ADSM-L

Apology to ADSM personnel in ADSM-L

1996-12-06 16:13:35
Subject: Apology to ADSM personnel in ADSM-L
From: Francisco Reyes <reyes01 AT IBM DOT NET>
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 1996 16:13:35 -0500
In an email I sent recently I said:

> If IBM doesn't listen we could always send the data to their
> competitors. Who knows if there was another distributed backup system

It was not intended to mean that the ADSM-L list is not attended by
ADSM personnel. I pesonally have had a great experience with not only
the ADSMers from this list but from the ones in compuserve too. If it
hadn't been for all the initial help I got (specially from Andy
Raibeck, Dale Mark Mock and Tom Hepner) I would have never stayed
with ADSM.

What I was trying to say is that 'IBM' the "company" and upper level
managers or whoever makes decisions such as marketting, feature sets,
platforms to be delivered, etc.. have not paid enough attention to
usability. I am sure there must be a reason, perhaps some of the
biggest ADSM users have other requirements, but the end result is
that usability has been slow to progress. In the short 6 months I
have been using ADSM I have seen a number of features which I
consider would not be difficult to implement which hvae not been
implemented. I have also seen features which although may require
considerable amount of work the benefit to the users would be
"tremendous".

Because of many reasons (some of which I have heard from IBM people,
and others that I suppose)  IBM chooses to not disclose
future/planned enhancements to ADSM. Even though I understand the
reasons I had not heard of any place where end users could easily
submit their requirements and see other people's requirements. I
believe this is usefull to both the users and to IBM. Even though IBM
internaly keeps a list of requirements who is to say that this list
is complete/correct. Surely the user's can not. Maybe the big ADSM
users may have influence and I have heard of some conference where
people collect info/feedback which is ultimately  sent to IBM, but
even then we don't know what IBM does with said feedback.

Even though I have had a very positive experience with pretty much
all the ADSM people I have ever had to deal with it is a reality that
if there was a product that was easier to use/operate than ADSM and
had a simmilar feature  I would switch (and probably many others). It
took me months (including spending my free time) to get ADSM to work
(not to mention that I am still learning a lot of concepts). My
opinion is that ADSM is probably one of the best backup softwares
around, but that does not mean that there isn't a lot of room for
improvement specially in usability.
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • Apology to ADSM personnel in ADSM-L, Francisco Reyes <=