Re: Naked ARS (was: The ~! for filter names)
Totally agreed that the strength of remedy is the workflow engine. BMC just don't see the value, which is sad. I am searching for an equivalent product for SME. Was thinking the remedyForce was one ... But.. From this group, it is not. Sigh -Original Message- From: Support supp...@arsmarts.com Sent: 07/03/2015 23:16 To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Naked ARS (was: The ~! for filter names) ** Hello List, Looks like I'm not the only one with the same idea . :-D. I have been working with Remedy since 1997 (yes, the previous century ...), beginning with version 2.3. Like everybody, I have seen AR System replaced by ITSM/CMDB and I cried out loud I have recently been working on projects more at the ITIL level, where the supporting tool had already been chosen. This gave me the opportunity to look at a number of other ITSM software packages, both from the end-user point of view and under the hood (admin and developer). As far as I am concerned, AR System is miles ahead compared to other tools, while the ITSM/CMDB sold by BMC is just another app on the market. If I may add something along the same line: applications such as ITSM8 have become too complexe (and too big) for the European market (where companies are not as large as in the US). I know for certain 3 customers who tried to move from a previous version of Remedy ITSM to ITSM8 and after a year of effort gave up and have now completely dropped Remedy :-( :-(. And there are more going down that path as we speak. If large applications make sense for large companies, it requires less consulting time to build a small ITSM app than to configure a large one, so offering AR System as a workflow engine makes a lot of sense to me (perhaps with a basic HelpDesk Template ). Also, the ITIL market has offered a flourishing field to do business the last 15-20 years or so (remember back in 1998-1999, when Remedy had a 50% market share ). I think that the market is now mature, and all customers have what they need, so propose AR System as a more general workflow engine could be a step to diversification Cheers, Kaïs. On 7/03/2015 13:57, Harsh wrote: ** Hi All, The decent workflow engine what we called ARS is backbone of these suits and It was really disheartening when BMC announced ARS will not be sold individually. I mean this a great platform where we can design custom apps and more modular apps that's help any organization. I still feel ARS should be sold solely, it was and it is the best platform for creating custom applications quickly. My vote is for naked ARS. Regards, Harsh On 07-Mar-2015 12:18 am, Andrew Hicox and...@hicox.com wrote: ** AMEN! I can't belive how short sighted bmc has become in regard to pushing itsm/cmdb and the rest of the licensed oob apps. Especially at the expense of pushing out custom development (essentially not supporting it). The true irony, in my opinion, is that in the decade+ that we've been struggling with converting the aruser GUI paradigm to a Web interface, the world has come full circle. Today, it's all mobile apps, and Web interfaces are on the way out. Static dimension, single window grid layouts are back in a huge way. I know what I could do with a naked arserver, and an aruser client that works on ios and android. With a few tweaks to the GUI elements to make them mobile friendly and client side plug-ins to give access to the camera, accelerometer, messaging framework and the rest ... holy moses, I know exactly what I could do with that! Change the world. That's what. On Mar 6, 2015 11:42 AM, Ray Gellenbeck ray.gellenb...@redmangollc.com wrote: Thanks. The whole point was that some people don't even KNOW that the engine is, well, an engine unto itself. There seems to be a trend (marketing?) to present the image that Remedy is ONLY CMDB/ITSM. It's always challenging to explain to customers that those are just apps running on a (very nice) workflow engine underneath. I'm all for canned apps where they make sense. Ease of upgrade path, support, etc etc. However, small steps seem to keep happening in the product evolution over the last few versions to slowly close off the custom-build path and I'd just like to ask for the server/engine to be made available *without* the suite. As great (or not great) as anyone might feel the suite is, there are plenty out there who want something simpler, or more modular, or (insert complaint here). It's part of why other products (especially those that start with S and end with W) get a lot of migration. There needs to be more flexibility. It also lets you push back on customizers from a support perspective. It won't be quite as ridiculous to have support tell you that's been customized, we don't support it because if you want custom, you should buy the naked product and build your own. I'm not pretending it's is any big magical answer
Re: Naked ARS (was: The ~! for filter names)
