then will the DDE, OLE, macros etc be removed from active link actions. - Is mid-tier expected to come up with more capabilities so as to tackle client dependencies? Not sure who can answer this. But would also be cool to get your own views on this. Cheers, Naveen - With Warm Regards, Naveen -- View this message in context:http://old.nabble.com/AR-User-Tool-Deprecated--tp28979740p28979740.h tml Sent from the ARS (Action Request System) mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ _ ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives atwww.arslist.org attend wwrug10www.wwrug.comARSlist: Where the Answers Are ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives atwww.arslist.org attend wwrug10www.wwrug.comARSlist: Where the Answers Are- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are
Re: AR User Tool Deprecated?
A revised statement of direction will be released in early July to answer these questions. -David J. Easter Sr. Product Manager, Enterprise Service Management BMC Software, Inc. The opinions, statements, and/or suggested courses of action expressed in this E-mail do not necessarily reflect those of BMC Software, Inc. My voluntary participation in this forum is not intended to convey a role as a spokesperson, liaison or public relations representative for BMC Software, Inc. -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of LJ LongWing Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 8:06 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? Are you taking into effect there that what was originally called 8 has been renamed to 7.6.3? Based on a meeting I was in I heard that 7.6.3 was the last version with Client. -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Chuck Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 8:44 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? Actually Version 8.0 is the last expected version with the User Client. Version 8.[1-9] and beyond wont have a User client. On Jun 24, 9:19 am, LJ LongWing lj.longw...@gmail.com wrote: 1 - Based on public statements to that effect for about the last year...yes I believe 7.6.3 will be the last version with a thick client 2 - Not likely, they will probably still be available for quite some time to come, simply because not everyone will go to web and will likely still use the older user tool for some things 3 - According to info I got from somewhere (don't remember where), JavaScripting can do very similar things to DDE/OLE, so they consider that to be taking care of the switch to web... -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of NNMN Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 1:40 AM To: arsl...@arslist.org Subject: AR User Tool Deprecated? Hi ARSers, I have been hearing that AR User tool is getting deprected. I have few questions on this. - Is it really going to get deprecated? Is ARS8.0 going to have a thick client? - If it is just through mid-tier then will the DDE, OLE, macros etc be removed from active link actions. - Is mid-tier expected to come up with more capabilities so as to tackle client dependencies? Not sure who can answer this. But would also be cool to get your own views on this. Cheers, Naveen - With Warm Regards, Naveen -- View this message in context:http://old.nabble.com/AR-User-Tool-Deprecated--tp28979740p28979740.h tml Sent from the ARS (Action Request System) mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ _ ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives atwww.arslist.org attend wwrug10www.wwrug.comARSlist: Where the Answers Are ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives atwww.arslist.org attend wwrug10www.wwrug.comARSlist: Where the Answers Are- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are
Re: AR User Tool Deprecated?
I have seen an official statement of direction paper from BMC that the next release (I think it is 7.6.3) will be the last release that will include a user tool. Anne Ramey *** E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties only by an authorized State Official. -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Joe D'Souza Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 3:55 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? I heard the same thing too about the user tool. But then I had pretty much heard that about 7 ARS was current on 5.1.x. Irrespective of when it finally happens it is on the cards so it would be a better idea to start preparing for that and not develop code that is supported only on the thick client.. Joe -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org]on Behalf Of NNMN Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 3:40 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: AR User Tool Deprecated? Hi ARSers, I have been hearing that AR User tool is getting deprected. I have few questions on this. - Is it really going to get deprecated? Is ARS8.0 going to have a thick client? - If it is just through mid-tier then will the DDE, OLE, macros etc be removed from active link actions. - Is mid-tier expected to come up with more capabilities so as to tackle client dependencies? Not sure who can answer this. But would also be cool to get your own views on this. Cheers, Naveen ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are
Re: AR User Tool Deprecated?
