Re: BMC User World : Topic Was - Buy vs. Build
Just sort of curious, but has there been any 'revelations' associated with this? We kicked the topic around back in July, and then the conversation got mysteriously quiet again. Kelly Deaver wrote: ** Bing, not a session, a track! A track = 13 sessions. Part of the conference line up includes - *13 sessions specifically dedicated to AR System and it's components - What's coming, how to use them, deep dives etc. For geeks only. *13 Sessions on Atrium foundation applications CMDB, AIE, What's coming in the next version... Hint some REALLY cool new tools and products. (Remember RemedyWeb (now mid-tier), Assignment Engine and Approval Server began life as separate products before they became part of what is included in AR System. Learn what the future might hold in the area of an extended AR System (Legal notice - no forward looking promises to be inferred) *13 more sessions for Atrium Applications - see list below *26 Sessions on ITSM *A track on Best Practices - many around Remedy I've seen the topics being worked on. Believe me, the majority of the sessions are around AR System and Remedy applications, next most common are BMC products that integrate with Remedy products (aren't you all being asked to do these integrations these days). People! Remedy product line including AR System is not dead it has become the heart and sole of BMC! If you look at a diagram of how all the products within BMC are related to each other Atrium is the middle circle that everyone else integrates to or builds upon. Atrium includes - -AR System (In the very middle of the circle/BMC Universe) -CMDB - Built on AR System -DSL - Built on AR System -Service Level Management - Built on AR System -Run Book Automation - most popular adapter - AR System connector -Discovery - Ships with AR System and CMDB to hold the data they discover -Dashboards - Reports on SD, AM, CM, SLM, SRM and Service Impact Management - looks mostly like talking to Remedy Apps to me! -Analytics - Reports on SD, AM, CM, SRM, and CMDB - ALL Remedy products. You owe it to yourself to come to this conference and see for yourself how much BMC has invested in making AR System THE work flow engine. We didn't go off and invest all that money to build Developer Studio just so our engineers could use it to build our own applications. BMC wants it to be the work flow engine that the world uses. I give David Easter great credit for taking AR System to the next level. AR System Developers - You have a skill that will be needed for years to come. It was a smart choice to learn it. Now come to the conference and learn more! Kelly Deaver mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Yes, I work for BMC. This post reflects the opinions of the poster and not the offical opinion of BMC) Original Message Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build From: Bradford Bingel Date: Fri, July 25, 2008 11:42 pm To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG I tip my hat to BMC/Remedy for holding a unique session dedicated solely to the AR System . . . Now, what about those complimentary developer kits? -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://email.secureserver.net/compose.php#Compose] On Behalf Of Easter, David Sent: Friday, July 25, 2008 8:15 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://email.secureserver.net/compose.php#Compose Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build There is an entire track at UserWorld dedicated to just AR System: http://www.bmc.com/userworld/miami/agenda/Tracks_and_Sessions.htmlhttp://www.bmc.com/userworld/miami/agenda/Tracks_and_Sessions.html BMC Atrium : Enabling Technologies BMC Remedy AR System - this track will take you beyond the vast, out-of-the-box functionality and enable you to leverage your existing BMC Remedy Action Request System investment in a way that you have not know before. Explore detailed sessions on the latest technology offered in BMC Remedy Action Request System,[...] -David J. Easter Sr. Product Manager, Solution Strategy and Development 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. -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://email.secureserver.net/compose.php#Compose] On Behalf Of Davis, David CTR NAVSURFWARCENDIV Crane, Code 0552 Sent: Friday, July 25, 2008 6:45 AM
Re: Buy vs. Build
I don't know if this is related to what we all have been complaining about, but BMC's stock price just took a dive last Friday. They lost about 7% of their stock price in a single day. I haven't investigated why, but it isn't a good thing. If their sales are down, or if ITSM is getting bad press, they will have to make some major changes in direction. -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Axton Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2008 8:06 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build That initially means laying off and then eventually hiring people. This has some implications in terms of active development in the product lines and other things. Also, Microsoft has deep pockets. http://www.gengaming.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=608mode=threaded Can BMC weather the storm? Is bankruptcy an option? Seems like Microsoft got into some hot water over its licensing practices. Is this a healthy image or a good place to be in? http://www.aaxnet.com/topics/slicense.html Seems like there were problems as well: http://news.cnet.com/Vista-views-Microsofts-license-changes/2009-1016_3-6126885.html Not advocating anything, just running the cards of the unspoken sides. Much of everything is in a trap, to varying degrees, just trying to drop all premonitions and have an open view of all sides. Axton Grams On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 4:49 PM, Kaiser Norm E CIV USAF 96 CS/SCCE [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes, of course. I already have considered existing forces. Think about it: BMC experiences a drop in revenue from support and a drop in revenue in licensing initially. It then rebounds by VOLUME sales of the ARS as a RAD toolset. Think about it: MICROSOFT DOES IT! Buy a copy of Visual Studio and it comes with a license key in the manual. You can't install the software without the license key. Bingo! Licensing problem (mostly) solved. Ever watch Gordon Ramsay's Kitchen Nightmares? Last night's episode is a perfect example. Gordon shows up to a restaurant that does *some* business but is, by no means, a booming business. Gordon tells the owner, You need to completely revamp your menu. The owner resists. No, he says, I don't want to lose my EXISTING customer base by changing. Gordon says, Well then you'll never be successful. The moral of the story? Oftentimes you have to jettison an existing mildly profitable (but declining) business model and swallow some losses in order to go on to big time success. -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Axton Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2008 3:32 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build Simple answer is affordable for the customer does not necessarily mean profitable for the proprietor. I'm not saying it can't be profitable, but there is a lot to account for in developing and proposing a business model that is so drastically different than what BMC has provided in the past. If such a model were developed, the revenue provided by the new model would have to exceed that of the current model. Introduction of a new business model would impact the existing pricing model, so that has to be taken into account in determining the overall viability of a different business model. Support services entail things that BMC can not avoid being a part of: - product maintenance - product licensing With the proposed model you have above, I could probably drop tens of thousands of dollars of my current annual support costs. More work, reduced revenue... The counter to the above statement is that the product is no longer a viable option for it's customers and sales plummet. This will force an adjustment to the pricing model that makes the product marketable. You have to consider the existing forces that are already in play. Axton Grams On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 3:00 PM, Kaiser Norm E CIV USAF 96 CS/SCCE [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes, of course Remedy is called a Help Desk application BUT THAT'S WRONG! That's part of my point. It's NOT just a Help Desk application. It's an application development platform that just *happens* to commonly run Help Desk apps because that's the niche it fell into. My point is, to survive, it needs to break that paradigm. And the best way is to get people writing apps that are not just Help Desk. Need to track monthly sales? Use Remedy. Need a visitor sign-in log? Use Remedy. Need a company web page? Use Remedy. Need an equipment checkout form? Use Remedy. Need to track pending orders? Use Remedy. Need a company-wide list of handy telephone numbers? Use Remedy. Need to track employee training? Use Remedy. That's the way the marketing should be, in my opinion, but the problem is, the expensive licensing makes all of that impractical. Why make your visitor sign-in log in Remedy and burn up costly user licenses
Re: Buy vs. Build
** Please do investigate. Sales were up but the one time cost of acquiring Bladelogic took a big hit on the quarter - http://www.bmc.com/USA/News/attachments/BMC_Q1FY09_Earnings.pdf http://www.marketintelligencecenter.com/articles/650370 Kelly Deaver [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Yes, I work for BMC. This post reflects the opinions of the poster and not the offical opinion of BMC) Original Message Subject: Re: Buy vs. BuildFrom: "Pierson, Shawn" <SHAWN.PIERSON@SUG.COMDate: Mon, July 28, 2008 7:49 amTo: arslist@ARSLIST.ORGI don't know if this is related to what we all have been complaining about, but BMC's stock price just took a dive last Friday. They lost about 7% of their stock price in a single day. I haven't investigated why, but it isn't a good thing. If their sales are down, or if ITSM is getting bad press, they will have to make some major changes in direction.-Original Message-From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of AxtonSent: Wednesday, July 23, 2008 8:06 PMTo: arslist@ARSLIST.ORGSubject: Re: Buy vs. BuildThat initially means laying off and then eventually hiring people.This has some implications in terms of active development in theproduct lines and other things. Also, Microsoft has deep pockets.http://www.gengaming.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=608mode=threadedCan BMC weather the storm? Is bankruptcy an option?Seems like Microsoft got into some hot water over its licensingpractices. Is this a healthy image or a good place to be in?http://www.aaxnet.com/topics/slicense.htmlSeems like there were problems as well:http://news.cnet.com/Vista-views-Microsofts-license-changes/2009-1016_3-6126885.htmlNot advocating anything, just running the cards of the unspoken sides.Much of everything is in a trap, to varying degrees, just trying todrop all premonitions and have an open view of all sides.Axton GramsOn Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 4:49 PM, Kaiser Norm E CIV USAF 96 CS/SCCEnorm.kaiser@eglin.af.mil wrote: Yes, of course. I already have considered existing forces. Think about it: BMC experiences a drop in revenue from support and a drop in revenue in licensing initially. It then rebounds by VOLUME sales of the ARS as a RAD toolset. Think about it: MICROSOFT DOES IT! Buy a copy of Visual Studio and it comes with a license key in the manual. You can't install the software without the license key. Bingo! Licensing problem (mostly) solved. Ever watch Gordon Ramsay's Kitchen Nightmares? Last night's episode is a perfect example. Gordon shows up to a restaurant that does *some* business but is, by no means, a booming business. Gordon tells the owner, "You need to completely revamp your menu." The owner resists. "No," he says, "I don't want to lose my EXISTING customer base by changing." Gordon says, "Well then you'll never be successful." The moral of the story? Oftentimes you have to jettison an existing mildly profitable (but declining) business model and swallow some losses in order to go on to big time success. -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Axton Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2008 3:32 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build Simple answer is "affordable for the customer does not necessarily mean profitable for the proprietor." I'm not saying it can't be profitable, but there is a lot to account for in developing and proposing a business model that is so drastically different than what BMC has provided in the past. If such a model were developed, the revenue provided by the new model would have to exceed that of the current model. Introduction of a new business model would impact the existing pricing model, so that has to be taken into account in determining the overall viability of a different business model. Support services entail things that BMC can not avoid being a part of: - product maintenance - product licensing With the proposed model you have above, I could probably drop tens of thousands of dollars of my current annual support costs. More work, reduced revenue... The counter to the above statement is that the product is no longer a viable option for it's customers and sales plummet. This will force an adjustment to the pricing model that makes the product marketable. You have to consider the existing forces that are already in play. Axton Grams On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 3:00 PM, Kaiser Norm E CIV USAF 96 CS/SCCE norm.kaiser@eglin.af.mil wrote: Yes, of course Remedy is called a "Help Desk application" BUT THAT'S WRONG! That's part of my point. It's NOT just a Help Desk application. It's an application development platform that just *happens* to commonly run Help Desk apps because that's the niche it fell into. My point is, to survive, it needs to break that paradigm. And the best way is to get people writing apps that are not just Help Desk. Need to trac
Re: BMC User World : Topic Was - Buy vs. Build
...Bing, not a session, a track! A track = 13 sessions... Wonderful. That's a great thing. Well done. That's not the answer to his question, however. His question was: Now, what about those complimentary developer kits? It seems like a fairly straight forward question to me, yet I don't believe that there has ever been a definite answer. Sure, I've seen a bit here and there as others have tried to wrestle with it, but I've don't believe that I've ever seen something right from the powers that be. If I am mistaken, please point me to the post (or resend the private message) and I will hang my head low, shrug my shoulders, sigh deeply and go off into the corner to lie down by my dish. ...how much BMC has invested in making AR System THE work flow engine... Wonderful! Now, if they could only cut the license price and yearly support renewal to ease adoption of the application suite by new customers, we'd be making even more progress. Kelly Deaver wrote: ** Bing, not a session, a track! A track = 13 sessions. Part of the conference line up includes - *13 sessions specifically dedicated to AR System and it's components - What's coming, how to use them, deep dives etc. For geeks only. *13 Sessions on Atrium foundation applications CMDB, AIE, What's coming in the next version... Hint some REALLY cool new tools and products. (Remember RemedyWeb (now mid-tier), Assignment Engine and Approval Server began life as separate products before they became part of what is included in AR System. Learn what the future might hold in the area of an extended AR System (Legal notice - no forward looking promises to be inferred) *13 more sessions for Atrium Applications - see list below *26 Sessions on ITSM *A track on Best Practices - many around Remedy I've seen the topics being worked on. Believe me, the majority of the sessions are around AR System and Remedy applications, next most common are BMC products that integrate with Remedy products (aren't you all being asked to do these integrations these days). People! Remedy product line including AR System is not dead it has become the heart and sole of BMC! If you look at a diagram of how all the products within BMC are related to each other Atrium is the middle circle that everyone else integrates to or builds upon. Atrium includes - -AR System (In the very middle of the circle/BMC Universe) -CMDB - Built on AR System -DSL - Built on AR System -Service Level Management - Built on AR System -Run Book Automation - most popular adapter - AR System connector -Discovery - Ships with AR System and CMDB to hold the data they discover -Dashboards - Reports on SD, AM, CM, SLM, SRM and Service Impact Management - looks mostly like talking to Remedy Apps to me! -Analytics - Reports on SD, AM, CM, SRM, and CMDB - ALL Remedy products. You owe it to yourself to come to this conference and see for yourself how much BMC has invested in making AR System THE work flow engine. We didn't go off and invest all that money to build Developer Studio just so our engineers could use it to build our own applications. BMC wants it to be the work flow engine that the world uses. I give David Easter great credit for taking AR System to the next level. AR System Developers - You have a skill that will be needed for years to come. It was a smart choice to learn it. Now come to the conference and learn more! Kelly Deaver mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Yes, I work for BMC. This post reflects the opinions of the poster and not the offical opinion of BMC) Original Message Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build From: Bradford Bingel Date: Fri, July 25, 2008 11:42 pm To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG I tip my hat to BMC/Remedy for holding a unique session dedicated solely to the AR System . . . Now, what about those complimentary developer kits? -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://email.secureserver.net/compose.php#Compose] On Behalf Of Easter, David Sent: Friday, July 25, 2008 8:15 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://email.secureserver.net/compose.php#Compose Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build There is an entire track at UserWorld dedicated to just AR System: http://www.bmc.com/userworld/miami/agenda/Tracks_and_Sessions.htmlhttp://www.bmc.com/userworld/miami/agenda/Tracks_and_Sessions.html BMC Atrium : Enabling Technologies BMC Remedy AR System - this track will take you beyond the vast, out-of-the-box functionality and enable you to leverage your existing BMC Remedy Action Request System investment in a way that you have not know before. Explore detailed sessions on the latest technology offered in BMC Remedy
BMC User World : Topic Was - Buy vs. Build
** Bing, not a session, a track! A track = 13 sessions. Part of the conference line up includes - *13 sessionsspecifically dedicated to AR System and it's components - What's coming, how to use them, deep dives etc. For geeks only. *13 Sessions on Atrium foundation applications CMDB, AIE, What's coming in the next version... Hint some REALLY cool new tools and products. (RememberRemedyWeb (now mid-tier), Assignment Engine and Approval Server began life as separate products before they became part of what is included in AR System. Learn what the futuremight hold in the area of an extended AR System (Legal notice - no forward looking promises to be inferred) *13 more sessions for Atrium Applications - see list below *26 Sessions on ITSM *A track on Best Practices - many around Remedy I've seen the topics being worked on. Believe me, the majority of the sessions are around AR System and Remedy applications, next most common are BMC products that integrate with Remedy products (aren't you all being asked to do these integrations these days). People! Remedy product line including AR Systemis not dead it has become the heart and sole of BMC! If you look at a diagram of how all the products within BMC are related to each other Atrium is the middle circle that everyone else integrates to or builds upon. Atrium includes - -AR System (In the very middle of the circle/BMC Universe) -CMDB -Built on AR System -DSL - Built on AR System -Service Level Management - Built on AR System -Run Book Automation - most popular adapter - AR System connector -Discovery - Ships with AR System and CMDB to hold the data they discover -Dashboards - Reports on SD, AM, CM, SLM, SRM and Service Impact Management - looks mostly like talking to Remedy Apps to me! -Analytics - Reports on SD, AM, CM, SRM, and CMDB - ALL Remedy products. You owe it to yourself to come to this conference and see for yourself how much BMC has invested in making AR System THE work flow engine. We didn't go off and invest all that money to build Developer Studio just so our engineers could useit to build our own applications.BMC wants it to be the work flow engine that the world uses.I giveDavid Easter great credit for taking AR System to the next level. AR System Developers - You have a skill that will be needed for years to come. It was a smart choice to learn it. Now come to the conference and learn more! Kelly Deaver [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Yes, I work for BMC. This post reflects the opinions of the poster and not the offical opinion of BMC) Original Message Subject: Re: Buy vs. BuildFrom: Bradford Bingel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Date: Fri, July 25, 2008 11:42 pmTo: arslist@ARSLIST.ORGI tip my hat to BMC/Remedy for holding a unique session dedicated solely tothe AR System . . .Now, what about those complimentary developer kits?-Original Message-From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Easter, DavidSent: Friday, July 25, 2008 8:15 AMTo: arslist@ARSLIST.ORGSubject: Re: Buy vs. BuildThere is an entire track at UserWorld dedicated to just AR System:http://www.bmc.com/userworld/miami/agenda/Tracks_and_Sessions.html"BMC Atrium : Enabling Technologies BMC Remedy AR System - this trackwill take you beyond the vast, out-of-the-box functionality and enable youto leverage your existing BMC Remedy Action Request System investment in away that you have not know before.Explore detailed sessions on the latest technology offered in BMC RemedyAction Request System,[...]" -David J. EasterSr. Product Manager, Solution Strategy and Development BMC Software, Inc.The opinions, statements, and/or suggested courses of action expressed inthis E-mail do not necessarily reflect those of BMC Software, Inc.My voluntary participation in this forum is not intended to convey a role asa spokesperson, liaison or public relations representative for BMC Software,Inc.-Original Message-From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Davis, David CTR NAVSURFWARCENDIVCrane, Code 0552Sent: Friday, July 25, 2008 6:45 AMTo: arslist@ARSLIST.ORGSubject: Re: Buy vs. BuildWhen you look at BMC User World Sessions schedule this year, it is prettyobvious what the direction of ARS is as far as BMC Software is concerned. Nomention of the ARS product only OOTB products listed.I was planning to go but NOW I don't see the value in going and am findingit VERY hard to justify the trip to management.Regards,Dave Davis-Original Message-From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList)[mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Howard RichterSent: Thursday, July 24, 2008 16:40To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORGSubject: Re: Buy vs. Build**This is starting to sound like what we were talking about in 2001 and 2002,the end of Remedy as we know it.hbrOn 7/24/08, Susan Palmer suzanpalmer@gmail.com wrote: ** Riley,Are you a Remedy developer? Sus
Re: Buy vs. Build
