I can't wait to be rid of Windows as my workstation OS. Remedy is the only tool in my stack that has a hard requirement for Windows as the OS.
Axton Grams 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. On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 10:14 PM, Jason Miller <jason.mil...@gmail.com>wrote: > ** 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" >> > > _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"