Hi All, The decent workflow engine what we called ARS is backbone of these suits and It was really disheartening when BMC announced ARS will not be sold individually. I mean this a great platform where we can design custom apps and more modular apps that's help any organization. I still feel ARS should be sold solely, it was and it is the best platform for creating custom applications quickly. My vote is for naked ARS. Regards, Harsh On 07-Mar-2015 12:18 am, Andrew Hicox and...@hicox.com wrote: ** AMEN! I can't belive how short sighted bmc has become in regard to pushing itsm/cmdb and the rest of the licensed oob apps. Especially at the expense of pushing out custom development (essentially not supporting it). The true irony, in my opinion, is that in the decade+ that we've been struggling with converting the aruser GUI paradigm to a Web interface, the world has come full circle. Today, it's all mobile apps, and Web interfaces are on the way out. Static dimension, single window grid layouts are back in a huge way. I know what I could do with a naked arserver, and an aruser client that works on ios and android. With a few tweaks to the GUI elements to make them mobile friendly and client side plug-ins to give access to the camera, accelerometer, messaging framework and the rest ... holy moses, I know exactly what I could do with that! Change the world. That's what. On Mar 6, 2015 11:42 AM, Ray Gellenbeck ray.gellenb...@redmangollc.com wrote: Thanks. The whole point was that some people don't even KNOW that the engine is, well, an engine unto itself. There seems to be a trend (marketing?) to present the image that Remedy is ONLY CMDB/ITSM. It's always challenging to explain to customers that those are just apps running on a (very nice) workflow engine underneath. I'm all for canned apps where they make sense. Ease of upgrade path, support, etc etc. However, small steps seem to keep happening in the product evolution over the last few versions to slowly close off the custom-build path and I'd just like to ask for the server/engine to be made available *without* the suite. As great (or not great) as anyone might feel the suite is, there are plenty out there who want something simpler, or more modular, or (insert complaint here). It's part of why other products (especially those that start with S and end with W) get a lot of migration. There needs to be more flexibility. It also lets you push back on customizers from a support perspective. It won't be quite as ridiculous to have support tell you that's been customized, we don't support it because if you want custom, you should buy the naked product and build your own. I'm not pretending it's is any big magical answer. The request was really just to speak to a mindset to say quit forcing one solution as if it is the right answer for everyone. Bring back some choice. Now if you've pitched Galileo (ITSM/CMDB v9) to customers and they don't like it, make this Plan B, a workflow engine platform where you can roll your own. Plenty won't like that either, but some do already and others will going forward, and it would be nice not to have to install all the ITSM spagetti if it's not going to be used. Make a modular installer where base is ONLY the engine and User/Group tables. Add some option checkboxes for Email Engine, Mid-Tier, Preferences, and other foundation elements some will still want in a custom build, BUT OTHERS WON'T. 15 up-votes so far in just a couple days. I think I hit a nerve ;) (/endsoapbox) ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years _ARSlist: Where the Answers Are and have been for 20 years_ ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years
Re: Naked ARS (was: The ~! for filter names)
Hello List, Looks like I'm not the only one with the same idea . :-D. I have been working with Remedy since 1997 (yes, the previous century ...), beginning with version 2.3. Like everybody, I have seen AR System replaced by ITSM/CMDB and I cried out loud I have recently been working on projects more at the ITIL level, where the supporting tool had already been chosen. This gave me the opportunity to look at a number of other ITSM software packages, both from the end-user point of view and under the hood (admin and developer). As far as I am concerned, AR System is miles ahead compared to other tools, while the ITSM/CMDB sold by BMC is just another app on the market. If I may add something along the same line: applications such as ITSM8 have become too complexe (and too big) for the European market (where companies are not as large as in the US). I know for certain 3 customers who tried to move from a previous version of Remedy ITSM to ITSM8 and after a year of effort gave up and have now completely dropped Remedy :-( :-(. And there are more going down that path as we speak. If large applications make sense for large companies, it requires less consulting time to build a small ITSM app than to configure a large one, so offering AR System as a workflow engine makes a lot of sense to me (perhaps with a basic HelpDesk Template ). Also, the ITIL market has offered a flourishing field to do business the last 15-20 years or so (remember back in 1998-1999, when Remedy had a 50% market share ). I think that the market is now mature, and all customers have what they need, so propose AR System as a more general workflow engine could be a step to diversification Cheers, Kaïs. On 7/03/2015 13:57, Harsh wrote: ** Hi All, The decent workflow engine what we called ARS is backbone of these suits and It was really disheartening when BMC announced ARS will not be sold individually. I mean this a great platform where we can design custom apps and more modular apps that's help any organization. I still feel ARS should be sold solely, it was and it is the best platform for creating custom applications quickly. My vote is for naked ARS. Regards, Harsh On 07-Mar-2015 12:18 am, Andrew Hicox and...