When you look at BMC User World Sessions schedule this year, it is pretty obvious what the direction of ARS is as far as BMC Software is concerned. No mention of the ARS product only OOTB products listed. I was planning to go but NOW I don't see the value in going and am finding it VERY hard to justify the trip to management. Regards, Dave Davis -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Howard Richter Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2008 16:40 To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build ** This is starting to sound like what we were talking about in 2001 and 2002, the end of Remedy as we know it. hbr On 7/24/08, Susan Palmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ** Riley, Are you a Remedy developer? Susan On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 11:58 AM, Riley, Russel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why buy AR Server for 25k when you can get a Visual Studio Express edition, and SQL Server Express and make better apps? For Free or at least not for 25k? Who uses Access anymore nowadays? -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Axton Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2008 8:06 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build That initially means laying off and then eventually hiring people. This has some implications in terms of active development in the product lines and other things. Also, Microsoft has deep pockets. http://www.gengaming.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=608mode=threaded Can BMC weather the storm? Is bankruptcy an option? Seems like Microsoft got into some hot water over its licensing practices. Is this a healthy image or a good place to be in? http://www.aaxnet.com/topics/slicense.html Seems like there were problems as well: http://news.cnet.com/Vista-views-Microsofts-license-changes/2009-1016_3- 6126885.html Not advocating anything, just running the cards of the unspoken sides. Much of everything is in a trap, to varying degrees, just trying to drop all premonitions and have an open view of all sides. Axton Grams On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 4:49 PM, Kaiser Norm E CIV USAF 96 CS/SCCE [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes, of course. I already have considered existing forces. Think about it: BMC experiences a drop in revenue from support and a drop in revenue in licensing initially. It then rebounds by VOLUME sales of the ARS as a RAD toolset. Think about it: MICROSOFT DOES IT! Buy a copy of Visual Studio and it comes with a license key in the manual. You can't install the software without the license key. Bingo! Licensing problem (mostly) solved. Ever watch Gordon Ramsay's Kitchen Nightmares? Last night's episode is a perfect example. Gordon shows up to a restaurant that does *some* business but is, by no means, a booming business. Gordon tells the owner, You need to completely revamp your menu. The owner resists. No, he says, I don't want to lose my EXISTING customer base by changing. Gordon says, Well then you'll never be successful. The moral of the story? Oftentimes you have to jettison an existing mildly profitable (but declining) business model and swallow some losses in order to go on to big time success. -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) __Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com http://www.rmsportal.com/ ARSlist: Where the Answers Are html___ -- Howard Richter Red Hat Certified Technician CompTIA Linux+ Certified ITIL Foundation Certified E-Mail = [EMAIL PROTECTED] LinkedIn Profile = http://www.linkedin.com/in/hbr4270 __Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are html___ ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are
Re: Buy vs. Build
There is an entire track at UserWorld dedicated to just AR System: http://www.bmc.com/userworld/miami/agenda/Tracks_and_Sessions.html BMC Atrium : Enabling Technologies BMC Remedy AR System - this track will take you beyond the vast, out-of-the-box functionality and enable you to leverage your existing BMC Remedy Action Request System investment in a way that you have not know before. Explore detailed sessions on the latest technology offered in BMC Remedy Action Request System,[...] -David J. Easter Sr. Product Manager, Solution Strategy and Development 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. -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Davis, David CTR NAVSURFWARCENDIV Crane, Code 0552 Sent: Friday, July 25, 2008 6:45 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build When you look at BMC User World Sessions schedule this year, it is pretty obvious what the direction of ARS is as far as BMC Software is concerned. No mention of the ARS product only OOTB products listed. I was planning to go but NOW I don't see the value in going and am finding it VERY hard to justify the trip to management. Regards, Dave Davis -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Howard Richter Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2008 16:40 To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build ** This is starting to sound like what we were talking about in 2001 and 2002, the end of Remedy as we know it. hbr On 7/24/08, Susan Palmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ** Riley, Are you a Remedy developer? Susan On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 11:58 AM, Riley, Russel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why buy AR Server for 25k when you can get a Visual Studio Express edition, and SQL Server Express and make better apps? For Free or at least not for 25k? Who uses Access anymore nowadays? -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Axton Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2008 8:06 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build That initially means laying off and then eventually hiring people. This has some implications in terms of active development in the product lines and other things. Also, Microsoft has deep pockets. http://www.gengaming.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=608mode=threaded Can BMC weather the storm? Is bankruptcy an option? Seems like Microsoft got into some hot water over its licensing practices. Is this a healthy image or a good place to be in? http://www.aaxnet.com/topics/slicense.html Seems like there were problems as well: http://news.cnet.com/Vista-views-Microsofts-license-changes/2009-1016_3- 6126885.html Not advocating anything, just running the cards of the unspoken sides. Much of everything is in a trap, to varying degrees, just trying to drop all premonitions and have an open view of all sides. Axton Grams On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 4:49 PM, Kaiser Norm E CIV USAF 96 CS/SCCE [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes, of course. I already have considered existing forces. Think about it: BMC experiences a drop in revenue from support and a drop in revenue in licensing initially. It then rebounds by VOLUME sales of the ARS as a RAD toolset. Think about it: MICROSOFT DOES IT! Buy a copy of Visual Studio and it comes with a license key in the manual. You can't install the software without the license key. Bingo! Licensing problem (mostly) solved. Ever watch Gordon Ramsay's Kitchen Nightmares? Last night's episode is a perfect example. Gordon shows up to a restaurant that does *some* business but is, by no means, a booming business. Gordon tells the owner, You need to completely revamp your menu. The owner resists. No, he says, I don't want to lose my EXISTING customer base
Re: Buy vs. Build
I tip my hat to BMC/Remedy for holding a unique session dedicated solely to the AR System . . . Now, what about those complimentary developer kits? -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Easter, David Sent: Friday, July 25, 2008 8:15 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build There is an entire track at UserWorld dedicated to just AR System: http://www.bmc.com/userworld/miami/agenda/Tracks_and_Sessions.html BMC Atrium : Enabling Technologies BMC Remedy AR System - this track will take you beyond the vast, out-of-the-box functionality and enable you to leverage your existing BMC Remedy Action Request System investment in a way that you have not know before. Explore detailed sessions on the latest technology offered in BMC Remedy Action Request System,[...] -David J. Easter Sr. Product Manager, Solution Strategy and Development 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. -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Davis, David CTR NAVSURFWARCENDIV Crane, Code 0552 Sent: Friday, July 25, 2008 6:45 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build When you look at BMC User World Sessions schedule this year, it is pretty obvious what the direction of ARS is as far as BMC Software is concerned. No mention of the ARS product only OOTB products listed. I was planning to go but NOW I don't see the value in going and am finding it VERY hard to justify the trip to management. Regards, Dave Davis -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Howard Richter Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2008 16:40 To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build ** This is starting to sound like what we were talking about in 2001 and 2002, the end of Remedy as we know it. hbr On 7/24/08, Susan Palmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ** Riley, Are you a Remedy developer? Susan On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 11:58 AM, Riley, Russel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why buy AR Server for 25k when you can get a Visual Studio Express edition, and SQL Server Express and make better apps? For Free or at least not for 25k? Who uses Access anymore nowadays? -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Axton Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2008 8:06 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build That initially means laying off and then eventually hiring people. This has some implications in terms of active development in the product lines and other things. Also, Microsoft has deep pockets. http://www.gengaming.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=608mode=threaded Can BMC weather the storm? Is bankruptcy an option? Seems like Microsoft got into some hot water over its licensing practices. Is this a healthy image or a good place to be in? http://www.aaxnet.com/topics/slicense.html Seems like there were problems as well: http://news.cnet.com/Vista-views-Microsofts-license-changes/2009-1016_3- 6126885.html Not advocating anything, just running the cards of the unspoken sides. Much of everything is in a trap, to varying degrees, just trying to drop all premonitions and have an open view of all sides. Axton Grams On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 4:49 PM, Kaiser Norm E CIV USAF 96 CS/SCCE [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes, of course. I already have considered existing forces. Think about it: BMC experiences a drop in revenue from support and a drop in revenue in licensing initially. It then rebounds by VOLUME sales of the ARS as a RAD toolset. Think about it: MICROSOFT DOES IT! Buy a copy of Visual Studio and it comes with a license key in the manual. You can't install the software without the license key. Bingo! Licensing problem (mostly) solved. Ever watch Gordon Ramsay's Kitchen
Pros and Cons of ARS development - was Buy vs. Build
I want to change the topic slightly and go off on a tangent that keeps coming up repeatedly. That topic is of the power of ARS for development. While I agree that ARS is great, I would have to qualify that to say that if you want to build an application that is within its capabilities, it is great. However, having worked with Visual Basic, PHP, Perl, and a few other things, I see plenty of limitations in ARS as a development tool. For example, there is no such thing as a variable in ARS. Yes, you can add a field to a form, even a Display Only field, but you can't instantiate fields during runtime on the fly. You have to purposely create fields for usage later on, and this limitation causes us to often re-use certain fields as generic variables, which can make troubleshooting difficult sometimes. I've worked on a system that someone else built that I had to troubleshoot something on a field that had many different Set Fields actions occurring at different points with different tables. It was definitely possible, but since ARS is missing another major capability that most development platforms have. ARS doesn't have a way to step through code. We can't start up processing on a form, and pause it to see what is going on. All we can do is 1) go through log files and recreate the workflow in our minds, or 2) pop up messages after each piece of workflow we want to troubleshoot. If there was a way to step through each piece of workflow that is running, that would be a tremendous help to us. Another issue that is more of a matter of taste I guess, is the inability to generate flat source-code. Yes, I have learned to read .def files to some extent, but it should be easier to read. Instead of values like 4\1\1\179\2\4\32\Change Level IA - Implementation\ in workflow, the definition files should display what we see in the Admin tool. These are the somewhat major problems I have with ARS for development. If you want to build an application with a database back end, a web interface, and have most of the standard controls (save, search, displaying tables, etc) just work automatically, ARS is a great too. There isn't anything out there that I've worked with which can top ARS development in terms of speed. In some cases, you do have to make sacrifices for more complex functionality, but it's still a great development platform for what it does. I just wish BMC would change the things I mentioned above, plus a few other minor ones (I'd like to be able to use arrays if they implement variables, I'd like to be able to have workflow triggered off of typing in specific fields, not just pressing enter and gain/lose focus, etc.) What are your thoughts about the pros and cons of ARS as a development tool? Perhaps we can put all of our heads together and go back to BMC and tell them what we want, plus come up with enough positive things about it to show our clients and employers that ARS is a great development tool. Shawn Pierson 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 Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are
Re: Pros and Cons of ARS development - was Buy vs. Build
Pros and Cons of ARS development Being relatively new to ARS development, my fresh eyes definitely agree what I think you're saying: debugging workflow is very awkward. For a tool that calls itself a development platform, this is not a minor drag but a gaping hole. And I too have stared in disbelief at the .def files... Remedy could be greatly improved if it could better interconnect with other tools. Most Remedy developers have some experience with shell, VB, Perl, and other utilities. And some have experience with programming languages like Java and C. Being able to use these utilities or languages with Remedy would be great. Remedy seems to be too much of a stand-alone development environment. Am I mistaken...? RELATED TO THIS TOPIC is that we have found it nearly impossible to upgrade Remedy after years and years of what I call casual customizations. A casual customization is something small, like adding a field to the HelpDesk form. (Casual customizations are contrasted to building an Application in Remedy -- a full-blown project with its own forms.) I DON'T blame Remedy for this -- it's clearly a hole that we have dug ourselves into. But I have come to believe that Remedy's strength (ease of casual customization) is its greatest flaw when it is time to upgrade. Unfortunately, it is nearly impossible to convince users that after the upgrade they will loose their custom fields on the HelpDesk form. But again, this problem was created by us, not by Remedy per se. (now I feel better...) John -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Pierson, Shawn Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2008 9:00 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Pros and Cons of ARS development - was Buy vs. Build I want to change the topic slightly and go off on a tangent that keeps coming up repeatedly. That topic is of the power of ARS for development. While I agree that ARS is great, I would have to qualify that to say that if you want to build an application that is within its capabilities, it is great. However, having worked with Visual Basic, PHP, Perl, and a few other things, I see plenty of limitations in ARS as a development tool. For example, there is no such thing as a variable in ARS. Yes, you can add a field to a form, even a Display Only field, but you can't instantiate fields during runtime on the fly. You have to purposely create fields for usage later on, and this limitation causes us to often re-use certain fields as generic variables, which can make troubleshooting difficult sometimes. I've worked on a system that someone else built that I had to troubleshoot something on a field that had many different Set Fields actions occurring at different points with different tables. It was definitely possible, but since ARS is missing another major capability that most development platforms have. ARS doesn't have a way to step through code. We can't start up processing on a form, and pause it to see what is going on. All we can do is 1) go through log files and recreate the workflow in our minds, or 2) pop up messages after each piece of workflow we want to troubleshoot. If there was a way to step through each piece of workflow that is running, that would be a tremendous help to us. Another issue that is more of a matter of taste I guess, is the inability to generate flat source-code. Yes, I have learned to read .def files to some extent, but it should be easier to read. Instead of values like 4\1\1\179\2\4\32\Change Level IA - Implementation\ in workflow, the definition files should display what we see in the Admin tool. These are the somewhat major problems I have with ARS for development. If you want to build an application with a database back end, a web interface, and have most of the standard controls (save, search, displaying tables, etc) just work automatically, ARS is a great too. There isn't anything out there that I've worked with which can top ARS development in terms of speed. In some cases, you do have to make sacrifices for more complex functionality, but it's still a great development platform for what it does. I just wish BMC would change the things I mentioned above, plus a few other minor ones (I'd like to be able to use arrays if they implement variables, I'd like to be able to have workflow triggered off of typing in specific fields, not just pressing enter and gain/lose focus, etc.) What are your thoughts about the pros and cons of ARS as a development tool? Perhaps we can put all of our heads together and go back to BMC and tell them what we want, plus come up with enough positive things about it to show our clients and employers that ARS is a great development tool. Shawn Pierson Private and confidential as detailed here: http://www.sug.com/disclaimers/default.htm#Mail . If you cannot access the link, please e-mail sender
Re: Pros and Cons of ARS development - was Buy vs. Build
A couple of points... Variables: I have never had a problem with the concept of Display Only fields as variables. I have worked on VB and C applications that had so many variables defined you needed a spreadsheet to keep track of what was done where. I have worked with Remedy applications with so many D/O fields you got lost. I have worked on other Remedy applications with only a few D/O fields that were reused. It all comes down to design. You can always tell a good well thought out design against something just slapped together. Debugging: In the 7.5 beta announcement David listed A text based debugger for server side workflow Source Code: It could be handy at times, but not having it actually worked in my favor one time. I had a manager (who didn't even use the system) that wanted to check my code. I gave him a .def file to shut him up (He wasn't my manager). Fred -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Pierson, Shawn Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2008 8:00 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Pros and Cons of ARS development - was Buy vs. Build I want to change the topic slightly and go off on a tangent that keeps coming up repeatedly. That topic is of the power of ARS for development. While I agree that ARS is great, I would have to qualify that to say that if you want to build an application that is within its capabilities, it is great. However, having worked with Visual Basic, PHP, Perl, and a few other things, I see plenty of limitations in ARS as a development tool. For example, there is no such thing as a variable in ARS. Yes, you can add a field to a form, even a Display Only field, but you can't instantiate fields during runtime on the fly. You have to purposely create fields for usage later on, and this limitation causes us to often re-use certain fields as generic variables, which can make troubleshooting difficult sometimes. I've worked on a system that someone else built that I had to troubleshoot something on a field that had many different Set Fields actions occurring at different points with different tables. It was definitely possible, but since ARS is missing another major capability that most development platforms have. ARS doesn't have a way to step through code. We can't start up processing on a form, and pause it to see what is going on. All we can do is 1) go through log files and recreate the workflow in our minds, or 2) pop up messages after each piece of workflow we want to troubleshoot. If there was a way to step through each piece of workflow that is running, that would be a tremendous help to us. Another issue that is more of a matter of taste I guess, is the inability to generate flat source-code. Yes, I have learned to read .def files to some extent, but it should be easier to read. Instead of values like 4\1\1\179\2\4\32\Change Level IA - Implementation\ in workflow, the definition files should display what we see in the Admin tool. These are the somewhat major problems I have with ARS for development. If you want to build an application with a database back end, a web interface, and have most of the standard controls (save, search, displaying tables, etc) just work automatically, ARS is a great too. There isn't anything out there that I've worked with which can top ARS development in terms of speed. In some cases, you do have to make sacrifices for more complex functionality, but it's still a great development platform for what it does. I just wish BMC would change the things I mentioned above, plus a few other minor ones (I'd like to be able to use arrays if they implement variables, I'd like to be able to have workflow triggered off of typing in specific fields, not just pressing enter and gain/lose focus, etc.) What are your thoughts about the pros and cons of ARS as a development tool? Perhaps we can put all of our heads together and go back to BMC and tell them what we want, plus come up with enough positive things about it to show our clients and employers that ARS is a great development tool. Shawn Pierson ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are
Re: Pros and Cons of ARS development - was Buy vs. Build
