I think it could be even simpler. ARS as a development platform is very strong.
BMC could easily have three developers sit down, all with equal experience and
skills in their areas. The first would be Java, the second would be .NET, and
the third would be ARS. They would be given requirements to build a simple
application with ten fields to track appointments or something like that. Time
them and see how long it takes. Obviously, the ARS developer will finish first.
While ARS is not meant to replace traditional programming, you can quickly roll
out some good apps with it. Pretty much every company I've worked for has
custom applications and are happy with them. I've built a lot of different
things like a robust survey system, a few HR type apps, multiple project
management applications, downtime tracking applications, telecom-specific
applications, and energy industry specific applications, such as one I will be
working on later this year to track devices on our pipelines. ARS is a great
tool, and I think BMC should spend more time on how it can benefit their
customers to use it to build their applications over using programming
languages.
Shawn Pierson
-----Original Message-----
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL
PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Sundberg
Sent: Friday, July 20, 2007 9:50 AM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: BUW 2007 Track Sessions Announced
** Agreed.
I think ARS needs to be more pronounced as the benefit of the system.
Meaning - ITIL is a commoditizer. If ITSM 7 is ITIL -- and the next
product (1/50 the cost) is also ITIL -- it will be a hard sell to mgmt that
they have to have BMC ARS....
Now - if they change it to be ARS is an service management (generic vs
just IT) platform of which it has applications like ITSM (Service Desk, Problem
Mgmt, Asset Mgmt, CMDB) etc... -- and has tools and strategies for extending
into other areas -- then it is an easier sell. The real sell is the platform -
and the direction/vision. However -- the platform (ARS) -- needs to have a life
of its own - and be respectable on its own -- not shunned.
And they need to communicate that it has other applications like:
Customer Support, Project Management, HR application tracking, HR Issue
management, Facilities Management, etc...
Then companies will be standardizing on a service framework. With that
being the case - it will be hard for a company who has an ITIL app (at 1/50th
the cost) -- to compete. They may have a story for ITIL processes -- but it
would be a huge leap for them to compete against all the offerings.
So - how does BMC do this?
I know of partners that have the apps already:
BMC has:
ITSM , etc...
-Customer Support
-Citizen Response
Kinetic Data has:
-Kinetic Request -- Service Request Management System
-Kinetic Survey -- Enterprise Feedback Management System
-Kinetic Field - Field Service Management System
Project Remedies has:
-Project Management
cMango/Wipro has:
- HR Application
Now if BMC would gather the partners - and create a partner program
that encourages collaboration and consistency across the apps provided -- then
a cohesive message can be delivered. BMC could have had something like Appforce
by Salesforce.com -- if they had planned. (I had this conversation 4+ years ago
with marketing at Remedy - but it did not go anywhere) I think they could still
pull it off - but it takes commitment (and changes of course)
Changes/challeges:
If BMC were to do this - they would naturally see and have early
involvement with organizations who are doing "great things" -- and they would
want to move into that app space and take all the revenue (note: Kinetic
Request and newScale Service Center). But - they must contain themselves or
they actually kill the market - as successful organizations that join the
partner program actually lose by joining. So - BMC continues to own and improve
their core offering of ARS itself and the existing apps - but BMC must control
itself from eating its partners who are expanding the vision in ways that they
had not predicted.
Other notes:
BMC licensing to change:
You buy the server and developer licenses.
For your apps (Service Desk, CMDB, etc...) BMC charges user licenses.
For access to the server itself -- FREE.(read or write)
So - a Kinetic Data with Kinetic Field would be strengthening the
overall service management platform (a win for BMC (harder to displace with
commodity ITIL) -- Kinetic Data would be a able to sell it's apps at what the
market will accept (without the BMC user license overhead -- which kills the
deal for many apps) (a win for Kinetic Data) -- and customers now can leverage
their investment (people/training/servers/infrastructure) in ARS across a
number of service related products (a win for the customer)
I think it would be cool - and I think it is a vision that people could
comprehend (aka buy).
So again - BMC creates a true knowledge share / non-competitive partner
program. BMC sells the ARS platform as the framework. (customers win, BMC wins,
partners win, and ARS fanatics - well - they stay fanatics (and the ARS world
does not die))
-John
On 7/20/07, Pierson, Shawn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
**
I would add that a big problem with this is that ITSM 7 is
extremely buggy, harder to use than previous versions, and extremely expensive.
AR System development is what kept Remedy alive, and by de-emphasizing the
strong point of Remedy, I see AR System and ITSM usage declining in the future.
