What really disappoints me is that they are using vendor forms all over the place nowadays. That looks to me like "hey we couldn't do it in workflow, so we built a plugin". Doesn't that mean something?
Oh and while I'm on rant mode, could we please have a "export but ignore all of the standard AR System forms and workflow" option? Back in the days we only had "Group" and "User'... Btw our "competing" application is called ExpertDesk, is very adaptable both through data and workflow. (and it has about 50% less workflow while providing enterprise featues). Hugo On 6/8/07, Robert Molenda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Axton - you think too much outside the box :) Just like so many of us on this list :) :) We need more of this thinking again!!! I have actually been wondering about this for some time now, especially in the area of CMDB and 'Re-development' or 'Module Integration' so to say. The BMC CMDB while being 'OK' (not to take this completely off topic) is such an overhead that a much simpler and "customer fitting design" would be so much more performant to the ARSystem and other applications... (none the less cheaper and easier to maintain at times!) At what point will BMC begin to limit customizations? Imagine if the install of say Incident Management installed all objects in "Locked Mode"... I wonder at times if BMC forgot the first envisioned cause for ARS... Rapid Application Development, Flexible Workflow, ... Robert -----Original Message----- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rick Cook Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2007 6:28 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Hypothetical I don't know what BMC's criteria are for approval, but I do know that there are already competing Service Management products out there, what's the point of a few more, unless someone thinks they've architected the code better than BMC does? Rick -----Original Message----- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Axton Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2007 4:24 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Hypothetical hmmm... probably if you write it first and big brother likes it, you're SOL. Prepare to be bought or dropped (aka, prepare to be boarded)? I guess there's money to be made there, but geez, what a disappointment... Axton Grams On 6/7/07, patrick zandi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > ** > Woo, So first inventor win's ? as long as you pay and have it locked. > huh .. > Land Grab.. > > > On 6/7/07, Axton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Just a hypothetical question. > > > > Deployable applications, which include the ability to enforce user > > fixed/floating licenses, are available to partners/ISVs. > > > > Partners are not allowed to write competing products. > > > > Does this mean that companies/people attempting to write apps that > > are similar in nature to those that Remedy offers are in a catch22 > > situation? > > > > Axton Grams > > > > > ______________________________________________________________________ > _________ > > UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org > > ARSlist:"Where > the Answers Are" > > > > > > -- > Patrick Zandi __20060125_______________________This posting was > submitted with HTML in it___ ________________________________________________________________________ ____ ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where the Answers Are" ________________________________________________________________________ _______ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where the Answers Are" _______________________________________________________________________________ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where the Answers Are"
_______________________________________________________________________________ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where the Answers Are"
