Henrik,
I am so sorry to hear about your situation. I hope sanity will
reign in the end. Here are some of my suggestions:
* Don't immediately turn the issue into a technical battle of TNG vs.
Hobbit. If you have the time, read "Getting to Yes" a book on
negotiations. Start with identifying what "monitoring" is supposed to
do in PHB-speak: maximize service availability to customers, provide
technicians the ability to quickly diagnose problems, ensure the
functionality of the environment after changes. The point being, try
to establish the goals everyone can agree on. You will lose the PHB
vs. technician fight based solely on "features."
* Be prepared to accept using both tools is fine. Even recommend it,
especially if the organization is prepared to do "cost-benefit"
analysis for the effort with NPV or ROI. Practically speaking,
running both tools together would be much better than just TNG.
* Ask about the process to get hobbit on the "approved software"
list. If your company has IT Governance, they might be a good spot to
start.
* Anticipate the issues the PHB will "throw at you." Sure hobbit is
great, but what if you leave Henrik? No one else in the company/world
knows hobbit like you, that creates risk to the organization. Big
tools are "certified" for security, hobbit is a "bunch of people in
their basements." Craft the replies in business and financial terms
that are quantifiable. Yes, I am the author of hobbit, with a
development and user community of over X,XXX. The code is written in
C, a standard for all Computer Science programs, with XXX,XXX
programmers in the world.
That's all for now. For the sake of the entire hobbit community, good luck!
Scott
On 2/7/07, Kauffman, Tom <user-3feba9e60a8b@xymon.invalid> wrote:
Back when we had an IBM mainframe, CA was desperately trying to find
ways to "give" us Unicenter, until our VP told them that he'd drop them
as an accepted vendor if he saw another proposal in the next six months.
So -- we never did Unicenter.
We did BMC Patrol on AIX -- and never could get viable alerting from the
product.
I have yet to see ANY of the vendor-provided tools that work with a
lightweight client for viewing the current status. Hobbit lets me check
things with any browser, on any OS -- and when you've only got dial-up
access to work with, this is *critical*. I don't have the time to load a
big honkin' java application (tivoli) or an ugly X-windows app (BMC)
over dialup to see what's down.
Big Brother and Hobbit and a handfull of home-brew scripts dropped BMC
out of our shop and saved us over $40,000 per YEAR in licensing.
Tom Kauffman
NIBCO, Inc
-----Original Message-----
From: Henrik Stoerner [mailto:user-ce4a2c883f75@xymon.invalid]
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 4:15 AM
To: user-ae9b8668bcde@xymon.invalid
Subject: [hobbit] Hobbit versus Unicenter/TNG
I'm currently arguing with some PHB's who insist that Unicenter/TNG is
the "standard" monitoring tool and we're supposed to use that
exclusively.
Since I have the users on my side I do expect to win that struggle, but
if any of you have compared Hobbit with Unicenter/TNG I would be
interested to hear about it. Especially features you've found that
Hobbit has, but TNG doesn't. I know of quite a few, but any ammunition
is welcome.
If you prefer, contact me directly instead of through the list.
Regards,
Henrik
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email and any attachments are for the
exclusive and confidential use of the intended recipient. If you are not
the intended recipient, please do not read, distribute or take action in
reliance upon this message. If you have received this in error, please
notify us immediately by return email and promptly delete this message
and its attachments from your computer system. We do not waive
attorney-client or work product privilege by the transmission of this
message.