I would have to add the built-in multi-tenancy capability of ITSM 7, with its improved data security and the possibility of decentralized management and organizational-specific tools (categorizations, templates, summaries, etc.,) as a major reason for the migration. If you have _ever_ had any groups that wanted their tickets to be secured from visibility, or who basically wanted to control their own piece of the application, ITSM 7 will do this OOTB. You have to be willing to give up Guest user access, but a lot of sites have never allowed that anyway; we never have.
Of course, multi-tenancy can make configuration significantly more complicated, depending on how far down you decide to segment your organization(s), and that is reflected in Rick's last bullet on masochism. Multi-tenancy has been the primary selling point for ITSM 7 here; we never went to ITSM 6 from 5.5 since there was so little to be gained in app functionality. ITIL is not a factor, there are only three of us here who know what it means; we get more mileage out of the "best practices for IT service support" translation. Christopher Strauss, Ph.D. Remedy Database Administrator University of North Texas Computing Center http://itsm.unt.edu/ > -----Original Message----- > From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Luttmann, Michael W CTR USA > Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2007 5:32 PM > To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG > Subject: Re: ARSystem 7 and ITSM 7 Upgrades (UNCLASSIFIED) > > Classification: UNCLASSIFIED > Caveats: NONE > > > Thanks, Rick. I'll have to deal with that last bullet during > my regular therapy sessions. > > > Mike L. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rick Cook > Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2007 11:12 AM > To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG > Subject: Re: ARSystem 7 and ITSM 7 Upgrades (UNCLASSIFIED) > > ** > There are several reasons that an organization might decide > to migrate to ITSM 7: > > * More effective ITIL Compliance. > * Functionality to allow IT to better meet the needs of the > business. > * A desire to use top-flight Service Management tools. > * A need to prove that BMC's implementations are WAY more time and > cost-effective than SAP's. > * ROI on upgrade is still worth the cost and time. > * Unresolved masochistic issues on part of current > developer/administrator. > > Obviously, some of those might be more useful than others. > ;-) I wish you well. > > Rick > > On 10/9/07, Luttmann, Michael W CTR USA <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > Classification: UNCLASSIFIED > Caveats: NONE > > Listers - I humbly beseech the intelligent masses out > there for some > quick talking points. Tomorrow, I am briefing my > chain-of-command > (paycheck signers) on our Remedy 6.3 system and current issues. > One > topic will be the "pros and cons" of upgrading ARSystem > and/or ITSM from > 6.x to 7.x. > > I've done an upgrade of the server portion before, and > I can handle > that. What I need would be: Why it is a good idea to > attempt an upgrade > of ITSM. I have the "What's New" documents, etc., but > can't find any > really good summary of what would be gained (versus > pain incurred in the > upgrade/migration process) to make it worthwhile, > especially in a > one-man shop. I just need bullet-type talking points. > > Quick replies would be appreciated. Thanks in advance. > > > Michael W. Luttmann > Fort Carson, CO > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > 719.524.0514 > > Classification: UNCLASSIFIED > Caveats: NONE > > __20060125_______________________This posting was submitted > with HTML in it___ > Classification: UNCLASSIFIED > Caveats: NONE > > ______________________________________________________________ > _________________ > 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"
