ADSM-L

Re: Annoying Windows NT/95 GUI Quirk

1998-10-13 16:22:11
Subject: Re: Annoying Windows NT/95 GUI Quirk
From: Dennis Schaffer <Dennis.Schaffer AT MUTUALOFOMAHA DOT COM>
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 15:22:11 -0500
Jeff,

Our customer restore help desk area finds that "feature" of ADSM V3 client
to be VERY confusing, especially since they are used to a V2 client which
clocks the client application while data is pending from the ADSM Server.

I've had dozens of calls from them because it appeared that NO data was
backed up and they panicked.  It is very difficult for them or myself to
proceduralize ADSM restores because we have to tell them to ignore the
absence of a clock and watch the "Displaying" messages to know when they
have a valid list of files to select from.

This has prevented full-scale deployment of the ADSM V3 client in our shop.

I have not opened a problem or requested an enhancement but would be
willing to join with you if you are interested.

Dennis Schaffer
Mutual of Omaha





connorj AT NIMO DOT COM on 10/13/98 02:10:44 PM

Please respond to ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU

To:   ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
cc:    (bcc: Dennis Schaffer)
Subject:  Annoying Windows NT/95 GUI Quirk




Does anyone else find it a annoying when drilling down a large directory
tree with lots of files in the ADSM Windows NT/95 GUI Backup/Archive client
when you click on a + box or folder and it appears nothing is happening.  I
noticed at the bottom of the window you get a "displaying" message but it
is easy to miss.  I think the mouse pointer should change to an hour glass
like most other windows apps do when work is being performed.  I have some
users who are very confused by this and keep clicking over and over again
which seems to make getting a response from the interface even more
difficult.  The only way I know if there will be a response to what they
clicked on is to do a Q SESS command from the admin client and verify the
send counts keep increasing.  My ADSM environment is ADSM for MVS V3.1.1.3
and the Windows NT/95 clients are running version 3.1.0.3.  I'm thinking of
opening a problem or enhancement request on this and was wondering if
anyone else finds this quirk a pain in the tail..
Thanks
Jeff