Hi Kathy!
Please let me reflect on your post:
> They not only participated in defining what they were looking
> for but also participated in early design reviews.
I know, as a matter of fact I was invited by IBM, but my boss didn't allow
me to go at that time... I would have definitely advised IBM not to go for
the AC solution.
> We understand that it is hard to give up an interface you know well and
> switch to a new one.
Well, the old web interface was far from perfect. Personally, I think the
old ADSM interface was the most intuitive one. But I'm open to new options,
but to my opinion and to most of the other TSM users I spoke in the
Netherlands, the AC interface is far from intuitive. One really has to
search through the panels to find the option you need. In a really intuitive
user interface the user doesn't have to search at all!
> 1. The command line interface (dsmadmc) is still available in TSM 5.3. We
> have no plans to remove dsmadmc from future releases. We recognize that a
> great many of our customers use automated scripts with dsmadmc.
That's good news, because for most 5.3 users it will probably be the only
available interface...
> 2. A separate machine is NOT required for the ISC/Administration Center
> installation. It can run on the same hardware as your TSM Server, provided
> you meet the minimum system requirements, as described in the version
> release page referenced below.
True, but only if you have a fat TSM server with a LOT of free memory!!
> Since the Administration Center is accessed via a browser, it is
> accessible from any operating system, including XP.
The old web admin was also accessible from any operating system...
> 5. We?ve heard your concern and complaint about the footprint of the
> Administration Center. We don?t have a quick fix for this but are
> continuing to look at ways to reduce this.
Even when IBM reduces the footprint, I doubt that any small TSM customer
will install AC. You have to make your server bigger to install AC on it or
you have to install a separate management server, just for managing a backup
server. For those customers AC is really overdone.
> 6. We have heard your requests to bring back the old interface. Since
> that interface was not uplifted with the new TSM 5.3 function and our
> intent is to only enhance the new interface, we decided not to release
> it. Instead we are focusing on continued enhancements to the new
> interface at as rapid a rate as is possible.
So although you say you hear our complaints, you say: don't complain and get
used to AC. To my opinion that's not how IBM should handle this. What IBM
could do is wait for a few months until several customers migrated to 5.3
(most people will probably wait until 5.3.1) and keep a customer survey. If
the majority of the people don't like AC, IBM should re-evaluate their
decision.
To be clear, I'm really open to new software and new designs. I personally
participated in the 5.3 beta program, but with AC IBM really took the wrong
turn...
Kindest regards,
Eric van Loon
**********************************************************************
For information, services and offers, please visit our web site:
http://www.klm.com. This e-mail and any attachment may contain confidential and
privileged material intended for the addressee only. If you are not the
addressee, you are notified that no part of the e-mail or any attachment may be
disclosed, copied or distributed, and that any other action related to this
e-mail or attachment is strictly prohibited, and may be unlawful. If you have
received this e-mail by error, please notify the sender immediately by return
e-mail, and delete this message. Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij NV (KLM),
its subsidiaries and/or its employees shall not be liable for the incorrect or
incomplete transmission of this e-mail or any attachments, nor responsible for
any delay in receipt.
**********************************************************************
|