Shawn, I have thought _a lot_ about how to describe ARS over the last 10 years. I find it interesting that lots of programmers can not even agree on what generation of a language (and in some cases if ARS is a language at all) that ARS is. I have also observed that most business people have a hard time understanding how to manage it because it does not fit into most of their existing models either. Ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-generation_programming_language or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second-generation_programming_language or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third-generation_programming_language or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth-generation_programming_language or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth-generation_programming_language ( Or any other sites/books to discuss the fine technical distinctions between those groupings of computer programming languages that you prefer to site.) In fact most of these discussions, in the past, have even failed to try to describe the type or language that ARS is. (Ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_language) For example... Can we try to establish if ARS is compiled, interpreted, or maybe does it use a byte code model? Is ARS a Visual programming language? (Ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visual_programming_language) Is ARS best described as a Domain-specific language? ( If so what domain?) ( Ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domain-Specific_Modeling A very interesting read ... and comparison IMO.) However, at the end of the analysis... these are just categorizations of the language and likely do not really identify the true strengths or weaknesses of the language itself. I will actually suggest that as the languages become more and more abstract, the strengths will have less to do with the language and more to do with the programmer's knowledge of the problem. ( Which is, again IMO, the fundamental problem with fifth generation languages, that will take the longest to solve.) And I think this trait is what makes ARS a challenging tool for programmer and business person a like. While I think an open and genuine discussion of pros and cons are good for a community to have (many times over), the point is to formulate how those suggested changes will benefit BMC. After all, they use the platform to make money. So whatever they are going to change needs to show ROI to them and not necessarily the customer. Hopefully the customer will benefit in some way, but it may be less financial and more business process or standardization centric than financial bottom line too. BTW: I am going to be proposing a session at BUW to talk about ARS as a programming language. If it is selected then I hope to see all of ARSList members there. That would be a sight to see. :) -- Carey Matthew Black Remedy Skilled Professional (RSP) ARS = Action Request System(Remedy) Love, then teach Solution = People + Process + Tools Fast, Accurate, Cheap Pick two. On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 9:00 AM, Pierson, Shawn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I want to change the topic slightly and go off on a tangent that keeps coming up repeatedly. That topic is of the power of ARS for development. While I agree that ARS is great, I would have to qualify that to say that if you want to build an application that is within its capabilities, it is great. However, having worked with Visual Basic, PHP, Perl, and a few other things, I see plenty of limitations in ARS as a development tool. For example, there is no such thing as a variable in ARS. Yes, you can add a field to a form, even a Display Only field, but you can't instantiate fields during runtime on the fly. You have to purposely create fields for usage later on, and this limitation causes us to often re-use certain fields as generic variables, which can make troubleshooting difficult sometimes. I've worked on a system that someone else built that I had to troubleshoot something on a field that had many different Set Fields actions occurring at different points with different tables. It was definitely possible, but since ARS is missing another major capability that most development platforms have. ARS doesn't have a way to step through code. We can't start up processing on a form, and pause it to see what is going on. All we can do is 1) go through log files and recreate the workflow in our minds, or 2) pop up messages after each piece of workflow we want to troubleshoot. If there was a way to step through each piece of workflow that is running, that would be a tremendous help to us. Another issue that is more of a matter of taste I guess, is the inability to generate flat source-code. Yes, I have learned to read .def files to some extent, but it should be easier to read. Instead of values like 4\1\1\179\2\4\32\Change Level IA - Implementation\ in workflow, the definition files should display what we see in the Admin tool. These are the
Re: Pros and Cons of ARS development - was Buy vs. Build
This may not be a pro for businesses who use Remedy but the fact that it is not a mainstream language makes it a good market those who know how to develop with the tool. I think typically a Remedy developer's pay is going to be higher than say a .NET, php, insert other language here. So with all of the typical features that Remedy may not have compared to a language that falls nicely into a category, if you know how it take the tool and make the differences invisible to the employeer/customer, you end up being a very valuable resource. I can't think of any application/integration that I have not been able to build in Remedy. Sure there are things like Mid-tier pages do not offer the all of the features and flexibility of an html, php, asp web page (mouse over, tables that can resize, etc) but these are not necesarrily critical to the functionality of your application (and I have heard rumblings of some changes that are suppose to fill some of these gaps with web 2.0 apps). Even if you absoluletly need a web feature (or even a language feature) you can write the app/module/script in a different technology and interface it with Remedy. Now does the fact that it is not easy to find the resources to make the product really sing act as a con? Just a general observation, from what I have seen it commenly takes about 6 months to find a good remedy person. Will companies go with other tools just because of the volume of resources available? I don't think this is a typical consideration before purchasing Remedy, especially if ITSM was a gateway app to in house development but it could end up being a factor. Jason On 7/24/08, Carey Matthew Black [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Shawn, I have thought _a lot_ about how to describe ARS over the last 10 years. I find it interesting that lots of programmers can not even agree on what generation of a language (and in some cases if ARS is a language at all) that ARS is. I have also observed that most business people have a hard time understanding how to manage it because it does not fit into most of their existing models either. Ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-generation_programming_language or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second-generation_programming_language or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third-generation_programming_language or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth-generation_programming_language or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth-generation_programming_language ( Or any other sites/books to discuss the fine technical distinctions between those groupings of computer programming languages that you prefer to site.) In fact most of these discussions, in the past, have even failed to try to describe the type or language that ARS is. (Ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_language) For example... Can we try to establish if ARS is compiled, interpreted, or maybe does it use a byte code model? Is ARS a Visual programming language? (Ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visual_programming_language) Is ARS best described as a Domain-specific language? ( If so what domain?) ( Ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domain-Specific_Modeling A very interesting read ... and comparison IMO.) However, at the end of the analysis... these are just categorizations of the language and likely do not really identify the true strengths or weaknesses of the language itself. I will actually suggest that as the languages become more and more abstract, the strengths will have less to do with the language and more to do with the programmer's knowledge of the problem. ( Which is, again IMO, the fundamental problem with fifth generation languages, that will take the longest to solve.) And I think this trait is what makes ARS a challenging tool for programmer and business person a like. While I think an open and genuine discussion of pros and cons are good for a community to have (many times over), the point is to formulate how those suggested changes will benefit BMC. After all, they use the platform to make money. So whatever they are going to change needs to show ROI to them and not necessarily the customer. Hopefully the customer will benefit in some way, but it may be less financial and more business process or standardization centric than financial bottom line too. BTW: I am going to be proposing a session at BUW to talk about ARS as a programming language. If it is selected then I hope to see all of ARSList members there. That would be a sight to see. :) -- Carey Matthew Black Remedy Skilled Professional (RSP) ARS = Action Request System(Remedy) Love, then teach Solution = People + Process + Tools Fast, Accurate, Cheap Pick two. On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 9:00 AM, Pierson, Shawn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I want to change the topic slightly and go off on a tangent that keeps coming up repeatedly. That topic is of the power of ARS for development. While I agree that ARS is great, I
Re: Pros and Cons of ARS development - was Buy vs. Build
I have always called ARS a 4.5 GL. It restricts you to only do things a certain way (i.e. Change Display is only on an Active Link). So it's a little better than a 4GL which allows you to do the same thing in many ways. SQL could be argued to be a classic 4GL. I consider a 5GL to be Artificial Intelligence blended with the language. The idea of reuse is a key element to AI. ARS has elements of this, but not everywhere. You can reuse fieldids, forms, menus and many different objects throughout, but is it really a 5GL. Probably not in the classic sense. Therefore I consider ARS to be somewhere in between. In the great timeline of GLs, is 5GL even possible in the classic Programming Language sense. To have 5GL you require a knowledgebase of some type (a DB if you will). 5GL requires something to extract knowledge or information. A 5GL should self adjust as it is used and reuse is inherit. I often have wondered what is beyond 5GL. Is it the Star Trek android called Data? Or is it Terminator? What if you had Active Links and Filters for many, many, many, many, many, many knowledge constructs? At what point does it become self-reliant? Interesting concept! I'll have to write a new Sci-Fi novel with such a plot. As for this whole Buy vs. Build thread, what has changed? BMC Remedy has made ITSM more efficient from a Computer Science sense. What's different from this and what happened early on when Open Window took the place of Macros. The old guys out there remember stacking buttons with macros to get the results that you now get with Open Window. Anybody remember recording 3 OS oriented Active Links for the same thing. (Windows, UNIX and Mac clients existed at one time). We had to adjust! The bottom line is that ARS has not changed significantly since 1993. Doug will say he has had one true bug since its creation. And I think that was because of a 32-bit verses 64-bit issue. What I guess I am saying is, Get out there and see how the new ITSM works. It does a lot with GUIDs which are very efficient. GUIDs have been part of ARS for a long time. Customizations have not gone away. They have just gotten more interesting! Gordon M. Frank Remedy Skilled Professional ITIL V3 Certified Lockheed Martin -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Carey Matthew Black Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2008 10:16 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Pros and Cons of ARS development - was Buy vs. Build Shawn, I have thought _a lot_ about how to describe ARS over the last 10 years. I find it interesting that lots of programmers can not even agree on what generation of a language (and in some cases if ARS is a language at all) that ARS is. I have also observed that most business people have a hard time understanding how to manage it because it does not fit into most of their existing models either. Ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-generation_programming_language or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second-generation_programming_language or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third-generation_programming_language or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth-generation_programming_language or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth-generation_programming_language ( Or any other sites/books to discuss the fine technical distinctions between those groupings of computer programming languages that you prefer to site.) In fact most of these discussions, in the past, have even failed to try to describe the type or language that ARS is. (Ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_language) For example... Can we try to establish if ARS is compiled, interpreted, or maybe does it use a byte code model? Is ARS a Visual programming language? (Ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visual_programming_language) Is ARS best described as a Domain-specific language? ( If so what domain?) ( Ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domain-Specific_Modeling A very interesting read ... and comparison IMO.) However, at the end of the analysis... these are just categorizations of the language and likely do not really identify the true strengths or weaknesses of the language itself. I will actually suggest that as the languages become more and more abstract, the strengths will have less to do with the language and more to do with the programmer's knowledge of the problem. ( Which is, again IMO, the fundamental problem with fifth generation languages, that will take the longest to solve.) And I think this trait is what makes ARS a challenging tool for programmer and business person a like. While I think an open and genuine discussion of pros and cons are good for a community to have (many times over), the point is to formulate how those suggested changes will benefit BMC. After all, they use the platform to make money. So whatever they are going to change needs to show ROI to them and not necessarily the customer. Hopefully the customer will benefit in some way
Re: Buy vs. Build
Why buy AR Server for 25k when you can get a Visual Studio Express edition, and SQL Server Express and make better apps? For Free or at least not for 25k? Who uses Access anymore nowadays? -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Axton Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2008 8:06 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build That initially means laying off and then eventually hiring people. This has some implications in terms of active development in the product lines and other things. Also, Microsoft has deep pockets. http://www.gengaming.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=608mode=threaded Can BMC weather the storm? Is bankruptcy an option? Seems like Microsoft got into some hot water over its licensing practices. Is this a healthy image or a good place to be in? http://www.aaxnet.com/topics/slicense.html Seems like there were problems as well: http://news.cnet.com/Vista-views-Microsofts-license-changes/2009-1016_3-6126885.html Not advocating anything, just running the cards of the unspoken sides. Much of everything is in a trap, to varying degrees, just trying to drop all premonitions and have an open view of all sides. Axton Grams On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 4:49 PM, Kaiser Norm E CIV USAF 96 CS/SCCE [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes, of course. I already have considered existing forces. Think about it: BMC experiences a drop in revenue from support and a drop in revenue in licensing initially. It then rebounds by VOLUME sales of the ARS as a RAD toolset. Think about it: MICROSOFT DOES IT! Buy a copy of Visual Studio and it comes with a license key in the manual. You can't install the software without the license key. Bingo! Licensing problem (mostly) solved. Ever watch Gordon Ramsay's Kitchen Nightmares? Last night's episode is a perfect example. Gordon shows up to a restaurant that does *some* business but is, by no means, a booming business. Gordon tells the owner, You need to completely revamp your menu. The owner resists. No, he says, I don't want to lose my EXISTING customer base by changing. Gordon says, Well then you'll never be successful. The moral of the story? Oftentimes you have to jettison an existing mildly profitable (but declining) business model and swallow some losses in order to go on to big time success. -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Axton Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2008 3:32 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build Simple answer is affordable for the customer does not necessarily mean profitable for the proprietor. I'm not saying it can't be profitable, but there is a lot to account for in developing and proposing a business model that is so drastically different than what BMC has provided in the past. If such a model were developed, the revenue provided by the new model would have to exceed that of the current model. Introduction of a new business model would impact the existing pricing model, so that has to be taken into account in determining the overall viability of a different business model. Support services entail things that BMC can not avoid being a part of: - product maintenance - product licensing With the proposed model you have above, I could probably drop tens of thousands of dollars of my current annual support costs. More work, reduced revenue... The counter to the above statement is that the product is no longer a viable option for it's customers and sales plummet. This will force an adjustment to the pricing model that makes the product marketable. You have to consider the existing forces that are already in play. Axton Grams On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 3:00 PM, Kaiser Norm E CIV USAF 96 CS/SCCE [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes, of course Remedy is called a Help Desk application BUT THAT'S WRONG! That's part of my point. It's NOT just a Help Desk application. It's an application development platform that just *happens* to commonly run Help Desk apps because that's the niche it fell into. My point is, to survive, it needs to break that paradigm. And the best way is to get people writing apps that are not just Help Desk. Need to track monthly sales? Use Remedy. Need a visitor sign-in log? Use Remedy. Need a company web page? Use Remedy. Need an equipment checkout form? Use Remedy. Need to track pending orders? Use Remedy. Need a company-wide list of handy telephone numbers? Use Remedy. Need to track employee training? Use Remedy. That's the way the marketing should be, in my opinion, but the problem is, the expensive licensing makes all of that impractical. Why make your visitor sign-in log in Remedy and burn up costly user licenses when you can make a similar app (certainly not as good) in Access? Now please don't bombard me with messages saying something like, Well, the reason you'd use
Re: Buy vs. Build
Because you can develop a quality remedy app in less than half the time. If you look at the course of a few years, you save a lot more than 25k in payroll alone. Thanks, Gary Opela, Jr., RSP Remedy Engineer Leader Communications, Inc. http://www.5pointleader.com http://www.lcibest.com Best Product, Best People, Best PriceTM An ISO 9001:2000 Certified, CMMI(r) Level 3 Rated Company -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Riley, Russel Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2008 11:58 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build Why buy AR Server for 25k when you can get a Visual Studio Express edition, and SQL Server Express and make better apps? For Free or at least not for 25k? Who uses Access anymore nowadays? -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Axton Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2008 8:06 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build That initially means laying off and then eventually hiring people. This has some implications in terms of active development in the product lines and other things. Also, Microsoft has deep pockets. http://www.gengaming.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=608mode=threaded Can BMC weather the storm? Is bankruptcy an option? Seems like Microsoft got into some hot water over its licensing practices. Is this a healthy image or a good place to be in? http://www.aaxnet.com/topics/slicense.html Seems like there were problems as well: http://news.cnet.com/Vista-views-Microsofts-license-changes/2009-1016_3-6126885.html Not advocating anything, just running the cards of the unspoken sides. Much of everything is in a trap, to varying degrees, just trying to drop all premonitions and have an open view of all sides. Axton Grams On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 4:49 PM, Kaiser Norm E CIV USAF 96 CS/SCCE [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes, of course. I already have considered existing forces. Think about it: BMC experiences a drop in revenue from support and a drop in revenue in licensing initially. It then rebounds by VOLUME sales of the ARS as a RAD toolset. Think about it: MICROSOFT DOES IT! Buy a copy of Visual Studio and it comes with a license key in the manual. You can't install the software without the license key. Bingo! Licensing problem (mostly) solved. Ever watch Gordon Ramsay's Kitchen Nightmares? Last night's episode is a perfect example. Gordon shows up to a restaurant that does *some* business but is, by no means, a booming business. Gordon tells the owner, You need to completely revamp your menu. The owner resists. No, he says, I don't want to lose my EXISTING customer base by changing. Gordon says, Well then you'll never be successful. The moral of the story? Oftentimes you have to jettison an existing mildly profitable (but declining) business model and swallow some losses in order to go on to big time success. -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Axton Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2008 3:32 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build Simple answer is affordable for the customer does not necessarily mean profitable for the proprietor. I'm not saying it can't be profitable, but there is a lot to account for in developing and proposing a business model that is so drastically different than what BMC has provided in the past. If such a model were developed, the revenue provided by the new model would have to exceed that of the current model. Introduction of a new business model would impact the existing pricing model, so that has to be taken into account in determining the overall viability of a different business model. Support services entail things that BMC can not avoid being a part of: - product maintenance - product licensing With the proposed model you have above, I could probably drop tens of thousands of dollars of my current annual support costs. More work, reduced revenue... The counter to the above statement is that the product is no longer a viable option for it's customers and sales plummet. This will force an adjustment to the pricing model that makes the product marketable. You have to consider the existing forces that are already in play. Axton Grams On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 3:00 PM, Kaiser Norm E CIV USAF 96 CS/SCCE [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes, of course Remedy is called a Help Desk application BUT THAT'S WRONG! That's part of my point. It's NOT just a Help Desk application. It's an application development platform that just *happens* to commonly run Help Desk apps because that's the niche it fell into. My point is, to survive, it needs to break that paradigm. And the best way is to get people writing apps that are not just Help Desk. Need to track monthly sales? Use Remedy. Need a visitor sign-in log? Use Remedy
Re: Pros and Cons of ARS development - was Buy vs. Build
