I suppose that quality vs. timeliness is a trade-off of sorts - as Matt's
sig line says "Good, Fast, Cheap - pick any two".  Right now, especially
when it comes to patches, I'd be happy with getting two, and at times, one.
 
Rick 
  _____  

From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lucero, Michelle - IST contractor
Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2007 7:05 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: ADM:Timing Test, please ignore, ITSM7


** 
Hi, Rick:
 
In all fairness and in light of recent patch releases (eh hem DST P20), I
would much rather them take as long as necessary to properly test and QA
this combination before releasing it to the masses.  I'm hoping that it's
not a low priority for them and they're simply trying to get it right this
time.  I'm sure they are aware that their reputation among some of their
customers might be at stake.  
 
On the more obvious point, I believe you're making...
If you've been given an Estimated Time of Release for a product and months
have passed, I would say that they might need to work on setting and meeting
expectations.  I almost wish they would say, "sometime in 2007" and be done
with it.
 
I agree with your last point that, "BMC sales would try to sell it [ITSM 6]
as an alternative...".  This is what some companies on their own are
electing to do.  That is installing ARS 7.0 with ITSM 6.0 as a solution.
 
My two cents,
Michelle

  _____  

From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rick Cook
Sent: Monday, February 19, 2007 9:16 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: ADM:Timing Test, please ignore, ITSM7


** 
As soon as ITSM 6 will work with CMDB 2.0?  That was supposed to happen in
November, then December, then January, and now it's February.  I keep being
told it's in process, but geez, it's been so long since it was promised that
I have to think it's a pretty low priority for them.  I do wish we had the
option of keeping some people on ITSM 6 until their organizations were ready
for ITIL, and that BMC sales would try to sell it as an alternative when it
was the better alternative for a particular customer.
 
Rick 
  _____  

From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Daniel Bloom
Sent: Monday, February 19, 2007 5:52 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: ADM:Timing Test, please ignore, ITSM7


** 

Robert,

 

Hmm, could it be more difficult than a change to ITSM7?

You know, I could get into a lot of trouble for this.

 

On the one hand, I love the look and feel of ITSM7.

Most certainly it feels more ITIL aligned than ITSM6,

and has some neat stuff in it.

 

On the other, gosh I hate converting people from ITSM6 to it,

and really, waiting for ITSM6 on CMDB2.0 makes a lot of sense for a lot of
people.

 

A number of folks I know and respect have commented on ITSM6 being a very
good option,

and as soon as the upgrade to CMDB2.0 is available I think that answers that
issue.

 

[anybody want a really heated discussion of the field ids in ITSM7? 

Ed, got your breakdown  spreadsheet of how many are outside the prescribed
range done yet?]

 

thanks for the kudos .. Daniel

 

 

  _____  

From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Robert Molenda
Sent: February 19, 2007 8:01 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: ADM:Timing Test, please ignore

 

Thanks Daniel;

We DO appreciate your efforts :-)

 

Hopefully your upgrade goes better than ITSM7.

 

Oh wait those are "in side the head words". darn those just keep leaking out
these days.

 

Thanks-n-advance; 

HDT Platform Incident / Problem Manager & Architect 
Robert Molenda 
IT OS PA 
Tel: +1 408 503 2701 
Fax: +1 408 503 2912 
Mobile: +1 408 472 8097 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

Quality begins with your actions.

 

 

__20060125_______________________This posting was submitted with HTML in
it___ __20060125_______________________This posting was submitted with HTML
in it___ __20060125_______________________This posting was submitted with
HTML in it___ __20060125_______________________This posting was submitted
with HTML in it___ __20060125_______________________This posting was
submitted with HTML in it___ __20060125_______________________This posting
was submitted with HTML in it___ 

_______________________________________________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where the 
Answers Are"

Reply via email to