I believe this is true and think BMC are making a big mistake for the following reasons: 1. The thick client has a client based API, using COM, which is used by many third party products, including our own, and this capability is really useful for integration with other products. All this functionality will be lost. 2. It is administrators, not users, pushing for web front ends, simply for deployment reasons. Users prefer responsive, rich functionality applications. Anyone who has used Siebel will know what I mean. I have no problem with a web alternative but if they go for thin client only, then that is not good news from my perspective. Angus - Original Message - From: NNMN naveen...@gmail.com Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 8:40 AM Subject: AR User Tool Deprecated? Hi ARSers, I have been hearing that AR User tool is getting deprected. I have few questions on this. - Is it really going to get deprecated? Is ARS8.0 going to have a thick client? - If it is just through mid-tier then will the DDE, OLE, macros etc be removed from active link actions. - Is mid-tier expected to come up with more capabilities so as to tackle client dependencies? Not sure who can answer this. But would also be cool to get your own views on this. Cheers, Naveen - With Warm Regards, Naveen -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/AR-User-Tool-Deprecated--tp28979740p28979740.html Sent from the ARS (Action Request System) mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are
Re: AR User Tool Deprecated?
I've been thinking about this sort of thing lately, and I think that it's not necessarily a bad move from a corporate perspective, despite my personal desire to continue using WUT. 1) Web services are the present and future of integrations, at least in the near term. Older APIs and such should be replaced soon, if they haven't been already. I'm not saying that this blanket statement will be entirely possible right now, as there are many applications that integrate with Remedy through APIs and such, but in my opinion it's not good practice to do integrations on the user interface anymore if you can help it. 2) If you look at the overall trends in computing, it seems like every manager now operates primarily from a Blackberry/iPhone/Android device. That trend is creeping down to the rank and file employees of a company, and it's easier to support the lowest common denominator in computing, which in this case will be the handheld devices. As a result, you're better off developing a web-based app that runs on an iPhone as well as IE in Windows. Also, management doesn't look at the user experience as the top priority, but rather how to use the tool to make or save money for the company. A standard UI is going to save money over variously installed versions of WUT that require admin rights that are more expensive to support. Do you ever have to tell users, Hey delete your *.ARF and *.ARV files and try again? There is a cost associated with that which isn't present on the web. Overall, IT seems to be trending away from executables and towards remotely-based applications much like the days of terminals and mainframes. Sure, you can run one copy of WUT from a Citrix server, but is that really ideal? I think it's more headache than it's worth. Thanks, Shawn Pierson -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Angus Comber Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 3:19 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? I believe this is true and think BMC are making a big mistake for the following reasons: 1. The thick client has a client based API, using COM, which is used by many third party products, including our own, and this capability is really useful for integration with other products. All this functionality will be lost. 2. It is administrators, not users, pushing for web front ends, simply for deployment reasons. Users prefer responsive, rich functionality applications. Anyone who has used Siebel will know what I mean. I have no problem with a web alternative but if they go for thin client only, then that is not good news from my perspective. Angus - Original Message - From: NNMN naveen...@gmail.com Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 8:40 AM Subject: AR User Tool Deprecated? Hi ARSers, I have been hearing that AR User tool is getting deprected. I have few questions on this. - Is it really going to get deprecated? Is ARS8.0 going to have a thick client? - If it is just through mid-tier then will the DDE, OLE, macros etc be removed from active link actions. - Is mid-tier expected to come up with more capabilities so as to tackle client dependencies? Not sure who can answer this. But would also be cool to get your own views on this. Cheers, Naveen - With Warm Regards, Naveen -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/AR-User-Tool-Deprecated--tp28979740p28979740.html Sent from the ARS (Action Request System) mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are Private and confidential as detailed here: http://www.sug.com/disclaimers/default.htm#Mail . If you cannot access the link, please e-mail sender. ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are
Re: AR User Tool Deprecated?
