|
As has been noted in this
forum many times, the only valid way to request modifications and enhancements
to the NetView product is via the Enhancement request through your IBM/Tivoli
representative.
I just wanted to let
everyone know, so you may respond to your representative accordingly, that my
enhancement request asking for the ability to use Locations as scoping
mechanisms is under review. This request asked that the scoping rules for user
accounts in the web client allow the use of a location container instead of just
a subnet.
This enhancement request
was placed on February 28th 2003. By my
calculations, that is nearly 18 months ago.
This underscores a point
that many of us on the mailing list have been trying to make regarding the lag
time to deployment of even the simplest of additional features to NetView. If it
takes 18 months to get a fairly simple change (from a feature point of view) to
the "review" stage, then how long will it take for support for SNMPv3? or
Community String Indexing. By the time this enhancement is complete, I will
probably have a matured work around in place even if it means tons of
manual work or programming/scripting to accomplish. To date, I have never
found a single individual who has submitted an enhancement request who can say
that their enhancement is in the product today. Maybe I'm
wrong.
Look, we all understand
that IBM generally gives software away at very reasonable prices and earns their
revenues based on service contracts. Okay fine. It appears to me that the focus
is placed on service and support to the detriment of development and
enhancements. I am continuously being asked "Why doesn't NetView do
this.....?" and I have to continually respond with, well "I've heard that is
coming", or "Don't hold your breath" You want more examples? How about
automation processing being single threaded? Why hasn't someone dealt with this
already? How about Java performance issues with the web client and with the java
based security console (which runs so slowly it makes my eyes bleed)? How about
the fact that mib loaders under the X-windows interface (which is netmon and
snmpCollect work off of) will not always load mibs that the mib loader provided
for the web client will load? How about SERVMON and the fact that on the Unix
platforms it has been castrated of necessary function? (As a side note, TEC is
in about the same shape as I now fully realize that console updates are single
threaded and trap floods pretty much wipe out TEC even though I have
successfully handled the events in NetView).
Look, the list goes on and
on. Someone has to communicate to the highest levels of the development
organization that there is pressure to find different solutions than NetView
when we can't demonstrate a superior product or demonstrate a committment to the
technologies / features we are being asked to deploy. I am a person who
participates in early support programs, I try and get in on beta tests, I try
and be a vocal leader of the NetView user community (thus my participation in
the Tivoli NetView global users group). I am vocal, I am well-trained, I am
prepared and I participate. I am in many regards the best kind of customer IBM
can have (some will snicker at that comment, but thats the way I view it). And
if I can't get enhancements deployed, after 18 months, with no feedback or
follow up, how can the "average" netview administrator. How can IBM expect to
earn, or keep, a best of breed tag on this software? Unrealistic expectation I
say.
I'm sorry, this is not
meant to be a rant. I typed over a WHOLE bunch of stuff I wanted to say to try
and keep this is professional as possible, but frankly, I'm at wit's end with
the development cycle. I encourage others to respond to this thread with
enhancements they know are submitted or glaring architectural/design issues that
should have been dealt with long ago.
Thanks, and again, sorry
for the rant.
|