@hicox.com mailto:and...@hicox.com wrote: ** AMEN! I can't belive how short sighted bmc has become in regard to pushing itsm/cmdb and the rest of the licensed oob apps. Especially at the expense of pushing out custom development (essentially not supporting it). The true irony, in my opinion, is that in the decade+ that we've been struggling with converting the aruser GUI paradigm to a Web interface, the world has come full circle. Today, it's all mobile apps, and Web interfaces are on the way out. Static dimension, single window grid layouts are back in a huge way. I know what I could do with a naked arserver, and an aruser client that works on ios and android. With a few tweaks to the GUI elements to make them mobile friendly and client side plug-ins to give access to the camera, accelerometer, messaging framework and the rest ... holy moses, I know exactly what I could do with that! Change the world. That's what. On Mar 6, 2015 11:42 AM, Ray Gellenbeck ray.gellenb...@redmangollc.com mailto:ray.gellenb...@redmangollc.com wrote: Thanks. The whole point was that some people don't even KNOW that the engine is, well, an engine unto itself. There seems to be a trend (marketing?) to present the image that Remedy is ONLY CMDB/ITSM. It's always challenging to explain to customers that those are just apps running on a (very nice) workflow engine underneath. I'm all for canned apps where they make sense. Ease of upgrade path, support, etc etc. However, small steps seem to keep happening in the product evolution over the last few versions to slowly close off the custom-build path and I'd just like to ask for the server/engine to be made available *without* the suite. As great (or not great) as anyone might feel the suite is, there are plenty out there who want something simpler, or more modular, or (insert complaint here). It's part of why other products (especially those that start with S and end with W) get a lot of migration. There needs to be more flexibility. It also lets you push back on customizers from a support perspective. It won't be quite as ridiculous to have support tell you that's been customized, we don't support it because if you want custom, you should buy the naked product and build your own. I'm not pretending it's is any big magical answer. The request was really just to speak to a mindset to say quit forcing one solution as if it is the right
Re: Naked ARS (was: The ~! for filter names)
Thanks. The whole point was that some people don't even KNOW that the engine is, well, an engine unto itself. There seems to be a trend (marketing?) to present the image that Remedy is ONLY CMDB/ITSM. It's always challenging to explain to customers that those are just apps running on a (very nice) workflow engine underneath. I'm all for canned apps where they make sense. Ease of upgrade path, support, etc etc. However, small steps seem to keep happening in the product evolution over the last few versions to slowly close off the custom-build path and I'd just like to ask for the server/engine to be made available *without* the suite. As great (or not great) as anyone might feel the suite is, there are plenty out there who want something simpler, or more modular, or (insert complaint here). It's part of why other products (especially those that start with S and end with W) get a lot of migration. There needs to be more flexibility. It also lets you push back on customizers from a support perspective. It won't be quite as ridiculous to have support tell you that's been customized, we don't support it because if you want custom, you should buy the naked product and build your own. I'm not pretending it's is any big magical answer. The request was really just to speak to a mindset to say quit forcing one solution as if it is the right answer for everyone. Bring back some choice. Now if you've pitched Galileo (ITSM/CMDB v9) to customers and they don't like it, make this Plan B, a workflow engine platform where you can roll your own. Plenty won't like that either, but some do already and others will going forward, and it would be nice not to have to install all the ITSM spagetti if it's not going to be used. Make a modular installer where base is ONLY the engine and User/Group tables. Add some option checkboxes for Email Engine, Mid-Tier, Preferences, and other foundation elements some will still want in a custom build, BUT OTHERS WON'T. 15 up-votes so far in just a couple days. I think I hit a nerve ;) (/endsoapbox) ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years
Re: Naked ARS (was: The ~! for filter names)
