Hello List,
Looks like I'm not the only one with the same idea ..... :-D.
I have been working with Remedy since 1997 (yes, the previous century
...), beginning with version 2.3. Like everybody, I have seen AR System
"replaced by" ITSM/CMDB and I cried out loud ....
I have recently been working on projects more at the ITIL level, where
the supporting tool had already been chosen. This gave me the
opportunity to look at a number of other ITSM software packages, both
from the end-user point of view and under the hood (admin and
developer). As far as I am concerned, AR System is miles ahead compared
to other tools, while the ITSM/CMDB sold by BMC is "just another app on
the market".
If I may add something along the same line: applications such as ITSM8
have become too complexe (and too big) for the European market (where
companies are not as large as in the US). I know for certain 3
customers who tried to move from a previous version of Remedy ITSM to
ITSM8 and after a year of effort gave up and have now completely dropped
Remedy :-( :-(. And there are more going down that path as we speak.
If large applications make sense for large companies, it requires less
consulting time to build a "small" ITSM app than to configure a large
one, so offering AR System as a workflow engine makes a lot of sense to
me (perhaps with a basic HelpDesk Template ....).
Also, the ITIL market has offered a flourishing field to do business the
last 15-20 years or so (remember back in 1998-1999, when Remedy had a
50% market share ....). I think that the market is now mature, and all
customers have what they need, so propose AR System as a more general
workflow engine could be a step to diversification ....
Cheers,
Kaïs.
On 7/03/2015 13:57, Harsh wrote:
**
Hi All,
The decent workflow engine what we called ARS is backbone of these
suits and It was really disheartening when BMC announced ARS will not
be sold individually. I mean this a great platform where we can design
custom apps and more modular apps that's help any organization. I
still feel ARS should be sold solely, it was and it is the best
platform for creating custom applications quickly.
My vote is for naked ARS.
Regards,
Harsh
On 07-Mar-2015 12:18 am, "Andrew Hicox" <and...@hicox.com
<mailto:and...@hicox.com>> wrote:
**
AMEN!
I can't belive how short sighted bmc has become in regard to
pushing itsm/cmdb and the rest of the licensed oob apps.
Especially at the expense of pushing out custom development
(essentially not supporting it).
The true irony, in my opinion, is that in the decade+ that we've
been struggling with converting the aruser GUI paradigm to a Web
interface, the world has come full circle.
Today, it's all mobile apps, and Web interfaces are on the way
out. Static dimension, single window grid layouts are back in a
huge way.
I know what I could do with a naked arserver, and an aruser client
that works on ios and android. With a few tweaks to the GUI
elements to make them mobile friendly and client side plug-ins to
give access to the camera, accelerometer, messaging framework and
the rest ...
holy moses, I know exactly what I could do with that! Change the
world. That's what.
On Mar 6, 2015 11:42 AM, "Ray Gellenbeck"
<ray.gellenb...@redmangollc.com
<mailto:ray.gellenb...@redmangollc.com>> wrote:
Thanks. The whole point was that some people don't even KNOW
that the engine is, well, an engine unto itself. There seems
to be a trend (marketing?) to present the image that Remedy is
ONLY CMDB/ITSM.
It's always challenging to explain to customers that those are
just apps running on a (very nice) workflow engine
underneath. I'm all for canned apps where they make sense.
Ease of upgrade path, support, etc etc. However, small steps
seem to keep happening in the product evolution over the last
few versions to slowly close off the "custom-build" path and
I'd just like to ask for the server/engine to be made
available *without* the suite. As great (or not great) as
anyone might feel the suite is, there are plenty out there who
want something simpler, or more modular, or (insert complaint
here). It's part of why other products (especially those that
start with S and end with W) get a lot of migration. There
needs to be more flexibility.
It also lets you push back on customizers from a support
perspective. It won't be quite as ridiculous to have support
tell you "that's been customized, we don't support it" because
if you want custom, you should buy the naked product and build
your own.
I'm not pretending it's is any big magical answer. The
request was really just to speak to a mindset to say "quit
forcing one solution as if it is the right answer for
everyone. Bring back some choice." Now if you've pitched
"Galileo" (ITSM/CMDB v9) to customers and they don't like it,
make this Plan B, a workflow engine platform where you can
"roll your own." Plenty won't like that either, but some do
already and others will going forward, and it would be nice
not to have to install all the ITSM "spagetti" if it's not
going to be used.
Make a modular installer where base is ONLY the engine and
User/Group tables. Add some option checkboxes for Email
Engine, Mid-Tier, Preferences, and other "foundation" elements
some will still want in a custom build, BUT OTHERS WON'T.
15 up-votes so far in just a couple days. I think I hit a
nerve ;)
(/endsoapbox)
_______________________________________________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
<http://www.arslist.org>
"Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"
_ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_
_ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_
_______________________________________________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org
"Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"
