To: | Tivoli NetView Discussions <nv-l@lists.ca.ibm.com> |
---|---|
Subject: | Re: [NV-L] Comparison: Netview and ITNM |
From: | Andres Rodriguez <arodriguez@kruger.com.ec> |
Date: | Fri, 9 May 2008 11:48:34 -0500 |
Delivery-date: | Fri, 09 May 2008 17:49:53 +0100 |
Envelope-to: | nv-l-archive@lists.skills-1st.co.uk |
Importance: | |
List-help: | <mailto:nv-l-request@lists.ca.ibm.com?subject=help> |
List-id: | Tivoli NetView Discussions <nv-l.lists.ca.ibm.com> |
List-post: | <mailto:nv-l@lists.ca.ibm.com> |
List-subscribe: | <http://lists.ca.ibm.com/mailman/listinfo/nv-l>, <mailto:nv-l-request@lists.ca.ibm.com?subject=subscribe> |
List-unsubscribe: | <http://lists.ca.ibm.com/mailman/listinfo/nv-l>, <mailto:nv-l-request@lists.ca.ibm.com?subject=unsubscribe> |
Reply-to: | Tivoli NetView Discussions <nv-l@lists.ca.ibm.com> |
Sender: | nv-l-bounces@lists.ca.ibm.com |
Sensitivity: |
I had the chance to see both products in a production environment.. In this particular case the customer was not at all satisfied with Netview because it had very poor performance and was not working properly... it was installed on a Windows Server 2003... the most notorius problem was that no one was using the tool so obviously they had a lot of difficulties when they try to use it after months of no maintenance at all ... so they decided to migrate to ITNM (also because they had some kind of arrangement about license issues).. and the improvement was huge... this migration was done a month ago... there were more people committed with the implementation of ITNM and it's working really fine ... The costumer is more satisfied .. because this time the tool works!!.. Netview is really easy to install and its out-of-the-box functionality is decent... ITNM requires more customization and is more difficult to install because of all the netcool products that are needed.. it's not an imposible installation but it's not as easy as Netview's... Netview is superior in data collection... it could draw real time graphics ... ITNM doesn't have this features yet but luckily the costumer was not interested in this kind of functionality. ITNM capacity to monitor layer 2 devices is very important for me... When I used Netview with Switch Analyzer I experienced problems with the performance of my netview clients.. especially with netview web console.. so having this feature incorporated gave the peace that I was looking for!!!.. lol.. By now this is my input... let's see what else I can say after a little more interaction with ITNM..
Saludos / Regards / Um abraço Hi List, _______________________________________________ NV-L mailing list NV-L@lists.ca.ibm.com Unsubscribe:NV-L-leave@lists.ca.ibm.com http://lists.ca.ibm.com/mailman/listinfo/nv-l (Browser access limited to internal IBM'ers only) |
<Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
---|---|---|
|
Previous by Date: | [NV-L] Comparison: Netview and ITNM, mani |
---|---|
Next by Date: | RE: [NV-L] Comparison: Netview and ITNM, John |
Previous by Thread: | Re: [NV-L] Comparison: Netview and ITNM, Jane Curry |
Next by Thread: | RE: [NV-L] Comparison: Netview and ITNM, John |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |
Archive operated by Skills 1st Ltd
See also: The NetView Web