While web services are the present and future of integrations, they are only useful in Application/System integrations. Web services are not useful in a screen pop type of integration (between say a phone system and a customer rep person taking a call). -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Pierson, Shawn Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 3:35 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? I've been thinking about this sort of thing lately, and I think that it's not necessarily a bad move from a corporate perspective, despite my personal desire to continue using WUT. 1) Web services are the present and future of integrations, at least in the near term. Older APIs and such should be replaced soon, if they haven't been already. I'm not saying that this blanket statement will be entirely possible right now, as there are many applications that integrate with Remedy through APIs and such, but in my opinion it's not good practice to do integrations on the user interface anymore if you can help it. 2) If you look at the overall trends in computing, it seems like every manager now operates primarily from a Blackberry/iPhone/Android device. That trend is creeping down to the rank and file employees of a company, and it's easier to support the lowest common denominator in computing, which in this case will be the handheld devices. As a result, you're better off developing a web-based app that runs on an iPhone as well as IE in Windows. Also, management doesn't look at the user experience as the top priority, but rather how to use the tool to make or save money for the company. A standard UI is going to save money over variously installed versions of WUT that require admin rights that are more expensive to support. Do you ever have to tell users, Hey delete your *.ARF and *.ARV files and try again? There is a cost associated with that which isn't present on the web. Overall, IT seems to be trending away from executables and towards remotely-based applications much like the days of terminals and mainframes. Sure, you can run one copy of WUT from a Citrix server, but is that really ideal? I think it's more headache than it's worth. Thanks, Shawn Pierson -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Angus Comber Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 3:19 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? I believe this is true and think BMC are making a big mistake for the following reasons: 1. The thick client has a client based API, using COM, which is used by many third party products, including our own, and this capability is really useful for integration with other products. All this functionality will be lost. 2. It is administrators, not users, pushing for web front ends, simply for deployment reasons. Users prefer responsive, rich functionality applications. Anyone who has used Siebel will know what I mean. I have no problem with a web alternative but if they go for thin client only, then that is not good news from my perspective. Angus - Original Message - From: NNMN naveen...@gmail.com Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 8:40 AM Subject: AR User Tool Deprecated? Hi ARSers, I have been hearing that AR User tool is getting deprected. I have few questions on this. - Is it really going to get deprecated? Is ARS8.0 going to have a thick client? - If it is just through mid-tier then will the DDE, OLE, macros etc be removed from active link actions. - Is mid-tier expected to come up with more capabilities so as to tackle client dependencies? Not sure who can answer this. But would also be cool to get your own views on this. Cheers, Naveen - With Warm Regards, Naveen -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/AR-User-Tool-Deprecated--tp28979740p28979740.html Sent from the ARS (Action Request System) mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are Private and confidential as detailed here: http://www.sug.com/disclaimers/default.htm#Mail . If you cannot access the link, please e-mail sender. ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are ___ UNSUBSCRIBE
Re: AR User Tool Deprecated?
Hello Angus, I would agree with some of your statements a few versions ago when Remedy Web was the web application tool. Mid-Tier since then has evolved to a much better product, and sometimes there is a very thin difference between the performance gains experienced on the thick client as opposed to the web. In fact in my experience the web client tends to be a lot more faster on remote connections than the native thick client. Yes you are going to loose and have to give up on client based API customizations that use the COM libraries, but many of these can be re-engineered or re-written using JavaScript that would work from the web client. I think it would be a good idea for Remedy to focus on continuing to improve the already 'much improved' web client, rather than utilize their resources developing and improving a client that is lesser and lesser used with every passing version. Many of the sites I have recently been to use only the thin client. Just curious, but what versions do you currently work on? Joe -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org]on Behalf Of Angus Comber Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 4:19 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? I believe this is true and think BMC are making a big mistake for the following reasons: 1. The thick client has a client based API, using COM, which is used by many third party products, including our own, and this capability is really useful for integration with other products. All this functionality will be lost. 2. It is administrators, not users, pushing for web front ends, simply for deployment reasons. Users prefer responsive, rich functionality applications. Anyone who has used Siebel will know what I mean. I have no problem with a web alternative but if they go for thin client only, then that is not good news from my perspective. Angus - Original Message - From: NNMN naveen...@gmail.com Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 8:40 AM Subject: AR User Tool Deprecated? Hi ARSers, I have been hearing that AR User tool is getting deprected. I have few questions on this. - Is it really going to get deprecated? Is ARS8.0 going to have a thick client? - If it is just through mid-tier then will the DDE, OLE, macros etc be removed from active link actions. - Is mid-tier expected to come up with more capabilities so as to tackle client dependencies? Not sure who can answer this. But would also be cool to get your own views on this. Cheers, Naveen - With Warm Regards, Naveen ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are
Re: AR User Tool Deprecated?