weeks to months just install/test/migrate all of your environments to patch x. By the time you finish patch x+2 is out. I would love for support to have fewer releases and more QA 13. Figuring out hard crashes in the remedy system is difficult. First of all ... you have no clue what caused it. Was it workflow? was it CMDB? a plugin? Reporting? aremail? If you do have a hard crash in production you have logging turned off so users can have the best performance. Then you turn logging on to try to trace the issue and support asked for the logs. You wait. Sometimes days to see the issue happen again. It happens again. You send logs to remedy and guess what? They ask for more logs. You then get those only to get the response Please upgrade to the next version.! See #12. 14. Admin tool is really slow. Especially when saving an active link or filter when you have ITSM installed. Maybe version 7.5 fixes that. I am currently on 7.0.1 patch 6. 15. Can't do multi-select in a tree view. (We are on 7.0.1 so maybe a later version supports it). 16. I don't know about anyone else but Related Workflow has never worked for me in version 7. It will go part of the way and never finish. We were given a dll that supposedly fixes it but had no luck. 17. It would really be nice if Remedy had a Counter widget that did a count in real time. 24 minutes till the vp is giving you the pink slip ... 23 ...22...21... whew you resolved the issue you are saved for now!!! 18. Expensive 19. CMDB has a lot of redundant data w/ ITSM. AST:Organization and Company. AST:Person and CTM:People. 20. It would be nice if BMC would give you Remedy preinstalled with everything. You simply license the stuff you want. (I think this is available somewhere). I am not saying all of these things to bash ARS. I love ARS as a tool and feel that it provides a lot of value. I feel that by sharing them maybe there are some things of value that BMC could address in future releases. Thanks, Sean -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Pierson, Shawn Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2008 9:00 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Pros and Cons of ARS development - was Buy vs. Build I want to change the topic slightly and go off on a tangent that keeps coming up repeatedly. That topic is of the power of ARS for development. While I agree that ARS is great, I would have to qualify that to say that if you want to build an application that is within its capabilities, it is great. However, having worked with Visual Basic, PHP, Perl, and a few other things, I see plenty of limitations in ARS as a development tool. For example, there is no such thing as a variable in ARS. Yes, you can add a field to a form, even a Display Only field, but you can't instantiate fields during runtime on the fly. You have to purposely create fields for usage later on, and this limitation causes us to often re-use certain fields as generic variables, which can make troubleshooting difficult sometimes. I've worked on a system that someone else built that I had to troubleshoot something on a field that had many different Set Fields actions occurring at different points with different tables. It was definitely possible, but since ARS is missing another major capability that most development platforms have. ARS doesn't have a way to step through code. We can't start up processing on a form, and pause it to see what is going on. All we can do is 1) go through log files and recreate the workflow in our minds, or 2) pop up messages after each piece of workflow we want to troubleshoot. If there was a way to step through each piece of workflow that is running, that would be a tremendous help to us. Another issue that is more of a matter of taste I guess, is the inability to generate flat source-code. Yes, I have learned to read .def files to some extent, but it should be easier to read. Instead of values like 4\1\1\179\2\4\32\Change Level IA - Implementation\ in workflow, the definition files should display what we see in the Admin tool. These are the somewhat major problems I have with ARS for development. If you want to build an application with a database back end, a web interface, and have most of the standard controls (save, search, displaying tables, etc) just work automatically, ARS is a great too. There isn't anything out there that I've worked with which can top ARS development in terms of speed. In some cases, you do have to make sacrifices for more complex functionality, but it's still a great development platform for what it does. I just wish BMC would change the things I mentioned above, plus a few other minor ones (I'd like to be able to use arrays if they implement variables, I'd like to be able to have workflow triggered off of typing in specific fields, not just pressing enter and gain/lose
Re: Pros and Cons of ARS development - was Buy vs. Build
Sean, thanks for the exhaustive list. It was interesting to read things you have related to ITSM. I've never used ITSM, so I've not seen many of the annoyances you have. My main problems that I have with other development platforms are as follows: 1. They're not Remedy. 2. They're not Remedy. :) Thanks, Gary Opela, Jr., RSP Remedy Engineer Leader Communications, Inc. http://www.5pointleader.com http://www.lcibest.com Best Product, Best People, Best PriceTM An ISO 9001:2000 Certified, CMMI(r) Level 3 Rated Company -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Garrison, Sean (Norcross) Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2008 1:11 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Pros and Cons of ARS development - was Buy vs. Build Having been a developer for years here are some of my experiences: 1. Remedy is great for rapid development. You can't develop an app any faster that will offer as much functionality as ars will offer in such a short amount of time. 2. Remedy allows you to make changes on the fly. (#1 feature in my book ... can't do that with custom apps). It is possible to have the system up very close to 24*7 even when making changes. Some changes do require the users to be locked out ... but usually it isn't very long. 3. Remedy/BMC has solved a lot of difficult problems already for you (Users in multiple time zones seeing their correct time, Business time calculations, SLAs, notifications, ITSM suite, integrations with auto discovery/alarm systems, migrations from one environment to another). 4. Debugging is going to be offered in version 7.5 if I understand right. 5. High Availability using Server Group. 6. Multiple API interfaces. 7. Per User custom table field settings is really a cool feature. 8. Data driven functionality in ITSM 7. Pretty cool. 9. AIE is awesome. Some issues I have run into with Remedy: 1. Custom apps will always run faster. Especially when doing mass updates. When doing a Modify All in remedy it updates one record at a time because it has to do the filter processing. Even on a Push field action. 2. Databases are difficult to report against and are confusing to a reporting person. This is mainly due to the ztmp fields and such that aren't necessary for the data but are necessary for workflow. -- Another caveat to this is I find (myself included) that the naming of fields gets kind of lazy w/ Remedy developers. 3. Data isn't normalized in Remedy development. I know it can be done ... but generating workflow to do it is rather difficult sometimes. Here's a good example ... I add a field to a Client form that stores Client Type. Rather than having a separate form that stores V for Vendor, C for Client etc, We as remedy developers store the entire word. This is so the type can show up in the Results List. We could use a filter that sets the field on Get Entry ... but then it doesn't show up in the results list. So now we have already built our form and discover that it needs to be a join form between Client Type and Client. This gets really difficult if you have 15 fields like that ( a join between 15 tables??? that would be about 16 remedy join forms you would have to create for one Client entity). 4. Graphics are next to impossible to do in Remedy unless you are a java/jsp/html developer. I can see my manager saying I see there is a calendar view in ITSM for change tasks ... can you make me a calendar view for tracking Hours worked just like that?. This couldn't be done using Remedy workflow. Maybe it could be done w/ some fancy java and or javascript ... While I am on this it would be difficult to have a Cad drawing of your datacenter, double click on a Rack and see all of the computers in the rack which interact with the cmdb. This can be done via data visualization modules ... but it isn't as easy as creating an active link or filter. 5. Distinct selects ... although the Tree view does solve this a little bit. 6. Active links do not have an On key press event. It doesn't have an On change flag event either. 7. Can't do transactional saves. For example I have an object like Client which has Customers and Sites that I added upon creation. Let's say I decided not to do create a Client. I can't do a Roll back of all of the sites/customers that I added to the client without some significant amount of workflow. Not saying it can't be done ... just saying it is a lot more difficult than just calling a Roll Back command. 8. Complex views have to be created at the db level and cannot be created via the Admin tool. This could solve issue # 6 and #3 if they build this into the tool. 9. Why the heck do they mix C and java at the server level for Remedy?? Why not program the whole thing in C or the whole thing in Java. Stop mixing the two -- I really hate that. It's like looking
Re: Buy vs. Build
This is starting to sound like what we were talking about in 2001 and 2002, the end of Remedy as we know it. hbr On 7/24/08, Susan Palmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ** Riley, Are you a Remedy developer? Susan On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 11:58 AM, Riley, Russel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why buy AR Server for 25k when you can get a Visual Studio Express edition, and SQL Server Express and make better apps? For Free or at least not for 25k? Who uses Access anymore nowadays? -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Axton Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2008 8:06 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build That initially means laying off and then eventually hiring people. This has some implications in terms of active development in the product lines and other things. Also, Microsoft has deep pockets. http://www.gengaming.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=608mode=threaded Can BMC weather the storm? Is bankruptcy an option? Seems like Microsoft got into some hot water over its licensing practices. Is this a healthy image or a good place to be in? http://www.aaxnet.com/topics/slicense.html Seems like there were problems as well: http://news.cnet.com/Vista-views-Microsofts-license-changes/2009-1016_3-6126885.html Not advocating anything, just running the cards of the unspoken sides. Much of everything is in a trap, to varying degrees, just trying to drop all premonitions and have an open view of all sides. Axton Grams On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 4:49 PM, Kaiser Norm E CIV USAF 96 CS/SCCE [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes, of course. I already have considered existing forces. Think about it: BMC experiences a drop in revenue from support and a drop in revenue in licensing initially. It then rebounds by VOLUME sales of the ARS as a RAD toolset. Think about it: MICROSOFT DOES IT! Buy a copy of Visual Studio and it comes with a license key in the manual. You can't install the software without the license key. Bingo! Licensing problem (mostly) solved. Ever watch Gordon Ramsay's Kitchen Nightmares? Last night's episode is a perfect example. Gordon shows up to a restaurant that does *some* business but is, by no means, a booming business. Gordon tells the owner, You need to completely revamp your menu. The owner resists. No, he says, I don't want to lose my EXISTING customer base by changing. Gordon says, Well then you'll never be successful. The moral of the story? Oftentimes you have to jettison an existing mildly profitable (but declining) business model and swallow some losses in order to go on to big time success. -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) __Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are html___ -- Howard Richter Red Hat Certified Technician CompTIA Linux+ Certified ITIL Foundation Certified E-Mail = [EMAIL PROTECTED] LinkedIn Profile = http://www.linkedin.com/in/hbr4270 ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are
Re: Buy vs. Build
Shawn/Bing: You guess hit the mark squarely. The ARS is dying a slow death, and unfortunately BMC is doing nothing to stop it. Think on it for just a moment. If BMC would lower the price of the ARS down to, say, the price of the Visual Studio (somewhere in the range of $500) and abolished ARS user licenses (they could continue to sell the user licenses for their OOTB apps), think of how many copies of ARS they would sell. I've written apps in a variety of environments, and to this day the fastest and easiest I've found is ARS. Build an app in Remedy and voila! Instant app that runs in Windows and Unix environments AND is client or web-based. When people see how easy and quick it is not knock out a complete application, they'll flock to it in droves. But as is, the licensing model blocks newcomers to the platform. It's the thanks but no thanks effect. True, ARS has its diehards (us), but we are a very small community. -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bradford Bingel Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2008 12:07 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build Shawn, you are right on target! IT management culture has changed since the AR System's initial introduction. In those days IT shops regularly debated the buy vs. build dilemma, and there wasn't a clear winner. Today it's different, as IT shops regularly select OOTB applications -- build decisions are the exception, not the rule. And it's not about cost. It's about assuring the business that IT's core service management applications are maintained and updated by a stable and reputable company, not Joe in development or some goober-faced no-name outfit that no one (outside a small Remedy community) has heard of. There has also been some BIG money invested in Software as a Service (SaaS) offerings, and that market continues to grow exponentially each year. Unfortunately, Remedy's market continues to shrink each year. Yet BMC continues to refuse to provide free ARS developer kits to encourage the development of new applications/products based on the AR System, and they refuse to offer ARS interfaces for Java, PHP/Python, .NET, and other current technologies. BMC's current focus is on applications, not the AR System or custom development, so it's unclear what the future holds for those shops who continue to run home brew applications, or what the future holds for those developers who cling to the ARS toolset even the manufacturer has virtually abandoned. (Sorry for the depressing statements. And no offense is intended to any independent ARS developers or product vendors -- on the contrary, by successfully offering your ARS-based products and services you've accomplished something even the mighty BMC/Remedy marketing machine has not, and you should be proud of it!) -- Bing Bradford Bingel (Bing) ITM3 California http://www.itm3.com/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] (email) 925-260-6394 (mobile) -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Pierson, Shawn Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 2:26 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build In addition to that, based on what I've seen, Remedy ARS developers get paid a lot more than .NET developers. Factor into that the difficulty in finding ARS developers, and management is more likely to pursue custom .NET development work as opposed to custom ARS development. If you leave the company, how long would it take for them to find a decent ARS developer willing to take your job for a 5% raise over what you get now? It would be difficult. On the other hand, you can probably find a decent .NET developer willing to get the same salary you do pretty easily. One of the best things about working with Remedy products is the good job market, but at the same time there isn't enough new blood and enough marketing of ARS to really make the development platform thrive like .NET has. You don't see BMC handing out free ARS server licenses on college campuses. Shawn Pierson -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kaiser Norm E CIV USAF 96 CS/SCCE Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 2:32 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build Yes...it is an awesome RAD environment but it's extremely hampered by its extraordinarily expensive licensing model. With another RAD (let's say Visual Studio .Net), you build the application and then never have to worry about paying a dime for application licenses. With Remedy you say, Hey, we could knock out XYZ app in a day! Oh...wait...we'd have to buy more licenses...nevermind... -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Elry Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 11:57 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build I have to say... There is nothing wrong
Re: Buy vs. Build
Hmmm...we'll see. I don't think just releasing a new version of the Admin tool (based on existing open source code) will do much to reinvigorate the ARS when BMC has discarded the Your Business -- Your Way approach. I've seen just one job posting for a custom developer recently...before that, it seems every single one was for an ITSM configurator. With fewer custom development jobs, developers are bound to leave the field for other toolsets where pastures are greener. When they leave, the ARS loses its biggest advocates of Remedy as a rapid app development tool. As you lose advocates, you lose word of mouth, which is what grew Remedy into what it is. I honestly don't think ITSM will drive anyone to think, Hey look at this cool development tool we have at our disposal. Instead, I think the mentality is more and more becoming, Hey, cowboy! Don't touch that! It's too complicated. We don't want you breaking our OOTB solution. I think lowering the price and attracting new people in to build apps of all sorts and sizes is the only thing that will make the ARS a viable platform in the eyes of many businesses. Think about it...ask just about any outsider about Remedy and typically (not always) they say something along the lines of, Oh yeah...that's that Help Desk thing, right? not, Oh yeah...that's that awesome rapid app toolset! I can't ever remember talking to an outsider (a network engineer, a CIO, an IT specialist, etc.) who knew you could build applications with Remedy. -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rick Cook Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2008 10:12 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build ** I have to take some exception to your first remark, Norm. If the ARS were dying a slow death, why would BMC bring out a new Administrator tool (7.5) that will EXPAND the developer's ability to do core ARS development? I know that part of the reason for that is that it's old technology that's in the way of some architectural advances that need to take place, but that's my point. AR System developers will, with 7.5, have the ability to build things we can't even imagine doing now. How many software companies give developers like us that much power over their OOB applications? In my opinion, the core AR System development, which has taken a back seat (maybe in the trunk) to OOB apps for a few years now, WILL be making a renaissance in the next few years as companies that bought ITSM increasingly realize that with it, they got a pretty good workflow engine that is easy to integrate with their ITSM products. I take great pains to point out to new Remedy/ITSM customers that every part of that application suite was built with the same workflow engine they have at their disposal, and that a skilled and experienced development team can build an application to support any business function with it. I don't see AR System ever being the financial driver that it used to be, as the revenue model will always be more robust for OOB apps. But it can and should return to being more of a technological driver in the next 2-3 years. I do agree that an MSDN-like arrangement would be a net win for both BMC and for the developers. I have heard Doug say he's proposed it many times. I hope he continues to do so until his wisdom is accepted. Rick On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 5:50 AM, Kaiser Norm E CIV USAF 96 CS/SCCE [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Shawn/Bing: You guess hit the mark squarely. The ARS is dying a slow death, and unfortunately BMC is doing nothing to stop it. Think on it for just a moment. If BMC would lower the price of the ARS down to, say, the price of the Visual Studio (somewhere in the range of $500) and abolished ARS user licenses (they could continue to sell the user licenses for their OOTB apps), think of how many copies of ARS they would sell. I've written apps in a variety of environments, and to this day the fastest and easiest I've found is ARS. Build an app in Remedy and voila! Instant app that runs in Windows and Unix environments AND is client or web-based. When people see how easy and quick it is not knock out a complete application, they'll flock to it in droves. But as is, the licensing model blocks newcomers to the platform. It's the thanks but no thanks effect. True, ARS has its diehards (us), but we are a very small community. -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) __Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are html___ ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are
Re: Buy vs. Build
Fred, I have been using Remedy for over 8 years, and it has always been called a Helpdesk application by people outside of the Remedy world. Granted I never describe it as such, and I correct everybody I can, but the fact remains, if you are not on the backside of Remedy, you seem to relate it to a helpdesk application. That might be because that is how it has been pushed and utilized for a decade plus. I have to say, I am not sure that ARS is dying either. Granted I know the in thing these days is ITSM, but that doesn't mean that once they get it into a company that they company doesn't realize they can use it for other things. I think of the problems is that there are a lot of people who gte put into the feed and care part of the system and only get trained on what they need to know i.e. ITSM. I have also found that there are many cases where these people don't know anything about Remedy and don't get any formal training. They are given books and told to figure it out. In fact, most projects that I have been on, the FTEs don't even know about the list. So where is the fault? Is it BMC for trying to make more money (and they seem to be selling a lot of ITSM licenses) or is it the companies for not sending their employees for proper trainiing? Or as is often the case, does the blame fall a little bit on everyone? Brian On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 9:42 AM, Kaiser Norm E CIV USAF 96 CS/SCCE [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hmmm...we'll see. I don't think just releasing a new version of the Admin tool (based on existing open source code) will do much to reinvigorate the ARS when BMC has discarded the Your Business -- Your Way approach. I've seen just one job posting for a custom developer recently...before that, it seems every single one was for an ITSM configurator. With fewer custom development jobs, developers are bound to leave the field for other toolsets where pastures are greener. When they leave, the ARS loses its biggest advocates of Remedy as a rapid app development tool. As you lose advocates, you lose word of mouth, which is what grew Remedy into what it is. I honestly don't think ITSM will drive anyone to think, Hey look at this cool development tool we have at our disposal. Instead, I think the mentality is more and more becoming, Hey, cowboy! Don't touch that! It's too complicated. We don't want you breaking our OOTB solution. I think lowering the price and attracting new people in to build apps of all sorts and sizes is the only thing that will make the ARS a viable platform in the eyes of many businesses. Think about it...ask just about any outsider about Remedy and typically (not always) they say something along the lines of, Oh yeah...that's that Help Desk thing, right? not, Oh yeah...that's that awesome rapid app toolset! I can't ever remember talking to an outsider (a network engineer, a CIO, an IT specialist, etc.) who knew you could build applications with Remedy. -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rick Cook Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2008 10:12 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build ** I have to take some exception to your first remark, Norm. If the ARS were dying a slow death, why would BMC bring out a new Administrator tool (7.5) that will EXPAND the developer's ability to do core ARS development? I know that part of the reason for that is that it's old technology that's in the way of some architectural advances that need to take place, but that's my point. AR System developers will, with 7.5, have the ability to build things we can't even imagine doing now. How many software companies give developers like us that much power over their OOB applications? In my opinion, the core AR System development, which has taken a back seat (maybe in the trunk) to OOB apps for a few years now, WILL be making a renaissance in the next few years as companies that bought ITSM increasingly realize that with it, they got a pretty good workflow engine that is easy to integrate with their ITSM products. I take great pains to point out to new Remedy/ITSM customers that every part of that application suite was built with the same workflow engine they have at their disposal, and that a skilled and experienced development team can build an application to support any business function with it. I don't see AR System ever being the financial driver that it used to be, as the revenue model will always be more robust for OOB apps. But it can and should return to being more of a technological driver in the next 2-3 years. I do agree that an MSDN-like arrangement would be a net win for both BMC and for the developers. I have heard Doug say he's proposed it many times. I hope he continues to do so until his wisdom is accepted. Rick On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 5:50 AM, Kaiser Norm E CIV USAF 96 CS/SCCE [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
