I'm afraid I'm another vote for the CLI. I'm not a big fan of either java or
javascript and usually have both disabled in my browser. Now IF Tivoli comes
up with a GOOD java implementation (I haven't seen a really good java
application yet) AND I can convince MS/AOL-Netscape/Opera/Mozilla to
implement the java/javascript options for the current window only and not
global to all instances on the browser I'd be willing to reconsider . . .

But I don't have boatloads of clients to administer, so I'm probably not
seeing the issues the rest of you are fighting. :-)

Tom Kauffman
NIBCO, Inc

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Prather, Wanda [mailto:Wanda.Prather AT JHUAPL DOT EDU]
> Sent: Monday, August 12, 2002 2:17 PM
> To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
> Subject: Re: Antwort: Web Admin Interface - grrr
>
>
> SHARE requirements get a fair amount of attention from Tivoli.
> Talk to Paul Seay to find out what requirements have already
> been voted in,
> the next SHARE US is next week.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rupp Thomas (Illwerke) [mailto:thomas.rupp AT ILLWERKE DOT AT]
> Sent: Monday, August 12, 2002 3:10 PM
> To: ADSM-L AT VM.MARIST DOT EDU
> Subject: AW: Antwort: Web Admin Interface - grrr
>
>
> > Well, not really meaning to be on either one side or the
> other, 1-valid
> > point for the web version is not needing to install the gui on every
> > machine you may want to use to administer the server(s).
>
> That's why I'm dreaming of a Java Applet. Tivoli has done it for the
> B/U client that I can use over the web - so why shouldn't it
> be possible
> to write a Java Applet for the admin interface?
>
> What would be the correct way to tell Tivoli what the customers want?
>
> Kind regards
> Thomas Rupp
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> --------------
> --------------
> Dieses eMail wurde auf Viren geprueft.
>
> Vorarlberger Illwerke AG
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> --------------
> --------------
>