Angus...I'm a fan of the native client as well...but tell me thiswould you use Amazon or Ebay if you needed to load a client to get to it? Maybe, maybe not...but I doubt that you WOULDN'T use it if you had to use the web browser, right? The default delivery method for this type of software these days is web...maintaining clients is a royal pain in the ARS (sorry...couldn't resist the pun)...web applications are robust and those apps that rely on client based interactions need to update their interfaces to allow for newer technologies. -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Angus Comber Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 2:19 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? I believe this is true and think BMC are making a big mistake for the following reasons: 1. The thick client has a client based API, using COM, which is used by many third party products, including our own, and this capability is really useful for integration with other products. All this functionality will be lost. 2. It is administrators, not users, pushing for web front ends, simply for deployment reasons. Users prefer responsive, rich functionality applications. Anyone who has used Siebel will know what I mean. I have no problem with a web alternative but if they go for thin client only, then that is not good news from my perspective. Angus - Original Message - From: NNMN naveen...@gmail.com Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 8:40 AM Subject: AR User Tool Deprecated? Hi ARSers, I have been hearing that AR User tool is getting deprected. I have few questions on this. - Is it really going to get deprecated? Is ARS8.0 going to have a thick client? - If it is just through mid-tier then will the DDE, OLE, macros etc be removed from active link actions. - Is mid-tier expected to come up with more capabilities so as to tackle client dependencies? Not sure who can answer this. But would also be cool to get your own views on this. Cheers, Naveen - With Warm Regards, Naveen -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/AR-User-Tool-Deprecated--tp28979740p28979740.html Sent from the ARS (Action Request System) mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are
Re: AR User Tool Deprecated?
Agreed, But why can't the screen pop technology launch a web browser instead of a Submit window in a clientwhy?...because they aren't currently tooled to do that...but could be if they want, and should be because not all apps that need screen pops reside on the workstation -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Grooms, Frederick W Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 2:40 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? While web services are the present and future of integrations, they are only useful in Application/System integrations. Web services are not useful in a screen pop type of integration (between say a phone system and a customer rep person taking a call). -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Pierson, Shawn Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 3:35 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? I've been thinking about this sort of thing lately, and I think that it's not necessarily a bad move from a corporate perspective, despite my personal desire to continue using WUT. 1) Web services are the present and future of integrations, at least in the near term. Older APIs and such should be replaced soon, if they haven't been already. I'm not saying that this blanket statement will be entirely possible right now, as there are many applications that integrate with Remedy through APIs and such, but in my opinion it's not good practice to do integrations on the user interface anymore if you can help it. 2) If you look at the overall trends in computing, it seems like every manager now operates primarily from a Blackberry/iPhone/Android device. That trend is creeping down to the rank and file employees of a company, and it's easier to support the lowest common denominator in computing, which in this case will be the handheld devices. As a result, you're better off developing a web-based app that runs on an iPhone as well as IE in Windows. Also, management doesn't look at the user experience as the top priority, but rather how to use the tool to make or save money for the company. A standard UI is going to save money over variously installed versions of WUT that require admin rights that are more expensive to support. Do you ever have to tell users, Hey delete your *.ARF and *.ARV files and try again? There is a cost associated with that which isn't present on the web. Overall, IT seems to be trending away from executables and towards remotely-based applications much like the days of terminals and mainframes. Sure, you can run one copy of WUT from a Citrix server, but is that really ideal? I think it's more headache than it's worth. Thanks, Shawn Pierson -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Angus Comber Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 3:19 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? I believe this is true and think BMC are making a big mistake for the following reasons: 1. The thick client has a client based API, using COM, which is used by many third party products, including our own, and this capability is really useful for integration with other products. All this functionality will be lost. 2. It is administrators, not users, pushing for web front ends, simply for deployment reasons. Users prefer responsive, rich functionality applications. Anyone who has used Siebel will know what I mean. I have no problem with a web alternative but if they go for thin client only, then that is not good news from my perspective. Angus - Original Message - From: NNMN naveen...@gmail.com Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 8:40 AM Subject: AR User Tool Deprecated? Hi ARSers, I have been hearing that AR User tool is getting deprected. I have few questions on this. - Is it really going to get deprecated? Is ARS8.0 going to have a thick client? - If it is just through mid-tier then will the DDE, OLE, macros etc be removed from active link actions. - Is mid-tier expected to come up with more capabilities so as to tackle client dependencies? Not sure who can answer this. But would also be cool to get your own views on this. Cheers, Naveen - With Warm Regards, Naveen -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/AR-User-Tool-Deprecated--tp28979740p28979740.html Sent from the ARS (Action Request System) mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
Re: AR User Tool Deprecated?