Re: Buy vs. Build
Yes, of course Remedy is called a Help Desk application BUT THAT'S WRONG! That's part of my point. It's NOT just a Help Desk application. It's an application development platform that just *happens* to commonly run Help Desk apps because that's the niche it fell into. My point is, to survive, it needs to break that paradigm. And the best way is to get people writing apps that are not just Help Desk. Need to track monthly sales? Use Remedy. Need a visitor sign-in log? Use Remedy. Need a company web page? Use Remedy. Need an equipment checkout form? Use Remedy. Need to track pending orders? Use Remedy. Need a company-wide list of handy telephone numbers? Use Remedy. Need to track employee training? Use Remedy. That's the way the marketing should be, in my opinion, but the problem is, the expensive licensing makes all of that impractical. Why make your visitor sign-in log in Remedy and burn up costly user licenses when you can make a similar app (certainly not as good) in Access? Now please don't bombard me with messages saying something like, Well, the reason you'd use Remedy and not Access is because Remedy is so good at... That's not my point. My point is that people will use other tools (Access is just an example) and endure a lesser resulting product because the other tools are so much more affordable. Access doesn't have all the awesome capability of Remedy, but it's AFFORDABLE. Then people say, Yeah, but if they reduced the cost of the ARS, they wouldn't make any money! To that I contend that ARS is such an awesome, robust, and easy-to-use solution, BMC would make much more money by selling in VOLUME. Here's what I envision: Sell ARS at around $500 with NO support. If you buy this version, you have to pay for support on a case-by-case basis like Microsoft. Or use the ARSList. Or you could buy a support contract for X amount of dollars for unlimited support. Then think--ARS could be anywhere and everywhere. You could buy a copy and take it home and use it to stand up a personal web server. Or smaller development companies could buy it, write apps, and then sell the apps with the ARS bundled into the price. Say you write a shipping system. You could charge $1000 for the app you wrote and $500 for the ARS to go with it. Total bill: $1500. One stop shop. Right now there are a few third parties writing ARS-based apps (ESS @ Work) but how frightening is that? You pour your heart and soul into writing an app in Remedy and then get an interested party who wants to buy it but then have to tell them, Yeah, we sell this awesome product, but to use it, you first have to go to ANOTHER company and buy THEIR product for $25,000. Man, that's a tough sell. And the reason why people get thrust into Remedy without training is because management doesn't realize what Remedy truly is and what it is truly capable of because of the *paradigm*...that is, the Help Desk STIGMA. If the ARS was more affordable, it could be marketed to a much wider audience and the paradigm could be broken. That's my point. Please excuse the long rant. -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brian Goralczyk Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2008 1:31 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build ** Fred, I have been using Remedy for over 8 years, and it has always been called a Helpdesk application by people outside of the Remedy world. Granted I never describe it as such, and I correct everybody I can, but the fact remains, if you are not on the backside of Remedy, you seem to relate it to a helpdesk application. That might be because that is how it has been pushed and utilized for a decade plus. I have to say, I am not sure that ARS is dying either. Granted I know the in thing these days is ITSM, but that doesn't mean that once they get it into a company that they company doesn't realize they can use it for other things. I think of the problems is that there are a lot of people who gte put into the feed and care part of the system and only get trained on what they need to know i.e. ITSM. I have also found that there are many cases where these people don't know anything about Remedy and don't get any formal training. They are given books and told to figure it out. In fact, most projects that I have been on, the FTEs don't even know about the list. So where is the fault? Is it BMC for trying to make more money (and they seem to be selling a lot of ITSM licenses) or is it the companies for not sending their employees for proper trainiing? Or as is often the case, does the blame fall a little bit on everyone? Brian On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 9:42 AM, Kaiser Norm E CIV USAF 96 CS/SCCE [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hmmm...we'll see. I don't think just releasing a new version of the Admin tool (based on existing open source code) will do much to reinvigorate the ARS when BMC has discarded the Your Business
Re: Buy vs. Build
Simple answer is affordable for the customer does not necessarily mean profitable for the proprietor. I'm not saying it can't be profitable, but there is a lot to account for in developing and proposing a business model that is so drastically different than what BMC has provided in the past. If such a model were developed, the revenue provided by the new model would have to exceed that of the current model. Introduction of a new business model would impact the existing pricing model, so that has to be taken into account in determining the overall viability of a different business model. Support services entail things that BMC can not avoid being a part of: - product maintenance - product licensing With the proposed model you have above, I could probably drop tens of thousands of dollars of my current annual support costs. More work, reduced revenue... The counter to the above statement is that the product is no longer a viable option for it's customers and sales plummet. This will force an adjustment to the pricing model that makes the product marketable. You have to consider the existing forces that are already in play. Axton Grams On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 3:00 PM, Kaiser Norm E CIV USAF 96 CS/SCCE [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes, of course Remedy is called a Help Desk application BUT THAT'S WRONG! That's part of my point. It's NOT just a Help Desk application. It's an application development platform that just *happens* to commonly run Help Desk apps because that's the niche it fell into. My point is, to survive, it needs to break that paradigm. And the best way is to get people writing apps that are not just Help Desk. Need to track monthly sales? Use Remedy. Need a visitor sign-in log? Use Remedy. Need a company web page? Use Remedy. Need an equipment checkout form? Use Remedy. Need to track pending orders? Use Remedy. Need a company-wide list of handy telephone numbers? Use Remedy. Need to track employee training? Use Remedy. That's the way the marketing should be, in my opinion, but the problem is, the expensive licensing makes all of that impractical. Why make your visitor sign-in log in Remedy and burn up costly user licenses when you can make a similar app (certainly not as good) in Access? Now please don't bombard me with messages saying something like, Well, the reason you'd use Remedy and not Access is because Remedy is so good at... That's not my point. My point is that people will use other tools (Access is just an example) and endure a lesser resulting product because the other tools are so much more affordable. Access doesn't have all the awesome capability of Remedy, but it's AFFORDABLE. Then people say, Yeah, but if they reduced the cost of the ARS, they wouldn't make any money! To that I contend that ARS is such an awesome, robust, and easy-to-use solution, BMC would make much more money by selling in VOLUME. Here's what I envision: Sell ARS at around $500 with NO support. If you buy this version, you have to pay for support on a case-by-case basis like Microsoft. Or use the ARSList. Or you could buy a support contract for X amount of dollars for unlimited support. Then think--ARS could be anywhere and everywhere. You could buy a copy and take it home and use it to stand up a personal web server. Or smaller development companies could buy it, write apps, and then sell the apps with the ARS bundled into the price. Say you write a shipping system. You could charge $1000 for the app you wrote and $500 for the ARS to go with it. Total bill: $1500. One stop shop. Right now there are a few third parties writing ARS-based apps (ESS @ Work) but how frightening is that? You pour your heart and soul into writing an app in Remedy and then get an interested party who wants to buy it but then have to tell them, Yeah, we sell this awesome product, but to use it, you first have to go to ANOTHER company and buy THEIR product for $25,000. Man, that's a tough sell. And the reason why people get thrust into Remedy without training is because management doesn't realize what Remedy truly is and what it is truly capable of because of the *paradigm*...that is, the Help Desk STIGMA. If the ARS was more affordable, it could be marketed to a much wider audience and the paradigm could be broken. That's my point. Please excuse the long rant. -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brian Goralczyk Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2008 1:31 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build ** Fred, I have been using Remedy for over 8 years, and it has always been called a Helpdesk application by people outside of the Remedy world. Granted I never describe it as such, and I correct everybody I can, but the fact remains, if you are not on the backside of Remedy, you seem to relate it to a helpdesk application. That might be because that is how
Re: Buy vs. Build
Yes, of course. I already have considered existing forces. Think about it: BMC experiences a drop in revenue from support and a drop in revenue in licensing initially. It then rebounds by VOLUME sales of the ARS as a RAD toolset. Think about it: MICROSOFT DOES IT! Buy a copy of Visual Studio and it comes with a license key in the manual. You can't install the software without the license key. Bingo! Licensing problem (mostly) solved. Ever watch Gordon Ramsay's Kitchen Nightmares? Last night's episode is a perfect example. Gordon shows up to a restaurant that does *some* business but is, by no means, a booming business. Gordon tells the owner, You need to completely revamp your menu. The owner resists. No, he says, I don't want to lose my EXISTING customer base by changing. Gordon says, Well then you'll never be successful. The moral of the story? Oftentimes you have to jettison an existing mildly profitable (but declining) business model and swallow some losses in order to go on to big time success. -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Axton Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2008 3:32 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build Simple answer is affordable for the customer does not necessarily mean profitable for the proprietor. I'm not saying it can't be profitable, but there is a lot to account for in developing and proposing a business model that is so drastically different than what BMC has provided in the past. If such a model were developed, the revenue provided by the new model would have to exceed that of the current model. Introduction of a new business model would impact the existing pricing model, so that has to be taken into account in determining the overall viability of a different business model. Support services entail things that BMC can not avoid being a part of: - product maintenance - product licensing With the proposed model you have above, I could probably drop tens of thousands of dollars of my current annual support costs. More work, reduced revenue... The counter to the above statement is that the product is no longer a viable option for it's customers and sales plummet. This will force an adjustment to the pricing model that makes the product marketable. You have to consider the existing forces that are already in play. Axton Grams On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 3:00 PM, Kaiser Norm E CIV USAF 96 CS/SCCE [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes, of course Remedy is called a Help Desk application BUT THAT'S WRONG! That's part of my point. It's NOT just a Help Desk application. It's an application development platform that just *happens* to commonly run Help Desk apps because that's the niche it fell into. My point is, to survive, it needs to break that paradigm. And the best way is to get people writing apps that are not just Help Desk. Need to track monthly sales? Use Remedy. Need a visitor sign-in log? Use Remedy. Need a company web page? Use Remedy. Need an equipment checkout form? Use Remedy. Need to track pending orders? Use Remedy. Need a company-wide list of handy telephone numbers? Use Remedy. Need to track employee training? Use Remedy. That's the way the marketing should be, in my opinion, but the problem is, the expensive licensing makes all of that impractical. Why make your visitor sign-in log in Remedy and burn up costly user licenses when you can make a similar app (certainly not as good) in Access? Now please don't bombard me with messages saying something like, Well, the reason you'd use Remedy and not Access is because Remedy is so good at... That's not my point. My point is that people will use other tools (Access is just an example) and endure a lesser resulting product because the other tools are so much more affordable. Access doesn't have all the awesome capability of Remedy, but it's AFFORDABLE. Then people say, Yeah, but if they reduced the cost of the ARS, they wouldn't make any money! To that I contend that ARS is such an awesome, robust, and easy-to-use solution, BMC would make much more money by selling in VOLUME. Here's what I envision: Sell ARS at around $500 with NO support. If you buy this version, you have to pay for support on a case-by-case basis like Microsoft. Or use the ARSList. Or you could buy a support contract for X amount of dollars for unlimited support. Then think--ARS could be anywhere and everywhere. You could buy a copy and take it home and use it to stand up a personal web server. Or smaller development companies could buy it, write apps, and then sell the apps with the ARS bundled into the price. Say you write a shipping system. You could charge $1000 for the app you wrote and $500 for the ARS to go with it. Total bill: $1500. One stop shop. Right now there are a few third parties writing ARS-based apps (ESS @ Work) but how frightening is that? You pour your heart and soul
Re: Buy vs. Build
Norm, For the record, my point was that, your right, it needs to be promoted as more than a helpdesk solution. But I think part of the fault in the current situation would also fall to the sales people. They make more money by convincing management that they NEED to buy ITSM. So maybe part of the issue is addressing the sale person's commission system. But I do agree with you, ARS can do so much more than almost anybody gives it credit for. I think possibly that one of the issues is trying to explain what ARS is to a non-technical person. They don't understand RAD. They don't understand a lot of the versatility in the application. And unfortunately, a lot of the people in this world that make buying decisions are not technologically knowledgeable. I agree with everything your saying, although I also agree with the others. I don't think such an extreme change is going to happen anytime soon. Although I wish as a developer I could pick up a development copy of ARS for 500 or a 1000 bucks. I think that they would do wonders if they offered the server for free (with limited records) and charged you for licenses (like they used to). Now you can't get your hands on it unless you have access to a support contract, and even then there is so much that would be nice to have access to that you can't without making your wallet go on a sever diet. I have always wished them to find a way to offer the server to small sized companies. But the more time passes, especially with ITSM, they seem to be hedging out the middle sized companies too these days. So for all that, I am in agreement with you. Brian On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 2:59 PM, Rick Cook [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ** Well, Norm, I see your point, but good luck convincing BMC that their revenue model isn't working. I'm not saying that it is or it isn't, but they seem to think it is, and the stock seems to be at least holding its own, so I don't see that model changing until they think it needs changing. Rick On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 1:49 PM, Kaiser Norm E CIV USAF 96 CS/SCCE [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes, of course. I already have considered existing forces. Think about it: BMC experiences a drop in revenue from support and a drop in revenue in licensing initially. It then rebounds by VOLUME sales of the ARS as a RAD toolset. Think about it: MICROSOFT DOES IT! Buy a copy of Visual Studio and it comes with a license key in the manual. You can't install the software without the license key. Bingo! Licensing problem (mostly) solved. Ever watch Gordon Ramsay's Kitchen Nightmares? Last night's episode is a perfect example. Gordon shows up to a restaurant that does *some* business but is, by no means, a booming business. Gordon tells the owner, You need to completely revamp your menu. The owner resists. No, he says, I don't want to lose my EXISTING customer base by changing. Gordon says, Well then you'll never be successful. The moral of the story? Oftentimes you have to jettison an existing mildly profitable (but declining) business model and swallow some losses in order to go on to big time success. -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) __Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are html___ ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are
Re: Buy vs. Build
That initially means laying off and then eventually hiring people. This has some implications in terms of active development in the product lines and other things. Also, Microsoft has deep pockets. http://www.gengaming.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=608mode=threaded Can BMC weather the storm? Is bankruptcy an option? Seems like Microsoft got into some hot water over its licensing practices. Is this a healthy image or a good place to be in? http://www.aaxnet.com/topics/slicense.html Seems like there were problems as well: http://news.cnet.com/Vista-views-Microsofts-license-changes/2009-1016_3-6126885.html Not advocating anything, just running the cards of the unspoken sides. Much of everything is in a trap, to varying degrees, just trying to drop all premonitions and have an open view of all sides. Axton Grams On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 4:49 PM, Kaiser Norm E CIV USAF 96 CS/SCCE [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes, of course. I already have considered existing forces. Think about it: BMC experiences a drop in revenue from support and a drop in revenue in licensing initially. It then rebounds by VOLUME sales of the ARS as a RAD toolset. Think about it: MICROSOFT DOES IT! Buy a copy of Visual Studio and it comes with a license key in the manual. You can't install the software without the license key. Bingo! Licensing problem (mostly) solved. Ever watch Gordon Ramsay's Kitchen Nightmares? Last night's episode is a perfect example. Gordon shows up to a restaurant that does *some* business but is, by no means, a booming business. Gordon tells the owner, You need to completely revamp your menu. The owner resists. No, he says, I don't want to lose my EXISTING customer base by changing. Gordon says, Well then you'll never be successful. The moral of the story? Oftentimes you have to jettison an existing mildly profitable (but declining) business model and swallow some losses in order to go on to big time success. -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Axton Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2008 3:32 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build Simple answer is affordable for the customer does not necessarily mean profitable for the proprietor. I'm not saying it can't be profitable, but there is a lot to account for in developing and proposing a business model that is so drastically different than what BMC has provided in the past. If such a model were developed, the revenue provided by the new model would have to exceed that of the current model. Introduction of a new business model would impact the existing pricing model, so that has to be taken into account in determining the overall viability of a different business model. Support services entail things that BMC can not avoid being a part of: - product maintenance - product licensing With the proposed model you have above, I could probably drop tens of thousands of dollars of my current annual support costs. More work, reduced revenue... The counter to the above statement is that the product is no longer a viable option for it's customers and sales plummet. This will force an adjustment to the pricing model that makes the product marketable. You have to consider the existing forces that are already in play. Axton Grams On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 3:00 PM, Kaiser Norm E CIV USAF 96 CS/SCCE [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes, of course Remedy is called a Help Desk application BUT THAT'S WRONG! That's part of my point. It's NOT just a Help Desk application. It's an application development platform that just *happens* to commonly run Help Desk apps because that's the niche it fell into. My point is, to survive, it needs to break that paradigm. And the best way is to get people writing apps that are not just Help Desk. Need to track monthly sales? Use Remedy. Need a visitor sign-in log? Use Remedy. Need a company web page? Use Remedy. Need an equipment checkout form? Use Remedy. Need to track pending orders? Use Remedy. Need a company-wide list of handy telephone numbers? Use Remedy. Need to track employee training? Use Remedy. That's the way the marketing should be, in my opinion, but the problem is, the expensive licensing makes all of that impractical. Why make your visitor sign-in log in Remedy and burn up costly user licenses when you can make a similar app (certainly not as good) in Access? Now please don't bombard me with messages saying something like, Well, the reason you'd use Remedy and not Access is because Remedy is so good at... That's not my point. My point is that people will use other tools (Access is just an example) and endure a lesser resulting product because the other tools are so much more affordable. Access doesn't have all the awesome capability of Remedy, but it's AFFORDABLE. Then people say, Yeah, but if they reduced the cost of the ARS, they wouldn't make
Buy vs. Build
