Hi Jerry,
Thanks for the feedback.
I'm guessing you're talking about the Win32 client, so that's what I'll use
to recreate your issues.
[Nice comments about installation deleted]
> Admin client - so far, very nice. I did find what I think to be a bug in the
> scheduled event section - when I go to include, and select admin schedules
> only (no check in backup/archive) I get EVERYTHING - including
> backup/archive. In fact, there is no difference between the two results
> (checked and not checked).
Do you have 3.1.0.1 installed? I didn't try this with 3.1.0.0, but I did try it
with 3.1.0.1 and I did not notice this problem. With Backup/Archive
events only checked, I saw only backup-archive schedules. With Admin
events only checked, I saw only Admin schedules.
Try out 3.1.0.1. If you still see the problem, open up a problem with
support.
> Other functions seemed good to begin with.
> Backup client......
> On the positive, you fixed two nagging problems - the client can now be
> expanded to full screen, and there was no Divide by 0 error with my favorite
> Music CD loaded.
Yeah!
> On the other hand, my first impressions of the backup window is a disaster.
> Selective backups as we used to know them seemed to have disappeared. We
> trained people to do backup by tree, but the default seems to be do an
> incremental, even if the tree structure appears. And if I go to the root and
> click on the plus, it shows now local and network - click on the gray box,
> associated with one of these, and it will select ALL of the file spaces below
> it. For example.....If I click on the grey box next to the Local Filespaces,
> all filespaces, including my CD ROM drive is selected. It didn't actually
> backup my music CD, but it did try to backup the clipart CD I also had
> mounted! And if I happened to click on the grey box next to the network
> drive, it selected all of the network drives I was logged into. And if I
> happened to click on the grey box next to the machine name, I get Everything
> - both local and Network!
True, the options for "Backup by directory tree", "Backup by file
specification",
and "Incremental backup" are gone. On the other hand, these options caused
a lot of confusion. For example, backup by directory tree backed up only
files, not directories... something that wasn't patently obvious. Also, you had
to figure out which option to use.
It might not be immediately obvious, but the file selection interface resembles
that of a lot of other Windows 95-style products, including the Windows
Explorer. You'll see local and network drives displayed similarly in
Explorer.
There should be "+" and "-" signs next to the grey boxes that you can click on
to expand and collapse branches. These will do so without selecting any
drives/directories/files.
Check out the "Help" button on that backup dialog box. It has information on
how to use the GUI. From my brief look-see, it's pretty good.
> I have to assume that if a user can do something unpleasant or
> unsatisfactory, he WILL do it. This makes it too easy to shoot us in the
> foot - and the DB and the network too. I am not certain I want to propagate
> this release to any clients at this time.
> In defense of the design, the old design presented the CD ROM and Network
> drives too, but the true local drives (round brown spinning DASD) were
> treated as LOCAL and they were highlighted in blue. A customer could always
> select something else, but the default (and what was usually taken) was to do
> nothing. The new design requires a user to make a selection - and if there
> is a choice - a user will make the wrong decision too often. (Does anyone
> think I'm getting pessimistic in my old age????)
> I also miss the easy way to select a whole directory - CNTL+left mouse button
> does not equal a full directory anymore - doesn't do anything as a matter of
> fact.
One complaint I saw quite often, both as a customer and an IBMer, is
that there was no easy way to select an entire directory tree; rather, you
had to select each branch of the tree one at a time.
It's a little more work, but you can still select all files in an individual
directory
without selecting the entire tree:
1) Click on the folder icon of the directory you want to back up. This will
cause all files directly under that directory to be displayed on the right
without selecting them for backup.
2) Click on the file icon of the first file in the right-hand window pane.
3) Scroll all the way down to the bottom of the right-hand window pane.
4) Press and hold the <SHIFT> key, then click on the file icon of the last file
in that pane. This will cause all the files to be selected (a la Windows
Explorer).
You can similarly select individual files by pressing and holding <CTRL> while
clicking on the file icons.
> I'm also not wild about the little selection box on the backup bar - the
> options being "Changed and Deleted', "Quick: Changed only", and "always
> backup". This seems to be asking for more ways to confuse.
Personally, I agree. Type of Backup = "Changed or Deleted files" implies
that we're backing up files that have been deleted! That'd be a great way
to restore a file that was deleted before the backup (i.e. delete it, select
"Changed or Deleted files", run the backup, then restore the file).
Although I can't say for sure, I think development is looking at changing
the wording, although I can't say when (because I don't know).
If you don't know what these mean, try clicking on the "Type of backup"
field, then pressing "F1" for help. You'll get a brief explanation of what
these options mean. I'm going to also pass back to development a
request to add to a link to each type of backup that will provide more
detail on what that type of backup does. (The info is in the help file,
but you have to "work" it a bit to find it.)
> I haven't done a scheduled backup yet, but the interface here in the GUI
> makes me wonder what the batch program will select as a local drive?
I believe that DSMC will pick up only real local drives, excluding CD-ROMs,
if the ALL-LOCAL domain is used.
> In closing, one of my favorite programming rules (right after, "you touch it,
> you own it") is "Change for the sake of change is NEVER a good idea." This
I agree 110%!!! That being said...
> whole interface looks like change for the sake of change - I was very happy
> with the old interface, and I do not remember anyone making any serious
> changes about its design. Why was it changed so drastically?
...I think the change came about for a combination of several reasons.
I hesitate to say that you are in the minority because when something
is right, folks usually don't say anything (i.e. you might be in a silent
majority). Usually it's only the bad stuff we hear about. But a lot of users
complained about ADSM's old interface. Some of the charges levied against
it were that it was clunky, slow, didn't integrate into the Windows environment
(especially Windows 95 look and feel), and that it was almost unusable. And
although in an ideal world function should be more important than form,
visual appeal (which a lot of people thought we lacked) is often an
important influence.
From my own experience in support, you're only the second person I ever
heard who liked the old GUI! Most of the feedback I heard was negative.
Another factor was technical: the old client was based on aging 16-bit
technology that limited our ability to add significant improvement. Using
newer 32-bit development tools, the client gets a face-lift to look and feel
more like a "real" Windows 95 application, as well as some added
feature/function and some performance enhancements.
Andy Raibeck
ADSM Level 2 Support
|