Correct, I was just trying to point out that each technology has its place and just because it uses a custom API does not mean it is bad or worthless. -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of LJ LongWing Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 4:24 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? Agreed, But why can't the screen pop technology launch a web browser instead of a Submit window in a clientwhy?...because they aren't currently tooled to do that...but could be if they want, and should be because not all apps that need screen pops reside on the workstation -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Grooms, Frederick W Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 2:40 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? While web services are the present and future of integrations, they are only useful in Application/System integrations. Web services are not useful in a screen pop type of integration (between say a phone system and a customer rep person taking a call). -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Pierson, Shawn Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 3:35 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? I've been thinking about this sort of thing lately, and I think that it's not necessarily a bad move from a corporate perspective, despite my personal desire to continue using WUT. 1) Web services are the present and future of integrations, at least in the near term. Older APIs and such should be replaced soon, if they haven't been already. I'm not saying that this blanket statement will be entirely possible right now, as there are many applications that integrate with Remedy through APIs and such, but in my opinion it's not good practice to do integrations on the user interface anymore if you can help it. 2) If you look at the overall trends in computing, it seems like every manager now operates primarily from a Blackberry/iPhone/Android device. That trend is creeping down to the rank and file employees of a company, and it's easier to support the lowest common denominator in computing, which in this case will be the handheld devices. As a result, you're better off developing a web-based app that runs on an iPhone as well as IE in Windows. Also, management doesn't look at the user experience as the top priority, but rather how to use the tool to make or save money for the company. A standard UI is going to save money over variously installed versions of WUT that require admin rights that are more expensive to support. Do you ever have to tell users, Hey delete your *.ARF and *.ARV files and try again? There is a cost associated with that which isn't present on the web. Overall, IT seems to be trending away from executables and towards remotely-based applications much like the days of terminals and mainframes. Sure, you can run one copy of WUT from a Citrix server, but is that really ideal? I think it's more headache than it's worth. Thanks, Shawn Pierson -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Angus Comber Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 3:19 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? I believe this is true and think BMC are making a big mistake for the following reasons: 1. The thick client has a client based API, using COM, which is used by many third party products, including our own, and this capability is really useful for integration with other products. All this functionality will be lost. 2. It is administrators, not users, pushing for web front ends, simply for deployment reasons. Users prefer responsive, rich functionality applications. Anyone who has used Siebel will know what I mean. I have no problem with a web alternative but if they go for thin client only, then that is not good news from my perspective. Angus - Original Message - From: NNMN naveen...@gmail.com Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 8:40 AM Subject: AR User Tool Deprecated? Hi ARSers, I have been hearing that AR User tool is getting deprected. I have few questions on this. - Is it really going to get deprecated? Is ARS8.0 going to have a thick client? - If it is just through mid-tier then will the DDE, OLE, macros etc be removed from active link actions. - Is mid-tier expected to come up with more capabilities so as to tackle client dependencies? Not sure who can answer this. But would also be cool to get your own views on this. Cheers, Naveen - With Warm Regards, Naveen ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend
Re: AR User Tool Deprecated?