Am I the only one seeing a resurgance of contacts seeking experienced custom-build expertise vs. install/configure/maintain/integrate folks? I know BMC's pie in the sky goal is minimal need for customizations vs. configuration/data changes, but there seems to be a growing backlash against this McDonald's approach. I'm only asking this of the group to see if this trend is bigger than my areas of engagement over the last couple years. Sure, there will always be needs for folks to step in an make customizations here and there, but I'm suprised now at the number and the scope of custom-build-from-scratch projects I'm getting proposals/recruiters for compared to the past. Has ITSM mis-stepped in its later releases or is it that the customer growth for the engine and those upgrading has somewhat de-coupled from ITSM along the way? Have that many old-school custom-builders disappeared? Send me your thoughts directly if you feel the board wanting to stay focused on troubleshooting threads... Ray [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are
Re: Buy vs. Build
I have a bit of a different take on things, Ray. The new BMC business continues to be almost entirely ITSM, because their sales people can't make as much money selling the AR System. However, many older customers have lots invested in their custom systems, and have no intention of converting. Hence, the work to upgrade and update them (just finishing up one of those now), and use the AR System to expand the usefulness and value of the AR System platform. Also, some of the newer ITSM customers (last couple of years) are now seeing that other applications can be built on AR System, and sometimes don't have the experienced staff on site to do so. I don't know if that was intended or foreseen by BMC, but it makes sense. So I don't think it's as much the pendulum swinging the other way as it is the custom programming part of the business catching up. Seems like a rising tide that will float all boats. Rick On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 6:47 AM, Ray Gellenbeck [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ** Am I the only one seeing a resurgance of contacts seeking experienced custom-build expertise vs. install/configure/maintain/integrate folks? I know BMC's pie in the sky goal is minimal need for customizations vs. configuration/data changes, but there seems to be a growing backlash against this McDonald's approach. I'm only asking this of the group to see if this trend is bigger than my areas of engagement over the last couple years. Sure, there will always be needs for folks to step in an make customizations here and there, but I'm suprised now at the number and the scope of custom-build-from-scratch projects I'm getting proposals/recruiters for compared to the past. Has ITSM mis-stepped in its later releases or is it that the customer growth for the engine and those upgrading has somewhat de-coupled from ITSM along the way? Have that many old-school custom-builders disappeared? Send me your thoughts directly if you feel the board wanting to stay focused on troubleshooting threads... * Ray Gellenbeck * [EMAIL PROTECTED] __Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are html___ ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are
Re: Buy vs. Build
Ray, Can you make your font just a little smaller :-) Old school custom builder - Your Business - Your Way I do believe for many reasons there are higher demands for custom applications versus ITSM 7.X (It Takes So Much) Great tool, make it dance, - I am a firm Believer in Remedy - Drive it with Data (as presented at past National RUG) But Do not want to be just a data administrator, Remedy is the most powerful Workflow Toolkit available - USE IT ! Doug Tanner RSP (Former RAC) Visionary of Rem-Mail From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ray Gellenbeck Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 9:48 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Buy vs. Build Am I the only one seeing a resurgance of contacts seeking experienced custom-build expertise vs. install/configure/maintain/integrate folks? I know BMC's pie in the sky goal is minimal need for customizations vs. configuration/data changes, but there seems to be a growing backlash against this McDonald's approach. I'm only asking this of the group to see if this trend is bigger than my areas of engagement over the last couple years. Sure, there will always be needs for folks to step in an make customizations here and there, but I'm suprised now at the number and the scope of custom-build-from-scratch projects I'm getting proposals/recruiters for compared to the past. Has ITSM mis-stepped in its later releases or is it that the customer growth for the engine and those upgrading has somewhat de-coupled from ITSM along the way? Have that many old-school custom-builders disappeared? Send me your thoughts directly if you feel the board wanting to stay focused on troubleshooting threads... Ray Gellenbeck [EMAIL PROTECTED] __Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are html___ DISCLAIMER Important! This message is intended for the above named person(s) only and is CONFIDENTIAL AND PROPRIETARY. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail and have received it in error, please immediately notify the sender by return email and then delete it from your mailbox. This message may be protected by the attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. Accessing, copying, disseminating or re-using any of the information contained in this e-mail by anyone other than the intended recipient is strictly prohibited. Finally, you should check this email and any attachments for the presence of viruses, as the sender accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this email. Thank you. ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are
Re: Buy vs. Build
I have to admit I was very pleasantly surprised to see a job posting just the other day that called for a custom developer...it said clearly NOT OOTB. I hadn't seen one in a long, long time. It's not so much that I'm against the OOTB solution -- it's that I'm an old school Business your way, Make the tool conform to your business...not make your business conform to your tool thinker (which people here, I'm sure, are painfully aware of!). -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ray Gellenbeck Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 8:48 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Buy vs. Build ** Am I the only one seeing a resurgance of contacts seeking experienced custom-build expertise vs. install/configure/maintain/integrate folks? I know BMC's pie in the sky goal is minimal need for customizations vs. configuration/data changes, but there seems to be a growing backlash against this McDonald's approach. I'm only asking this of the group to see if this trend is bigger than my areas of engagement over the last couple years. Sure, there will always be needs for folks to step in an make customizations here and there, but I'm suprised now at the number and the scope of custom-build-from-scratch projects I'm getting proposals/recruiters for compared to the past. Has ITSM mis-stepped in its later releases or is it that the customer growth for the engine and those upgrading has somewhat de-coupled from ITSM along the way? Have that many old-school custom-builders disappeared? Send me your thoughts directly if you feel the board wanting to stay focused on troubleshooting threads... Ray Gellenbeck [EMAIL PROTECTED] __Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are html___ ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are
Re: Buy vs. Build
Ray, Can you make your font just a little smaller :-) Old school custom builder - Your Business - Your Way I do believe for many reasons there are higher demands for custom applications versus ITSM 7.X (It Takes So Much) Great tool, make it dance, - I am a firm Believer in Remedy - Drive it with Data (as presented at past National RUG) But Do not want to be just a data administrator, Remedy is the most powerful Workflow Toolkit available - USE IT ! Doug Tanner RSP (Former RAC) Visionary of Rem-Mail From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ray Gellenbeck Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 9:48 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Buy vs. Build Am I the only one seeing a resurgance of contacts seeking experienced custom-build expertise vs. install/configure/maintain/integrate folks? I know BMC's pie in the sky goal is minimal need for customizations vs. configuration/data changes, but there seems to be a growing backlash against this McDonald's approach. I'm only asking this of the group to see if this trend is bigger than my areas of engagement over the last couple years. Sure, there will always be needs for folks to step in an make customizations here and there, but I'm suprised now at the number and the scope of custom-build-from-scratch projects I'm getting proposals/recruiters for compared to the past. Has ITSM mis-stepped in its later releases or is it that the customer growth for the engine and those upgrading has somewhat de-coupled from ITSM along the way? Have that many old-school custom-builders disappeared? Send me your thoughts directly if you feel the board wanting to stay focused on troubleshooting threads... Ray Gellenbeck [EMAIL PROTECTED] __Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are html___ DISCLAIMER Important! This message is intended for the above named person(s) only and is CONFIDENTIAL AND PROPRIETARY. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail and have received it in error, please immediately notify the sender by return email and then delete it from your mailbox. This message may be protected by the attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. Accessing, copying, disseminating or re-using any of the information contained in this e-mail by anyone other than the intended recipient is strictly prohibited. Finally, you should check this email and any attachments for the presence of viruses, as the sender accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this email. Thank you. ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are
Re: Buy vs. Build
I have to say... There is nothing wrong with the ITSM Suite 7.x. It fits nicely into the ITIL Framework that a lot of companies crave. But, there are lot of companies that realize that they can't run their business efficiently inside the Framework; therefore, custom build or find another product. Luckily, these companies are beginning to realize that ARS is a great RAD Tool with it's own IDE integration plugins that make many other types of development pale by comparison... They are also finding out that the other ITIL based products out there are not as easily customizable, nor do they integrate well... In any event custom development will allow most companies to nail there processes then put a tool around it rather than tyring to push a square peg through a round hole... On Jul 22, 11:40 am, Tanner, Doug [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ray, Can you make your font just a little smaller :-) Old school custom builder - Your Business - Your Way I do believe for many reasons there are higher demands for custom applications versus ITSM 7.X (It Takes So Much) Great tool, make it dance, - I am a firm Believer in Remedy - Drive it with Data (as presented at past National RUG) But Do not want to be just a data administrator, Remedy is the most powerful Workflow Toolkit available - USE IT ! Doug Tanner RSP (Former RAC) Visionary of Rem-Mail From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ray Gellenbeck Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 9:48 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Buy vs. Build Am I the only one seeing a resurgance of contacts seeking experienced custom-build expertise vs. install/configure/maintain/integrate folks? I know BMC's pie in the sky goal is minimal need for customizations vs. configuration/data changes, but there seems to be a growing backlash against this McDonald's approach. I'm only asking this of the group to see if this trend is bigger than my areas of engagement over the last couple years. Sure, there will always be needs for folks to step in an make customizations here and there, but I'm suprised now at the number and the scope of custom-build-from-scratch projects I'm getting proposals/recruiters for compared to the past. Has ITSM mis-stepped in its later releases or is it that the customer growth for the engine and those upgrading has somewhat de-coupled from ITSM along the way? Have that many old-school custom-builders disappeared? Send me your thoughts directly if you feel the board wanting to stay focused on troubleshooting threads... Ray Gellenbeck [EMAIL PROTECTED] __Platinum Sponsor:www.rmsportal.comARSlist: Where the Answers Are html___ DISCLAIMER Important! This message is intended for the above named person(s) only and is CONFIDENTIAL AND PROPRIETARY. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail and have received it in error, please immediately notify the sender by return email and then delete it from your mailbox. This message may be protected by the attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. Accessing, copying, disseminating or re-using any of the information contained in this e-mail by anyone other than the intended recipient is strictly prohibited. Finally, you should check this email and any attachments for the presence of viruses, as the sender accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this email. Thank you. ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives atwww.arslist.org Platinum Sponsor:www.rmsportal.comARSlist: Where the Answers Are ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are
Re: Buy vs. Build
Yes...it is an awesome RAD environment but it's extremely hampered by its extraordinarily expensive licensing model. With another RAD (let's say Visual Studio .Net), you build the application and then never have to worry about paying a dime for application licenses. With Remedy you say, Hey, we could knock out XYZ app in a day! Oh...wait...we'd have to buy more licenses...nevermind... -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Elry Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 11:57 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build I have to say... There is nothing wrong with the ITSM Suite 7.x. It fits nicely into the ITIL Framework that a lot of companies crave. But, there are lot of companies that realize that they can't run their business efficiently inside the Framework; therefore, custom build or find another product. Luckily, these companies are beginning to realize that ARS is a great RAD Tool with it's own IDE integration plugins that make many other types of development pale by comparison... They are also finding out that the other ITIL based products out there are not as easily customizable, nor do they integrate well... In any event custom development will allow most companies to nail there processes then put a tool around it rather than tyring to push a square peg through a round hole... On Jul 22, 11:40 am, Tanner, Doug [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ray, Can you make your font just a little smaller :-) Old school custom builder - Your Business - Your Way I do believe for many reasons there are higher demands for custom applications versus ITSM 7.X (It Takes So Much) Great tool, make it dance, - I am a firm Believer in Remedy - Drive it with Data (as presented at past National RUG) But Do not want to be just a data administrator, Remedy is the most powerful Workflow Toolkit available - USE IT ! Doug Tanner RSP (Former RAC) Visionary of Rem-Mail From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ray Gellenbeck Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 9:48 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Buy vs. Build Am I the only one seeing a resurgance of contacts seeking experienced custom-build expertise vs. install/configure/maintain/integrate folks? I know BMC's pie in the sky goal is minimal need for customizations vs. configuration/data changes, but there seems to be a growing backlash against this McDonald's approach. I'm only asking this of the group to see if this trend is bigger than my areas of engagement over the last couple years. Sure, there will always be needs for folks to step in an make customizations here and there, but I'm suprised now at the number and the scope of custom-build-from-scratch projects I'm getting proposals/recruiters for compared to the past. Has ITSM mis-stepped in its later releases or is it that the customer growth for the engine and those upgrading has somewhat de-coupled from ITSM along the way? Have that many old-school custom-builders disappeared? Send me your thoughts directly if you feel the board wanting to stay focused on troubleshooting threads... Ray Gellenbeck [EMAIL PROTECTED] __Platinum Sponsor:www.rmsportal.comARSlist: Where the Answers Are html___ DISCLAIMER Important! This message is intended for the above named person(s) only and is CONFIDENTIAL AND PROPRIETARY. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail and have received it in error, please immediately notify the sender by return email and then delete it from your mailbox. This message may be protected by the attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. Accessing, copying, disseminating or re-using any of the information contained in this e-mail by anyone other than the intended recipient is strictly prohibited. Finally, you should check this email and any attachments for the presence of viruses, as the sender accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this email. Thank you. ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives atwww.arslist.org Platinum Sponsor:www.rmsportal.comARSlist: Where the Answers Are ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are
Re: Buy vs. Build
Another great reason for the Custom applications, I have hundreds of users with only an AR User license - No Application licenses needed -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kaiser Norm E CIV USAF 96 CS/SCCE Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 3:32 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build Yes...it is an awesome RAD environment but it's extremely hampered by its extraordinarily expensive licensing model. With another RAD (let's say Visual Studio .Net), you build the application and then never have to worry about paying a dime for application licenses. With Remedy you say, Hey, we could knock out XYZ app in a day! Oh...wait...we'd have to buy more licenses...nevermind... -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Elry Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 11:57 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build I have to say... There is nothing wrong with the ITSM Suite 7.x. It fits nicely into the ITIL Framework that a lot of companies crave. But, there are lot of companies that realize that they can't run their business efficiently inside the Framework; therefore, custom build or find another product. Luckily, these companies are beginning to realize that ARS is a great RAD Tool with it's own IDE integration plugins that make many other types of development pale by comparison... They are also finding out that the other ITIL based products out there are not as easily customizable, nor do they integrate well... In any event custom development will allow most companies to nail there processes then put a tool around it rather than tyring to push a square peg through a round hole... On Jul 22, 11:40 am, Tanner, Doug [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ray, Can you make your font just a little smaller :-) Old school custom builder - Your Business - Your Way I do believe for many reasons there are higher demands for custom applications versus ITSM 7.X (It Takes So Much) Great tool, make it dance, - I am a firm Believer in Remedy - Drive it with Data (as presented at past National RUG) But Do not want to be just a data administrator, Remedy is the most powerful Workflow Toolkit available - USE IT ! Doug Tanner RSP (Former RAC) Visionary of Rem-Mail From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ray Gellenbeck Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 9:48 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Buy vs. Build Am I the only one seeing a resurgance of contacts seeking experienced custom-build expertise vs. install/configure/maintain/integrate folks? I know BMC's pie in the sky goal is minimal need for customizations vs. configuration/data changes, but there seems to be a growing backlash against this McDonald's approach. I'm only asking this of the group to see if this trend is bigger than my areas of engagement over the last couple years. Sure, there will always be needs for folks to step in an make customizations here and there, but I'm suprised now at the number and the scope of custom-build-from-scratch projects I'm getting proposals/recruiters for compared to the past. Has ITSM mis-stepped in its later releases or is it that the customer growth for the engine and those upgrading has somewhat de-coupled from ITSM along the way? Have that many old-school custom-builders disappeared? Send me your thoughts directly if you feel the board wanting to stay focused on troubleshooting threads... Ray Gellenbeck [EMAIL PROTECTED] __Platinum Sponsor:www.rmsportal.comARSlist: Where the Answers Are html___ DISCLAIMER Important! This message is intended for the above named person(s) only and is CONFIDENTIAL AND PROPRIETARY. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail and have received it in error, please immediately notify the sender by return email and then delete it from your mailbox. This message may be protected by the attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. Accessing, copying, disseminating or re-using any of the information contained in this e-mail by anyone other than the intended recipient is strictly prohibited. Finally, you should check this email and any attachments for the presence of viruses, as the sender accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this email. Thank you. ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives atwww.arslist.org Platinum Sponsor:www.rmsportal.comARSlist: Where the Answers Are ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are ___ UNSUBSCRIBE
Re: Buy vs. Build
Yeah but if you custom build your application you do not need all of the licenses for instance like ITSM 7 needs, Problem, change, asset, incident etc... Kevin Begosh, RSP External Initiatives System Design Integration 301-791-3540 Phone 410-422-3623 Cell [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kaiser Norm E CIV USAF 96 CS/SCCE Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 3:32 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build Yes...it is an awesome RAD environment but it's extremely hampered by its extraordinarily expensive licensing model. With another RAD (let's say Visual Studio .Net), you build the application and then never have to worry about paying a dime for application licenses. With Remedy you say, Hey, we could knock out XYZ app in a day! Oh...wait...we'd have to buy more licenses...nevermind... -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Elry Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 11:57 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build I have to say... There is nothing wrong with the ITSM Suite 7.x. It fits nicely into the ITIL Framework that a lot of companies crave. But, there are lot of companies that realize that they can't run their business efficiently inside the Framework; therefore, custom build or find another product. Luckily, these companies are beginning to realize that ARS is a great RAD Tool with it's own IDE integration plugins that make many other types of development pale by comparison... They are also finding out that the other ITIL based products out there are not as easily customizable, nor do they integrate well... In any event custom development will allow most companies to nail there processes then put a tool around it rather than tyring to push a square peg through a round hole... On Jul 22, 11:40 am, Tanner, Doug [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ray, Can you make your font just a little smaller :-) Old school custom builder - Your Business - Your Way I do believe for many reasons there are higher demands for custom applications versus ITSM 7.X (It Takes So Much) Great tool, make it dance, - I am a firm Believer in Remedy - Drive it with Data (as presented at past National RUG) But Do not want to be just a data administrator, Remedy is the most powerful Workflow Toolkit available - USE IT ! Doug Tanner RSP (Former RAC) Visionary of Rem-Mail From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ray Gellenbeck Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 9:48 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Buy vs. Build Am I the only one seeing a resurgance of contacts seeking experienced custom-build expertise vs. install/configure/maintain/integrate folks? I know BMC's pie in the sky goal is minimal need for customizations vs. configuration/data changes, but there seems to be a growing backlash against this McDonald's approach. I'm only asking this of the group to see if this trend is bigger than my areas of engagement over the last couple years. Sure, there will always be needs for folks to step in an make customizations here and there, but I'm suprised now at the number and the scope of custom-build-from-scratch projects I'm getting proposals/recruiters for compared to the past. Has ITSM mis-stepped in its later releases or is it that the customer growth for the engine and those upgrading has somewhat de-coupled from ITSM along the way? Have that many old-school custom-builders disappeared? Send me your thoughts directly if you feel the board wanting to stay focused on troubleshooting threads... Ray Gellenbeck [EMAIL PROTECTED] __Platinum Sponsor:www.rmsportal.comARSlist: Where the Answers Are html___ DISCLAIMER Important! This message is intended for the above named person(s) only and is CONFIDENTIAL AND PROPRIETARY. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail and have received it in error, please immediately notify the sender by return email and then delete it from your mailbox. This message may be protected by the attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. Accessing, copying, disseminating or re-using any of the information contained in this e-mail by anyone other than the intended recipient is strictly prohibited. Finally, you should check this email and any attachments for the presence of viruses, as the sender accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this email. Thank you. ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives atwww.arslist.org Platinum Sponsor:www.rmsportal.comARSlist: Where the Answers Are ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org Platinum