I have heard from a lot of people that their management is looking forward to
the ITSM release from Microsoft because they think it will be more integrated
with other systems. While I think the Microsoft product is not going to be
that good in the first release, it will improve, and if BMC does not improve
the quality of ITSM and go back to selling AR System itself as a major product,
Microsoft will put them out of the IT service management business.
Shawn
-----Original Message-----
From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rick Cook
Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2007 7:18 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: BUW 2007 Track Sessions Announced
**
I think that Susan has a point, and to make a more
specific observation, the de-emphasis of the AR System as a development
platform, making BMC's defacto focus on it just being a willing and able
container for the ITSM/CMDB, has led to less custom work going on these days.
This in turn leads to fewer people able to talk about innovative things they're
doing, because it's increasingly out of the mainstream that it once would have
been in the middle of. Not to say that there isn't custom work, it's just that
privacy concerns are probably keeping most govt. apps private, and most private
entities are going ITIL/ITSM these days, because that's all that BMC sells to
them.
Not necessarily blaming BMC for that, just saying that
this is a foreseeable byproduct of their product direction, exacerbated by the
fact that many of us are neck deep in trying to figure out what the **** BMC
was thinking in some of the feature decisions with ITSM.
Maybe THAT would be a good breakout - Gap analysis
between ITSM 7.0.2 delivered functionality and what customers are actually
wanting it to do, both raising awareness for prospective customers and giving
some ideas for bridging those gaps for both future and present deployers of the
apps.
Rick
On 7/19/07, Susan Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
**
David,
Maybe there is an unspoken message that bmc
should be listening too. There generally is no lack of submissions by non-host
presenters. Since the advent of the various version 7 products there has been
an aura around Remedy that is disconcerting to some degree. Last year we
gathered over a 100 topics of interest. This year few if any topics were
suggested here. That in itself is very unusual.
Thoughts to mull over ....
Susan
On 7/19/07, Easter, David <[EMAIL PROTECTED] >
wrote:
**
> I, too, was disappointed with the
dearth of non-BMC presenters.
We too were disappointed in the number
of customer submissions. If anyone missed the submission deadline but has a
desire to present, please feel free to send me a direct E-mail with your topic
and synopsis. We still have some ability to move things around to accommodate
customer presentations. It doesn't necessarily have to be a development
training session - we'd love to have customers present their honest (but
hopefully positive) experience with BMC products too!
Thanks,
-David J. Easter
Sr. Product Manager, Service Management
Business Unit
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.ORG ] On Behalf Of Rick Cook
Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2007 3:27 PM
To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG
Subject: Re: BUW 2007 Track Sessions
Announced
**
I, too, was disappointed with the
dearth of non-BMC presenters. I think the submission time was far earlier than
it had been in years past - that may have had a bit to do with it.
Rick
On 7/19/07, Bill Estep <[EMAIL
PROTECTED] > wrote:
** I didn't see any development
sessions. They are all BMC product related. Did anyone see anything that's
not BMC product related, but Remedy development?
Thanks, we're still trying to decide if
we are sending folks.
Bill Estep
Nemours
On 7/18/07, Geoffrey Endresen <[EMAIL
PROTECTED] > wrote:
** For some reason it's not on the list
I want the session called "Remedy
Licenses for Dummies" with tips and tricks to using the minimum amount of
floating licenses while staying within the License Agreement.
-Geoff
On 7/18/07, Jarl Grøneng < [EMAIL
PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote:
Pretty much the same, but also
AR System Plug-in Server 7.1 and Java
SDK and AR System 7.1 API enhancements
-
Jarl
On 7/17/07, Jon Chau < [EMAIL
PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote:
> **
https://bmcuserworld.com/catalog/catalog/catalog.jsp
>
> What are some of the topics that most
interest you?
>
> I'm interested in:
>
> The Definitive Pure Java Single Sign
On Integration of Remedy Web
> Making DVF Development Easier: A
High-Level API and a Case Study
> Taking Advantage of New Features in
AR System Server 7.1
>
> Jon
__20060125_______________________This posting was
submitted with HTML in it___
Private and confidential as detailed here
<http://www.sug.com/disclaimers/default.htm#Mail> . If you cannot access
hyperlink, please e-mail sender.
__20060125_______________________This posting was submitted
with HTML in it___
--
John David Sundberg
235 East 6th Street, Suite 400B
St. Paul, MN 55101
(651) 556-0930-work
(651) 247-6766-cell
(651) 695-8577-fax
[EMAIL PROTECTED] __20060125_______________________This posting was
submitted with HTML in it___
Private and confidential as detailed <a
href="http://www.sug.com/disclaimers/default.htm#Mail";>here</a>. If you cannot
access hyperlink, please e-mail sender.
_______________________________________________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org ARSlist:"Where the
Answers Are"