TANSTAAFL! - There Aint No Such Thing As A Free Lunch for those of you that haven't read Heinlein... Yea, we might not have to ask What version of the user tool do you use or Have you tried deleting ARF/ARV files? But those questions are quickly replaced by What browser (and what version) are you using and Have you tried deleting your cookies? And then add to those: What are your browser security settings? Do you have popups blocked? Are you using No Script? etc. Standardization or simplification at the End User Level usually comes at the cost of complexity in the underlying infrastructure. And the taller the stack gets, the more pieces there are to break or be mis-configured. ( How may of us have had to resort to the 7.1 Admin tool reg-edit hack because you had a server that was unresponsive to the User Tool? ) Note that I'm not necessarily saying that It's a BAD (tm) thing, I'm just saying that it does NOT make things simpler or lower the total cost and to use that as a primary selling point is a fallacy, IMHO. Juan Ingles On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 1:34 PM, Pierson, Shawn shawn.pier...@sug.com wrote: I've been thinking about this sort of thing lately, and I think that it's not necessarily a bad move from a corporate perspective, despite my personal desire to continue using WUT. 1) Web services are the present and future of integrations, at least in the near term. Older APIs and such should be replaced soon, if they haven't been already. I'm not saying that this blanket statement will be entirely possible right now, as there are many applications that integrate with Remedy through APIs and such, but in my opinion it's not good practice to do integrations on the user interface anymore if you can help it. 2) If you look at the overall trends in computing, it seems like every manager now operates primarily from a Blackberry/iPhone/Android device. That trend is creeping down to the rank and file employees of a company, and it's easier to support the lowest common denominator in computing, which in this case will be the handheld devices. As a result, you're better off developing a web-based app that runs on an iPhone as well as IE in Windows. Also, management doesn't look at the user experience as the top priority, but rather how to use the tool to make or save money for the company. A standard UI is going to save money over variously installed versions of WUT that require admin rights that are more expensive to support. Do you ever have to tell users, Hey delete your *.ARF and *.ARV files and try again? There is a cost associated with that which isn't present on the web. Overall, IT seems to be trending away from executables and towards remotely-based applications much like the days of terminals and mainframes. Sure, you can run one copy of WUT from a Citrix server, but is that really ideal? I think it's more headache than it's worth. Thanks, Shawn Pierson -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Angus Comber Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 3:19 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? I believe this is true and think BMC are making a big mistake for the following reasons: 1. The thick client has a client based API, using COM, which is used by many third party products, including our own, and this capability is really useful for integration with other products. All this functionality will be lost. 2. It is administrators, not users, pushing for web front ends, simply for deployment reasons. Users prefer responsive, rich functionality applications. Anyone who has used Siebel will know what I mean. I have no problem with a web alternative but if they go for thin client only, then that is not good news from my perspective. Angus - Original Message - From: NNMN naveen...@gmail.com Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 8:40 AM Subject: AR User Tool Deprecated? Hi ARSers, I have been hearing that AR User tool is getting deprected. I have few questions on this. - Is it really going to get deprecated? Is ARS8.0 going to have a thick client? - If it is just through mid-tier then will the DDE, OLE, macros etc be removed from active link actions. - Is mid-tier expected to come up with more capabilities so as to tackle client dependencies? Not sure who can answer this. But would also be cool to get your own views on this. Cheers, Naveen - With Warm Regards, Naveen -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/AR-User-Tool-Deprecated--tp28979740p28979740.html Sent from the ARS (Action Request System) mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug10 www.wwrug.com
Re: AR User Tool Deprecated?
Again, Agreed :) -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Grooms, Frederick W Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 4:05 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? Correct, I was just trying to point out that each technology has its place and just because it uses a custom API does not mean it is bad or worthless. -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of LJ LongWing Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 4:24 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? Agreed, But why can't the screen pop technology launch a web browser instead of a Submit window in a clientwhy?...because they aren't currently tooled to do that...but could be if they want, and should be because not all apps that need screen pops reside on the workstation -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Grooms, Frederick W Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 2:40 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? While web services are the present and future of integrations, they are only useful in Application/System integrations. Web services are not useful in a screen pop type of integration (between say a phone system and a customer rep person taking a call). -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Pierson, Shawn Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 3:35 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? I've been thinking about this sort of thing lately, and I think that it's not necessarily a bad move from a corporate perspective, despite my personal desire to continue using WUT. 1) Web services are the present and future of integrations, at least in the near term. Older APIs and such should be replaced soon, if they haven't been already. I'm not saying that this blanket statement will be entirely possible right now, as there are many applications that integrate with Remedy through APIs and such, but in my opinion it's not good practice to do integrations on the user interface anymore if you can help it. 2) If you look at the overall trends in computing, it seems like every manager now operates primarily from a Blackberry/iPhone/Android device. That trend is creeping down to the rank and file employees of a company, and it's easier to support the lowest common denominator in computing, which in this case will be the handheld devices. As a result, you're better off developing a web-based app that runs on an iPhone as well as IE in Windows. Also, management doesn't look at the user experience as the top priority, but rather how to use the tool to make or save money for the company. A standard UI is going to save money over variously installed versions of WUT that require admin rights that are more expensive to support. Do you ever have to tell users, Hey delete your *.ARF and *.ARV files and try again? There is a cost associated with that which isn't present on the web. Overall, IT seems to be trending away from executables and towards remotely-based applications much like the days of terminals and mainframes. Sure, you can run one copy of WUT from a Citrix server, but is that really ideal? I think it's more headache than it's worth. Thanks, Shawn Pierson -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Angus Comber Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 3:19 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? I believe this is true and think BMC are making a big mistake for the following reasons: 1. The thick client has a client based API, using COM, which is used by many third party products, including our own, and this capability is really useful for integration with other products. All this functionality will be lost. 2. It is administrators, not users, pushing for web front ends, simply for deployment reasons. Users prefer responsive, rich functionality applications. Anyone who has used Siebel will know what I mean. I have no problem with a web alternative but if they go for thin client only, then that is not good news from my perspective. Angus - Original Message - From: NNMN naveen...@gmail.com Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 8:40 AM Subject: AR User Tool Deprecated? Hi ARSers, I have been hearing that AR User tool is getting deprected. I have few questions on this. - Is it really going to get deprecated? Is ARS8.0 going to have a thick client? - If it is just through mid-tier then will the DDE, OLE, macros etc be removed from active link actions. - Is mid-tier expected to come up with more capabilities so as to tackle client dependencies? Not sure who can answer
Re: AR User Tool Deprecated?