AMEN! I can't belive how short sighted bmc has become in regard to pushing itsm/cmdb and the rest of the licensed oob apps. Especially at the expense of pushing out custom development (essentially not supporting it). The true irony, in my opinion, is that in the decade+ that we've been struggling with converting the aruser GUI paradigm to a Web interface, the world has come full circle. Today, it's all mobile apps, and Web interfaces are on the way out. Static dimension, single window grid layouts are back in a huge way. I know what I could do with a naked arserver, and an aruser client that works on ios and android. With a few tweaks to the GUI elements to make them mobile friendly and client side plug-ins to give access to the camera, accelerometer, messaging framework and the rest ... holy moses, I know exactly what I could do with that! Change the world. That's what. On Mar 6, 2015 11:42 AM, Ray Gellenbeck ray.gellenb...@redmangollc.com wrote: Thanks. The whole point was that some people don't even KNOW that the engine is, well, an engine unto itself. There seems to be a trend (marketing?) to present the image that Remedy is ONLY CMDB/ITSM. It's always challenging to explain to customers that those are just apps running on a (very nice) workflow engine underneath. I'm all for canned apps where they make sense. Ease of upgrade path, support, etc etc. However, small steps seem to keep happening in the product evolution over the last few versions to slowly close off the custom-build path and I'd just like to ask for the server/engine to be made available *without* the suite. As great (or not great) as anyone might feel the suite is, there are plenty out there who want something simpler, or more modular, or (insert complaint here). It's part of why other products (especially those that start with S and end with W) get a lot of migration. There needs to be more flexibility. It also lets you push back on customizers from a support perspective. It won't be quite as ridiculous to have support tell you that's been customized, we don't support it because if you want custom, you should buy the naked product and build your own. I'm not pretending it's is any big magical answer. The request was really just to speak to a mindset to say quit forcing one solution as if it is the right answer for everyone. Bring back some choice. Now if you've pitched Galileo (ITSM/CMDB v9) to customers and they don't like it, make this Plan B, a workflow engine platform where you can roll your own. Plenty won't like that either, but some do already and others will going forward, and it would be nice not to have to install all the ITSM spagetti if it's not going to be used. Make a modular installer where base is ONLY the engine and User/Group tables. Add some option checkboxes for Email Engine, Mid-Tier, Preferences, and other foundation elements some will still want in a custom build, BUT OTHERS WON'T. 15 up-votes so far in just a couple days. I think I hit a nerve ;) (/endsoapbox) ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years
Re: Naked ARS (was: The ~! for filter names)
Hi, Ray: Can you repost the link here for your idea? If I haven't already, I will definitely vote it up. Michelle -Original Message- From: Action Request System discussion list(ARSList) [mailto:arslist@ARSLIST.ORG] On Behalf Of Ray Gellenbeck Sent: Friday, March 06, 2015 11:43 AM To: arslist@ARSLIST.ORG Subject: Re: Naked ARS (was: The ~! for filter names) Thanks. The whole point was that some people don't even KNOW that the engine is, well, an engine unto itself. There seems to be a trend (marketing?) to present the image that Remedy is ONLY CMDB/ITSM. It's always challenging to explain to customers that those are just apps running on a (very nice) workflow engine underneath. I'm all for canned apps where they make sense. Ease of upgrade path, support, etc etc. However, small steps seem to keep happening in the product evolution over the last few versions to slowly close off the custom-build path and I'd just like to ask for the server/engine to be made available *without* the suite. As great (or not great) as anyone might feel the suite is, there are plenty out there who want something simpler, or more modular, or (insert complaint here). It's part of why other products (especially those that start with S and end with W) get a lot of migration. There needs to be more flexibility. It also lets you push back on customizers from a support perspective. It won't be quite as ridiculous to have support tell you that's been customized, we don't support it because if you want custom, you should buy the naked product and build your own. I'm not pretending it's is any big magical answer. The request was really just to speak to a mindset to say quit forcing one solution as if it is the right answer for everyone. Bring back some choice. Now if you've pitched Galileo (ITSM/CMDB v9) to customers and they don't like it, make this Plan B, a workflow engine platform where you can roll your own. Plenty won't like that either, but some do already and others will going forward, and it would be nice not to have to install all the ITSM spagetti if it's not going to be used. Make a modular installer where base is ONLY the engine and User/Group tables. Add some option checkboxes for Email Engine, Mid-Tier, Preferences, and other foundation elements some will still want in a custom build, BUT OTHERS WON'T. 15 up-votes so far in just a couple days. I think I hit a nerve ;) (/endsoapbox) ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years -- This message, and any attachments, is for the intended recipient(s) only, may contain information that is privileged, confidential and/or proprietary and subject to important terms and conditions available at http://www.bankofamerica.com/emaildisclaimer. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message. ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years
Re: Naked ARS (was: The ~! for filter names)
Per Misi's post earlier in an old/unrelated thread (copy/pasted)... Here is the link for Naked Remedy: https://communities.bmc.com/ideas/9432 ___ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years
