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.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: > 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 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 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 or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org attend wwrug10 www.wwrug.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"