They already use Eclipse as the Framework for the Admin tool, why not use it as a User tool too? Then All they have to maintain is a plugin into Eclipse... On Jun 24, 5:33 pm, LJ LongWing lj.longw...@gmail.com wrote: Again, Agreed :) -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Grooms, Frederick W Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 4:05 PM To: arsl...@arslist.org Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? Correct, I was just trying to point out that each technology has its place and just because it uses a custom API does not mean it is bad or worthless. -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of LJ LongWing Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 4:24 PM To: arsl...@arslist.org Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? Agreed, But why can't the screen pop technology launch a web browser instead of a Submit window in a clientwhy?...because they aren't currently tooled to do that...but could be if they want, and should be because not all apps that need screen pops reside on the workstation -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Grooms, Frederick W Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 2:40 PM To: arsl...@arslist.org Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? While web services are the present and future of integrations, they are only useful in Application/System integrations. Web services are not useful in a screen pop type of integration (between say a phone system and a customer rep person taking a call). -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Pierson, Shawn Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 3:35 PM To: arsl...@arslist.org Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? I've been thinking about this sort of thing lately, and I think that it's not necessarily a bad move from a corporate perspective, despite my personal desire to continue using WUT. 1) Web services are the present and future of integrations, at least in the near term. Older APIs and such should be replaced soon, if they haven't been already. I'm not saying that this blanket statement will be entirely possible right now, as there are many applications that integrate with Remedy through APIs and such, but in my opinion it's not good practice to do integrations on the user interface anymore if you can help it. 2) If you look at the overall trends in computing, it seems like every manager now operates primarily from a Blackberry/iPhone/Android device. That trend is creeping down to the rank and file employees of a company, and it's easier to support the lowest common denominator in computing, which in this case will be the handheld devices. As a result, you're better off developing a web-based app that runs on an iPhone as well as IE in Windows. Also, management doesn't look at the user experience as the top priority, but rather how to use the tool to make or save money for the company. A standard UI is going to save money over variously installed versions of WUT that require admin rights that are more expensive to support. Do you ever have to tell users, Hey delete your *.ARF and *.ARV files and try again? There is a cost associated with that which isn't present on the web. Overall, IT seems to be trending away from executables and towards remotely-based applications much like the days of terminals and mainframes. Sure, you can run one copy of WUT from a Citrix server, but is that really ideal? I think it's more headache than it's worth. Thanks, Shawn Pierson -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arsl...@arslist.org] On Behalf Of Angus Comber Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 3:19 PM To: arsl...@arslist.org Subject: Re: AR User Tool Deprecated? I believe this is true and think BMC are making a big mistake for the following reasons: 1. The thick client has a client based API, using COM, which is used by many third party products, including our own, and this capability is really useful for integration with other products. All this functionality will be lost. 2. It is administrators, not users, pushing for web front ends, simply for deployment reasons. Users prefer responsive, rich functionality applications. Anyone who has used Siebel will know what I mean. I have no problem with a web alternative but if they go for thin client only, then that is not good news from my perspective. Angus - Original Message - From: NNMN naveen...@gmail.com Newsgroups: public.remedy.arsystem.general To: arsl...@arslist.org Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2010 8:40 AM Subject: AR User Tool Deprecated? Hi ARSers, I have been hearing that AR User tool is getting deprected. I have few questions
