ADSM-L

Re: TSM 3.7 GUI Admin - did I miss something?

1999-10-07 19:07:13
Subject: Re: TSM 3.7 GUI Admin - did I miss something?
From: Trevor Foley <Trevor.Foley AT BANKERSTRUST.COM DOT AU>
Date: Fri, 8 Oct 1999 09:07:13 +1000
Hi Jerry,

I'm on your side. I've get the same error when shutting down the 3.1 admin gui 
as you get. But that doesn't worry me greatly.

The fact that there isn't an admin gui with 3.7 does worry me though. I've 
tried forcing myself to use the web admin interface a number of times now. But 
I keep going back to the native gui and command line. I find the native 
interface faster and more reliable. This is particularly the case when you are 
trying to administer multiple ADSM servers and need to swap constantly between 
them.

I guess we NTers now find outselves in the position that the AIX people found 
themselves in a while back when the admin gui was dropped from that platform.


Trevor

> -----Original Message-----
> From: JerryLawson [mailto:jlawson AT THEHARTFORD DOT COM]
> Sent: Friday,8 October 1999 3:37
> To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
> Subject: TSM 3.7 GUI Admin - did I miss something?
>
>
> Date:     October 7, 1999               Time: 1:32 PM
> From:     Jerry Lawson
>           The Hartford Insurance Group
> (860)  547-2960          jlawson AT thehartford DOT com
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> ---------------
> Yesterday I downloaded the TSM 3.7 (Sorry - I'm just an
> Acronym sort of guy)
> client for Win32, and installed it on my machine.  I was a
> little bit of
> surprised when I found that there was no GUI Admin client -
> just the GUI
> backup client, and CLIs for the Backup and admin.  Well,
> maybe they were
> rushed, and couldn't get it rolled out in time, I thought.
>
> Then I tried my old 3.1 Admin GUI, and low and behold, it
> still seemed fine -
> after all, I haven't upgraded the server, so all should be
> well, right?  It
> was up until I shut it down, when it took an ANS8003S
> catastrophic error.  A
> peek in the error log indicated that a couple of messages
> were missing from
> the repository.  OK, I thought - time to report the problem,
> which I did.
>
> The response, to my surprise, came back that there was no intention of
> supporting a GUI for the Admin; we would now have to use a Web Browser
> Interface.
>
> I am still trying to see the logic in this.  My first
> inclination is that
> some planners/developers have struck upon this as a neat way
> to avoid a GUI
> application - they can now just use HTML and some Java.
> Probably easier on
> their end.  The trouble is, I don't think they have taken a
> look at anyone's
> network lately.  In my shop, this would mean that I need to
> keep a Browser
> loaded all the time (certainly not a big deal), but I must
> also now contend
> with internet and intranet traffic.  Our firewall is not
> always the best; it
> has sometimes caused outages to internet/intranet traffic
> when regular TCP/IP
> traffic to my server (OS/390) has not been impacted.  The
> bottom line is that
> I expect that response time will be slower, and availability
> will not be as
> good.  Is this the way a major product should be going?
>
> I think I understand some of the reasons given for web
> enabled clients, but I
> certainly do not want to have them as my sole means of access
> to a native
> product.  I haven't been monitoring the list actively lately
> - has this been
> a hot discussion item that people are clamoring for?  What
> did I miss?  What
> do others think?
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> ---------------
>                                                      Jerry
>
> Insanity is doing the same thing over and over..and expecting
> the results to
> be different - Anon.
>