Re: Buy vs. Build
Works exceptionally well just so long as user A doesn't need to update user B's request... -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tanner, Doug Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 2:37 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build Another great reason for the Custom applications, I have hundreds of users with only an AR User license - No Application licenses needed -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kaiser Norm E CIV USAF 96 CS/SCCE Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 3:32 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build Yes...it is an awesome RAD environment but it's extremely hampered by its extraordinarily expensive licensing model. With another RAD (let's say Visual Studio .Net), you build the application and then never have to worry about paying a dime for application licenses. With Remedy you say, Hey, we could knock out XYZ app in a day! Oh...wait...we'd have to buy more licenses...nevermind... -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Elry Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 11:57 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build I have to say... There is nothing wrong with the ITSM Suite 7.x. It fits nicely into the ITIL Framework that a lot of companies crave. But, there are lot of companies that realize that they can't run their business efficiently inside the Framework; therefore, custom build or find another product. Luckily, these companies are beginning to realize that ARS is a great RAD Tool with it's own IDE integration plugins that make many other types of development pale by comparison... They are also finding out that the other ITIL based products out there are not as easily customizable, nor do they integrate well... In any event custom development will allow most companies to nail there processes then put a tool around it rather than tyring to push a square peg through a round hole... On Jul 22, 11:40 am, Tanner, Doug [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ray, Can you make your font just a little smaller :-) Old school custom builder - Your Business - Your Way I do believe for many reasons there are higher demands for custom applications versus ITSM 7.X (It Takes So Much) Great tool, make it dance, - I am a firm Believer in Remedy - Drive it with Data (as presented at past National RUG) But Do not want to be just a data administrator, Remedy is the most powerful Workflow Toolkit available - USE IT ! Doug Tanner RSP (Former RAC) Visionary of Rem-Mail From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ray Gellenbeck Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 9:48 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Buy vs. Build Am I the only one seeing a resurgance of contacts seeking experienced custom-build expertise vs. install/configure/maintain/integrate folks? I know BMC's pie in the sky goal is minimal need for customizations vs. configuration/data changes, but there seems to be a growing backlash against this McDonald's approach. I'm only asking this of the group to see if this trend is bigger than my areas of engagement over the last couple years. Sure, there will always be needs for folks to step in an make customizations here and there, but I'm suprised now at the number and the scope of custom-build-from-scratch projects I'm getting proposals/recruiters for compared to the past. Has ITSM mis-stepped in its later releases or is it that the customer growth for the engine and those upgrading has somewhat de-coupled from ITSM along the way? Have that many old-school custom-builders disappeared? Send me your thoughts directly if you feel the board wanting to stay focused on troubleshooting threads... Ray Gellenbeck [EMAIL PROTECTED] __Platinum Sponsor:www.rmsportal.comARSlist: Where the Answers Are html___ DISCLAIMER Important! This message is intended for the above named person(s) only and is CONFIDENTIAL AND PROPRIETARY. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail and have received it in error, please immediately notify the sender by return email and then delete it from your mailbox. This message may be protected by the attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. Accessing, copying, disseminating or re-using any of the information contained in this e-mail by anyone other than the intended recipient is strictly prohibited. Finally, you should check this email and any attachments for the presence of viruses, as the sender accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this email. Thank you. ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives atwww.arslist.org Platinum Sponsor:www.rmsportal.comARSlist: Where
Re: Buy vs. Build
Right...you avoid the ridiculous (my opinion) costs associated with ITSM, but you still have to pay for AR System user licenses. With VS .Net, Delphi, or whatever you NEVER worry about user licenses for apps you build. -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Begosh, Kevin Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 2:36 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build Yeah but if you custom build your application you do not need all of the licenses for instance like ITSM 7 needs, Problem, change, asset, incident etc... Kevin Begosh, RSP External Initiatives System Design Integration 301-791-3540 Phone 410-422-3623 Cell [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kaiser Norm E CIV USAF 96 CS/SCCE Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 3:32 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build Yes...it is an awesome RAD environment but it's extremely hampered by its extraordinarily expensive licensing model. With another RAD (let's say Visual Studio .Net), you build the application and then never have to worry about paying a dime for application licenses. With Remedy you say, Hey, we could knock out XYZ app in a day! Oh...wait...we'd have to buy more licenses...nevermind... -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Elry Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 11:57 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build I have to say... There is nothing wrong with the ITSM Suite 7.x. It fits nicely into the ITIL Framework that a lot of companies crave. But, there are lot of companies that realize that they can't run their business efficiently inside the Framework; therefore, custom build or find another product. Luckily, these companies are beginning to realize that ARS is a great RAD Tool with it's own IDE integration plugins that make many other types of development pale by comparison... They are also finding out that the other ITIL based products out there are not as easily customizable, nor do they integrate well... In any event custom development will allow most companies to nail there processes then put a tool around it rather than tyring to push a square peg through a round hole... On Jul 22, 11:40 am, Tanner, Doug [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ray, Can you make your font just a little smaller :-) Old school custom builder - Your Business - Your Way I do believe for many reasons there are higher demands for custom applications versus ITSM 7.X (It Takes So Much) Great tool, make it dance, - I am a firm Believer in Remedy - Drive it with Data (as presented at past National RUG) But Do not want to be just a data administrator, Remedy is the most powerful Workflow Toolkit available - USE IT ! Doug Tanner RSP (Former RAC) Visionary of Rem-Mail From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ray Gellenbeck Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 9:48 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Buy vs. Build Am I the only one seeing a resurgance of contacts seeking experienced custom-build expertise vs. install/configure/maintain/integrate folks? I know BMC's pie in the sky goal is minimal need for customizations vs. configuration/data changes, but there seems to be a growing backlash against this McDonald's approach. I'm only asking this of the group to see if this trend is bigger than my areas of engagement over the last couple years. Sure, there will always be needs for folks to step in an make customizations here and there, but I'm suprised now at the number and the scope of custom-build-from-scratch projects I'm getting proposals/recruiters for compared to the past. Has ITSM mis-stepped in its later releases or is it that the customer growth for the engine and those upgrading has somewhat de-coupled from ITSM along the way? Have that many old-school custom-builders disappeared? Send me your thoughts directly if you feel the board wanting to stay focused on troubleshooting threads... Ray Gellenbeck [EMAIL PROTECTED] __Platinum Sponsor:www.rmsportal.comARSlist: Where the Answers Are html___ DISCLAIMER Important! This message is intended for the above named person(s) only and is CONFIDENTIAL AND PROPRIETARY. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail and have received it in error, please immediately notify the sender by return email and then delete it from your mailbox. This message may be protected by the attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. Accessing, copying, disseminating or re-using any of the information contained in this e-mail by anyone other than the intended recipient is strictly prohibited. Finally, you should check this email and any attachments for the presence of viruses, as the sender accepts
Re: Buy vs. Build
That's driven by who BMC decides market to. It's also driven by the competition in each software segment. Axton Grams On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 3:32 PM, Kaiser Norm E CIV USAF 96 CS/SCCE [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes...it is an awesome RAD environment but it's extremely hampered by its extraordinarily expensive licensing model. With another RAD (let's say Visual Studio .Net), you build the application and then never have to worry about paying a dime for application licenses. With Remedy you say, Hey, we could knock out XYZ app in a day! Oh...wait...we'd have to buy more licenses...nevermind... -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Elry Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 11:57 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build I have to say... There is nothing wrong with the ITSM Suite 7.x. It fits nicely into the ITIL Framework that a lot of companies crave. But, there are lot of companies that realize that they can't run their business efficiently inside the Framework; therefore, custom build or find another product. Luckily, these companies are beginning to realize that ARS is a great RAD Tool with it's own IDE integration plugins that make many other types of development pale by comparison... They are also finding out that the other ITIL based products out there are not as easily customizable, nor do they integrate well... In any event custom development will allow most companies to nail there processes then put a tool around it rather than tyring to push a square peg through a round hole... On Jul 22, 11:40 am, Tanner, Doug [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ray, Can you make your font just a little smaller :-) Old school custom builder - Your Business - Your Way I do believe for many reasons there are higher demands for custom applications versus ITSM 7.X (It Takes So Much) Great tool, make it dance, - I am a firm Believer in Remedy - Drive it with Data (as presented at past National RUG) But Do not want to be just a data administrator, Remedy is the most powerful Workflow Toolkit available - USE IT ! Doug Tanner RSP (Former RAC) Visionary of Rem-Mail From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ray Gellenbeck Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 9:48 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Buy vs. Build Am I the only one seeing a resurgance of contacts seeking experienced custom-build expertise vs. install/configure/maintain/integrate folks? I know BMC's pie in the sky goal is minimal need for customizations vs. configuration/data changes, but there seems to be a growing backlash against this McDonald's approach. I'm only asking this of the group to see if this trend is bigger than my areas of engagement over the last couple years. Sure, there will always be needs for folks to step in an make customizations here and there, but I'm suprised now at the number and the scope of custom-build-from-scratch projects I'm getting proposals/recruiters for compared to the past. Has ITSM mis-stepped in its later releases or is it that the customer growth for the engine and those upgrading has somewhat de-coupled from ITSM along the way? Have that many old-school custom-builders disappeared? Send me your thoughts directly if you feel the board wanting to stay focused on troubleshooting threads... Ray Gellenbeck [EMAIL PROTECTED] __Platinum Sponsor:www.rmsportal.comARSlist: Where the Answers Are html___ DISCLAIMER Important! This message is intended for the above named person(s) only and is CONFIDENTIAL AND PROPRIETARY. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail and have received it in error, please immediately notify the sender by return email and then delete it from your mailbox. This message may be protected by the attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. Accessing, copying, disseminating or re-using any of the information contained in this e-mail by anyone other than the intended recipient is strictly prohibited. Finally, you should check this email and any attachments for the presence of viruses, as the sender accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this email. Thank you. ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives atwww.arslist.org Platinum Sponsor:www.rmsportal.comARSlist: Where the Answers Are ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: Where the Answers Are ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: Where the Answers
Re: Buy vs. Build
If your customer is willing to conform to the processes established within the ITSM 7.0 framework with very MINIMUM customization Buy! If not Build! Your project is doomed to fail if you try to take the OOTB applications and customize them to meet your customers unique requirements. I know this from experience. It is not pretty! -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tanner, Doug Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 15:37 To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build Another great reason for the Custom applications, I have hundreds of users with only an AR User license - No Application licenses needed -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kaiser Norm E CIV USAF 96 CS/SCCE Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 3:32 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build Yes...it is an awesome RAD environment but it's extremely hampered by its extraordinarily expensive licensing model. With another RAD (let's say Visual Studio .Net), you build the application and then never have to worry about paying a dime for application licenses. With Remedy you say, Hey, we could knock out XYZ app in a day! Oh...wait...we'd have to buy more licenses...nevermind... -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Elry Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 11:57 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build I have to say... There is nothing wrong with the ITSM Suite 7.x. It fits nicely into the ITIL Framework that a lot of companies crave. But, there are lot of companies that realize that they can't run their business efficiently inside the Framework; therefore, custom build or find another product. Luckily, these companies are beginning to realize that ARS is a great RAD Tool with it's own IDE integration plugins that make many other types of development pale by comparison... They are also finding out that the other ITIL based products out there are not as easily customizable, nor do they integrate well... In any event custom development will allow most companies to nail there processes then put a tool around it rather than tyring to push a square peg through a round hole... On Jul 22, 11:40 am, Tanner, Doug [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ray, Can you make your font just a little smaller :-) Old school custom builder - Your Business - Your Way I do believe for many reasons there are higher demands for custom applications versus ITSM 7.X (It Takes So Much) Great tool, make it dance, - I am a firm Believer in Remedy - Drive it with Data (as presented at past National RUG) But Do not want to be just a data administrator, Remedy is the most powerful Workflow Toolkit available - USE IT ! Doug Tanner RSP (Former RAC) Visionary of Rem-Mail From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ray Gellenbeck Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 9:48 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Buy vs. Build Am I the only one seeing a resurgance of contacts seeking experienced custom-build expertise vs. install/configure/maintain/integrate folks? I know BMC's pie in the sky goal is minimal need for customizations vs. configuration/data changes, but there seems to be a growing backlash against this McDonald's approach. I'm only asking this of the group to see if this trend is bigger than my areas of engagement over the last couple years. Sure, there will always be needs for folks to step in an make customizations here and there, but I'm suprised now at the number and the scope of custom-build-from-scratch projects I'm getting proposals/recruiters for compared to the past. Has ITSM mis-stepped in its later releases or is it that the customer growth for the engine and those upgrading has somewhat de-coupled from ITSM along the way? Have that many old-school custom-builders disappeared? Send me your thoughts directly if you feel the board wanting to stay focused on troubleshooting threads... Ray Gellenbeck [EMAIL PROTECTED] __Platinum Sponsor:www.rmsportal.comARSlist: Where the Answers Are html___ DISCLAIMER Important! This message is intended for the above named person(s) only and is CONFIDENTIAL AND PROPRIETARY. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail and have received it in error, please immediately notify the sender by return email and then delete it from your mailbox. This message may be protected by the attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. Accessing, copying, disseminating or re-using any of the information contained in this e-mail by anyone other than the intended recipient is strictly prohibited. Finally, you should check this email and any attachments for the presence of viruses, as the sender accepts no liability for any damage
Re: Buy vs. Build
I think this is where Enterprise Service Suite (ESS) @ Work turns out to be such a bargain. It's very solid application suite that's every bit as functional as ISTM *and ITIL compliant* without the recurring expense of extra application licenses. http://buoyantsolutions.net/ESS.html (No, I don't get a commission from Gidd for saying this. I truly believe it.) --Tim - Original Message From: Begosh, Kevin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 3:36:26 PM Subject: Re: [ARSLIST] Buy vs. Build Yeah but if you custom build your application you do not need all of the licenses for instance like ITSM 7 needs, Problem, change, asset, incident etc... Kevin Begosh, RSP External Initiatives System Design Integration 301-791-3540 Phone 410-422-3623 Cell [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kaiser Norm E CIV USAF 96 CS/SCCE Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 3:32 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build Yes...it is an awesome RAD environment but it's extremely hampered by its extraordinarily expensive licensing model. With another RAD (let's say Visual Studio .Net), you build the application and then never have to worry about paying a dime for application licenses. With Remedy you say, Hey, we could knock out XYZ app in a day! Oh...wait...we'd have to buy more licenses...nevermind... -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Elry Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 11:57 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build I have to say... There is nothing wrong with the ITSM Suite 7.x. It fits nicely into the ITIL Framework that a lot of companies crave. But, there are lot of companies that realize that they can't run their business efficiently inside the Framework; therefore, custom build or find another product. Luckily, these companies are beginning to realize that ARS is a great RAD Tool with it's own IDE integration plugins that make many other types of development pale by comparison... They are also finding out that the other ITIL based products out there are not as easily customizable, nor do they integrate well... In any event custom development will allow most companies to nail there processes then put a tool around it rather than tyring to push a square peg through a round hole... On Jul 22, 11:40 am, Tanner, Doug [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ray, Can you make your font just a little smaller :-) Old school custom builder - Your Business - Your Way I do believe for many reasons there are higher demands for custom applications versus ITSM 7.X (It Takes So Much) Great tool, make it dance, - I am a firm Believer in Remedy - Drive it with Data (as presented at past National RUG) But Do not want to be just a data administrator, Remedy is the most powerful Workflow Toolkit available - USE IT ! Doug Tanner RSP (Former RAC) Visionary of Rem-Mail From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ray Gellenbeck Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 9:48 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Buy vs. Build Am I the only one seeing a resurgance of contacts seeking experienced custom-build expertise vs. install/configure/maintain/integrate folks? I know BMC's pie in the sky goal is minimal need for customizations vs. configuration/data changes, but there seems to be a growing backlash against this McDonald's approach. I'm only asking this of the group to see if this trend is bigger than my areas of engagement over the last couple years. Sure, there will always be needs for folks to step in an make customizations here and there, but I'm suprised now at the number and the scope of custom-build-from-scratch projects I'm getting proposals/recruiters for compared to the past. Has ITSM mis-stepped in its later releases or is it that the customer growth for the engine and those upgrading has somewhat de-coupled from ITSM along the way? Have that many old-school custom-builders disappeared? Send me your thoughts directly if you feel the board wanting to stay focused on troubleshooting threads... Ray Gellenbeck [EMAIL PROTECTED] __Platinum Sponsor:www.rmsportal.comARSlist: Where the Answers Are html___ DISCLAIMER Important! This message is intended for the above named person(s) only and is CONFIDENTIAL AND PROPRIETARY. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail and have received it in error, please immediately notify the sender by return email and then delete it from your mailbox. This message may be protected by the attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. Accessing, copying, disseminating or re-using any of the information contained in this e-mail by anyone other than the intended recipient is strictly prohibited
Re: Buy vs. Build
All Microsoft users must be covered by a CAL license of some type either Server license and/or Database license. -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kaiser Norm E CIV USAF 96 CS/SCCE Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 15:41 To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build Right...you avoid the ridiculous (my opinion) costs associated with ITSM, but you still have to pay for AR System user licenses. With VS .Net, Delphi, or whatever you NEVER worry about user licenses for apps you build. -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Begosh, Kevin Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 2:36 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build Yeah but if you custom build your application you do not need all of the licenses for instance like ITSM 7 needs, Problem, change, asset, incident etc... Kevin Begosh, RSP External Initiatives System Design Integration 301-791-3540 Phone 410-422-3623 Cell [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kaiser Norm E CIV USAF 96 CS/SCCE Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 3:32 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build Yes...it is an awesome RAD environment but it's extremely hampered by its extraordinarily expensive licensing model. With another RAD (let's say Visual Studio .Net), you build the application and then never have to worry about paying a dime for application licenses. With Remedy you say, Hey, we could knock out XYZ app in a day! Oh...wait...we'd have to buy more licenses...nevermind... -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Elry Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 11:57 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build I have to say... There is nothing wrong with the ITSM Suite 7.x. It fits nicely into the ITIL Framework that a lot of companies crave. But, there are lot of companies that realize that they can't run their business efficiently inside the Framework; therefore, custom build or find another product. Luckily, these companies are beginning to realize that ARS is a great RAD Tool with it's own IDE integration plugins that make many other types of development pale by comparison... They are also finding out that the other ITIL based products out there are not as easily customizable, nor do they integrate well... In any event custom development will allow most companies to nail there processes then put a tool around it rather than tyring to push a square peg through a round hole... On Jul 22, 11:40 am, Tanner, Doug [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ray, Can you make your font just a little smaller :-) Old school custom builder - Your Business - Your Way I do believe for many reasons there are higher demands for custom applications versus ITSM 7.X (It Takes So Much) Great tool, make it dance, - I am a firm Believer in Remedy - Drive it with Data (as presented at past National RUG) But Do not want to be just a data administrator, Remedy is the most powerful Workflow Toolkit available - USE IT ! Doug Tanner RSP (Former RAC) Visionary of Rem-Mail From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ray Gellenbeck Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 9:48 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Buy vs. Build Am I the only one seeing a resurgance of contacts seeking experienced custom-build expertise vs. install/configure/maintain/integrate folks? I know BMC's pie in the sky goal is minimal need for customizations vs. configuration/data changes, but there seems to be a growing backlash against this McDonald's approach. I'm only asking this of the group to see if this trend is bigger than my areas of engagement over the last couple years. Sure, there will always be needs for folks to step in an make customizations here and there, but I'm suprised now at the number and the scope of custom-build-from-scratch projects I'm getting proposals/recruiters for compared to the past. Has ITSM mis-stepped in its later releases or is it that the customer growth for the engine and those upgrading has somewhat de-coupled from ITSM along the way? Have that many old-school custom-builders disappeared? Send me your thoughts directly if you feel the board wanting to stay focused on troubleshooting threads... Ray Gellenbeck [EMAIL PROTECTED] __Platinum Sponsor:www.rmsportal.comARSlist: Where the Answers Are html___ DISCLAIMER Important! This message is intended for the above named person(s) only and is CONFIDENTIAL AND PROPRIETARY. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail and have received it in error, please immediately notify the sender by return email and then delete it from your mailbox. This message
Re: Buy vs. Build
Right...given...but same is true about Remedy running in an MS environment. Remedy in MS environment = CALs, server license, and/or database license PLUS Remedy user licenses Other app developed with VS or other RAD = CALS, server license, and/or database license...but no app license! Moreover, with other RADs you can leverage MySQL or Postgre and get away from the database licenses, too...Remedy doesn't yet support MySQL or Postgre. -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Davis, David CTR NAVSURFWARCENDIV Crane, Code 0552 Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 3:06 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build All Microsoft users must be covered by a CAL license of some type either Server license and/or Database license. -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kaiser Norm E CIV USAF 96 CS/SCCE Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 15:41 To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build Right...you avoid the ridiculous (my opinion) costs associated with ITSM, but you still have to pay for AR System user licenses. With VS .Net, Delphi, or whatever you NEVER worry about user licenses for apps you build. -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Begosh, Kevin Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 2:36 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build Yeah but if you custom build your application you do not need all of the licenses for instance like ITSM 7 needs, Problem, change, asset, incident etc... Kevin Begosh, RSP External Initiatives System Design Integration 301-791-3540 Phone 410-422-3623 Cell [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kaiser Norm E CIV USAF 96 CS/SCCE Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 3:32 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build Yes...it is an awesome RAD environment but it's extremely hampered by its extraordinarily expensive licensing model. With another RAD (let's say Visual Studio .Net), you build the application and then never have to worry about paying a dime for application licenses. With Remedy you say, Hey, we could knock out XYZ app in a day! Oh...wait...we'd have to buy more licenses...nevermind... -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Elry Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 11:57 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build I have to say... There is nothing wrong with the ITSM Suite 7.x. It fits nicely into the ITIL Framework that a lot of companies crave. But, there are lot of companies that realize that they can't run their business efficiently inside the Framework; therefore, custom build or find another product. Luckily, these companies are beginning to realize that ARS is a great RAD Tool with it's own IDE integration plugins that make many other types of development pale by comparison... They are also finding out that the other ITIL based products out there are not as easily customizable, nor do they integrate well... In any event custom development will allow most companies to nail there processes then put a tool around it rather than tyring to push a square peg through a round hole... On Jul 22, 11:40 am, Tanner, Doug [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ray, Can you make your font just a little smaller :-) Old school custom builder - Your Business - Your Way I do believe for many reasons there are higher demands for custom applications versus ITSM 7.X (It Takes So Much) Great tool, make it dance, - I am a firm Believer in Remedy - Drive it with Data (as presented at past National RUG) But Do not want to be just a data administrator, Remedy is the most powerful Workflow Toolkit available - USE IT ! Doug Tanner RSP (Former RAC) Visionary of Rem-Mail From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ray Gellenbeck Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 9:48 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Buy vs. Build Am I the only one seeing a resurgance of contacts seeking experienced custom-build expertise vs. install/configure/maintain/integrate folks? I know BMC's pie in the sky goal is minimal need for customizations vs. configuration/data changes, but there seems to be a growing backlash against this McDonald's approach. I'm only asking this of the group to see if this trend is bigger than my areas of engagement over the last couple years. Sure, there will always be needs for folks to step in an make customizations here and there, but I'm suprised now at the number and the scope of custom-build-from-scratch projects I'm getting proposals/recruiters for compared to the past. Has ITSM mis-stepped in its later releases
Re: Buy vs. Build
Norm, I'll take a stab at this, from all appearances you are gainfully employed servicing some sort of Remedy application? Like it or not there are few, count them on one hand if you like, enterprise applications like ITSM (or ESS for that matter) that can scale globally and that is fundamentally because of ARS. For us old timers, ARS was here long before there we OOTB applications and this list served only one purpose back then, to share knowledge. Whether I like or dislike ITSM is not the point of this thread it seems to me but rather this is about should the list continue to exist to support primarily ITSM issues? I am sure that Dan will chime in here at some point ... Doug is right, don't see what you like here then build your own but you know what, when you hit the wall guess where you'll post your questions? There is a reason Remedy is where it is. There was a reason that Peregrine could not beat Remedy in the same marketplace and still can't. Bottom line, unless you are signing the check and control direction, management will choose what it deems to be the best tool for the job and their enterprise. Facts are, it'll probably be Remedy driven by ARS ! Regards...Gidd PS: Thanks Doug and Larry and others who had the vision to develop ARS. (yes I appreciate the Checkbox you did for me years ago and I still remember). -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kaiser Norm E CIV USAF 96 CS/SCCE Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 1:10 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build Right...given...but same is true about Remedy running in an MS environment. Remedy in MS environment = CALs, server license, and/or database license PLUS Remedy user licenses Other app developed with VS or other RAD = CALS, server license, and/or database license...but no app license! Moreover, with other RADs you can leverage MySQL or Postgre and get away from the database licenses, too...Remedy doesn't yet support MySQL or Postgre. -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Davis, David CTR NAVSURFWARCENDIV Crane, Code 0552 Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 3:06 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build All Microsoft users must be covered by a CAL license of some type either Server license and/or Database license. -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kaiser Norm E CIV USAF 96 CS/SCCE Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 15:41 To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build Right...you avoid the ridiculous (my opinion) costs associated with ITSM, but you still have to pay for AR System user licenses. With VS .Net, Delphi, or whatever you NEVER worry about user licenses for apps you build. -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Begosh, Kevin Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 2:36 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build Yeah but if you custom build your application you do not need all of the licenses for instance like ITSM 7 needs, Problem, change, asset, incident etc... Kevin Begosh, RSP External Initiatives System Design Integration 301-791-3540 Phone 410-422-3623 Cell [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kaiser Norm E CIV USAF 96 CS/SCCE Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 3:32 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build Yes...it is an awesome RAD environment but it's extremely hampered by its extraordinarily expensive licensing model. With another RAD (let's say Visual Studio .Net), you build the application and then never have to worry about paying a dime for application licenses. With Remedy you say, Hey, we could knock out XYZ app in a day! Oh...wait...we'd have to buy more licenses...nevermind... -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Elry Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 11:57 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build I have to say... There is nothing wrong with the ITSM Suite 7.x. It fits nicely into the ITIL Framework that a lot of companies crave. But, there are lot of companies that realize that they can't run their business efficiently inside the Framework; therefore, custom build or find another product. Luckily, these companies are beginning to realize that ARS is a great RAD Tool with it's own IDE integration plugins that make many other types of development pale by comparison... They are also finding out that the other ITIL based products out there are not as easily customizable, nor do they integrate well... In any event custom development will allow most companies to nail there processes then put a tool around it rather than tyring to push a square
Re: Buy vs. Build
In addition to that, based on what I've seen, Remedy ARS developers get paid a lot more than .NET developers. Factor into that the difficulty in finding ARS developers, and management is more likely to pursue custom .NET development work as opposed to custom ARS development. If you leave the company, how long would it take for them to find a decent ARS developer willing to take your job for a 5% raise over what you get now? It would be difficult. On the other hand, you can probably find a decent .NET developer willing to get the same salary you do pretty easily. One of the best things about working with Remedy products is the good job market, but at the same time there isn't enough new blood and enough marketing of ARS to really make the development platform thrive like .NET has. You don't see BMC handing out free ARS server licenses on college campuses. Shawn Pierson -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kaiser Norm E CIV USAF 96 CS/SCCE Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 2:32 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build Yes...it is an awesome RAD environment but it's extremely hampered by its extraordinarily expensive licensing model. With another RAD (let's say Visual Studio .Net), you build the application and then never have to worry about paying a dime for application licenses. With Remedy you say, Hey, we could knock out XYZ app in a day! Oh...wait...we'd have to buy more licenses...nevermind... -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Elry Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 11:57 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build I have to say... There is nothing wrong with the ITSM Suite 7.x. It fits nicely into the ITIL Framework that a lot of companies crave. But, there are lot of companies that realize that they can't run their business efficiently inside the Framework; therefore, custom build or find another product. Luckily, these companies are beginning to realize that ARS is a great RAD Tool with it's own IDE integration plugins that make many other types of development pale by comparison... They are also finding out that the other ITIL based products out there are not as easily customizable, nor do they integrate well... In any event custom development will allow most companies to nail there processes then put a tool around it rather than tyring to push a square peg through a round hole... On Jul 22, 11:40 am, Tanner, Doug [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ray, Can you make your font just a little smaller :-) Old school custom builder - Your Business - Your Way I do believe for many reasons there are higher demands for custom applications versus ITSM 7.X (It Takes So Much) Great tool, make it dance, - I am a firm Believer in Remedy - Drive it with Data (as presented at past National RUG) But Do not want to be just a data administrator, Remedy is the most powerful Workflow Toolkit available - USE IT ! Doug Tanner RSP (Former RAC) Visionary of Rem-Mail From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ray Gellenbeck Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 9:48 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Buy vs. Build Am I the only one seeing a resurgance of contacts seeking experienced custom-build expertise vs. install/configure/maintain/integrate folks? I know BMC's pie in the sky goal is minimal need for customizations vs. configuration/data changes, but there seems to be a growing backlash against this McDonald's approach. I'm only asking this of the group to see if this trend is bigger than my areas of engagement over the last couple years. Sure, there will always be needs for folks to step in an make customizations here and there, but I'm suprised now at the number and the scope of custom-build-from-scratch projects I'm getting proposals/recruiters for compared to the past. Has ITSM mis-stepped in its later releases or is it that the customer growth for the engine and those upgrading has somewhat de-coupled from ITSM along the way? Have that many old-school custom-builders disappeared? Send me your thoughts directly if you feel the board wanting to stay focused on troubleshooting threads... Ray Gellenbeck [EMAIL PROTECTED] __Platinum Sponsor:www.rmsportal.comARSlist: Where the Answers Are html___ DISCLAIMER Important! This message is intended for the above named person(s) only and is CONFIDENTIAL AND PROPRIETARY. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail and have received it in error, please immediately notify the sender by return email and then delete it from your mailbox. This message may be protected by the attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine. Accessing, copying, disseminating or re-using any of the information contained in this e-mail by anyone
Re: Buy vs. Build
Shawn, you are right on target! IT management culture has changed since the AR System's initial introduction. In those days IT shops regularly debated the buy vs. build dilemma, and there wasn't a clear winner. Today it's different, as IT shops regularly select OOTB applications -- build decisions are the exception, not the rule. And it's not about cost. It's about assuring the business that IT's core service management applications are maintained and updated by a stable and reputable company, not Joe in development or some goober-faced no-name outfit that no one (outside a small Remedy community) has heard of. There has also been some BIG money invested in Software as a Service (SaaS) offerings, and that market continues to grow exponentially each year. Unfortunately, Remedy's market continues to shrink each year. Yet BMC continues to refuse to provide free ARS developer kits to encourage the development of new applications/products based on the AR System, and they refuse to offer ARS interfaces for Java, PHP/Python, .NET, and other current technologies. BMC's current focus is on applications, not the AR System or custom development, so it's unclear what the future holds for those shops who continue to run home brew applications, or what the future holds for those developers who cling to the ARS toolset even the manufacturer has virtually abandoned. (Sorry for the depressing statements. And no offense is intended to any independent ARS developers or product vendors -- on the contrary, by successfully offering your ARS-based products and services you've accomplished something even the mighty BMC/Remedy marketing machine has not, and you should be proud of it!) -- Bing Bradford Bingel (Bing) ITM3 California http://www.itm3.com/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] (email) 925-260-6394 (mobile) -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Pierson, Shawn Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 2:26 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build In addition to that, based on what I've seen, Remedy ARS developers get paid a lot more than .NET developers. Factor into that the difficulty in finding ARS developers, and management is more likely to pursue custom .NET development work as opposed to custom ARS development. If you leave the company, how long would it take for them to find a decent ARS developer willing to take your job for a 5% raise over what you get now? It would be difficult. On the other hand, you can probably find a decent .NET developer willing to get the same salary you do pretty easily. One of the best things about working with Remedy products is the good job market, but at the same time there isn't enough new blood and enough marketing of ARS to really make the development platform thrive like .NET has. You don't see BMC handing out free ARS server licenses on college campuses. Shawn Pierson -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kaiser Norm E CIV USAF 96 CS/SCCE Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 2:32 PM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build Yes...it is an awesome RAD environment but it's extremely hampered by its extraordinarily expensive licensing model. With another RAD (let's say Visual Studio .Net), you build the application and then never have to worry about paying a dime for application licenses. With Remedy you say, Hey, we could knock out XYZ app in a day! Oh...wait...we'd have to buy more licenses...nevermind... -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Elry Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2008 11:57 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Buy vs. Build I have to say... There is nothing wrong with the ITSM Suite 7.x. It fits nicely into the ITIL Framework that a lot of companies crave. But, there are lot of companies that realize that they can't run their business efficiently inside the Framework; therefore, custom build or find another product. Luckily, these companies are beginning to realize that ARS is a great RAD Tool with it's own IDE integration plugins that make many other types of development pale by comparison... They are also finding out that the other ITIL based products out there are not as easily customizable, nor do they integrate well... In any event custom development will allow most companies to nail there processes then put a tool around it rather than tyring to push a square peg through a round hole... On Jul 22, 11:40 am, Tanner, Doug [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ray, Can you make your font just a little smaller :-) Old school custom builder - Your Business - Your Way I do believe for many reasons there are higher demands for custom applications versus ITSM 7.X (It Takes So Much) Great tool, make it dance, - I am a firm Believer in Remedy - Drive it with Data (as presented at past National RUG
