Talk:Systems management: Difference between revisions

Proposed merge

PC Management Software is listed for AFD. Some of its content may be of use in expanding this article. --LesleyW 13:10, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Some info was used to improve the article. — Anrie Nord 16:53, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Yes! There shouldn't be separate articles for System management and Systems management. This should be fixed asap. johnpseudo 20:17, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

What happened to the proposed merger? Kenavant 18:38, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

I think that the System management article may be deleted already, because all the facts are already in the Systems management. I'm not familiar with the deletion policy. Please help me. — Anrie Nord 2007-01-01 15:14Z

BMC PATROL

Please provide additional info about BMC PATROL product such as BMC Software well known customers and technical background (standards and technologies) of this product. Or write an article about this company and product family. — Anrie Nord 15:57, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

BMC Patrol is reasonably well-known where I live (Wellington, New Zealand). EDS used it for many years to manage servers, both internally and for customers. I think it's important enough to warrant being listed. --LesleyW 05:51, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

Added freeware link

I've added a link to http://www.lansweeper.com Wikipedia should promote more freeware, system administrators with a limited budget like me will benefit from it.

Landsweeper is not a systems management system. It has only some software inventory features. Please categorize this software in another way. — Anrie Nord 2006-09-22 01:03Z

The most known systems and NPOV

Recently Djbclark has changed the article by including some free and open source software links in the beginning. With all respect to the open source movement, the most known systems management systems are proprietary in fact. Djbclark, though I have the software engineering background, I'm familiar with systems and network management stuff. But I've never heard about the tools you mentioned. I suppose those products are not systems management systems, but just configuration management tools. Maybe you could find another place to compare open source and proprietary products, such as list of systems management systems or even better comparison of open source configuration management software. I guess you've already found these ones and made the changes you wanted to.

— Anrie Nord 2007-04-17 22:20Z

1. You have violated the first rule of Wikipedia:Resolving disputes; namely "Be respectful to others and their points of view. This means primarily: Do not simply revert changes in a dispute. When someone makes an edit you consider biased or inaccurate, improve the edit, rather than reverting it."..
2. What is the basis for the statement "most known systems management systems are proprietary"? I've personally only vaguely heard of most of the proprietary projects you mention, and the standards are even more arcane. "cfengine" gives about 1 million hits on Google, whereas ""bmc patrol" gives only 150k. Cfengine, bcfg2, and puppet are regularly written about in professional System Administration journals such as ;Login: and magazines such as "Sys Admin", whereas I can not recall any of the other projects being mentioned. IBM, CA, etc. have near zero participation in LISA, the largest system administration conference in the world.
3. You need to find a credible source that states what "system management" means and how it differs from "configuration management".
4. If you want to keep the article as-is, I would be fine with it being renamed "proprietary systems management systems" or something like that.
5. I am going to mark the article as under dispute. To avoid an edit war I will not re-revert the changes, and I ask that you follow wikipedia policy and not remove the dispute tag until we have reached a resolution.

These are the disputed changes.

— Djbclark 23:02, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I've violated WP:DR policy, I'm sorry for that. The definition of systems management is given in the joint ITU-T and ISO/IEC X.200 standard:

Systems management — functions in the Application Layer related to the management of various OSI resources and their status across all layers of the OSI architecture.

It is given in the context of the OSI architecture, but explained in more detail in X.700 series according to the FCAPS framework (see the article we are disputing on). I think the point in our discussion is the domain of systems management. Things you are talking about are more closely related to system administration while the article is about enterprise-wide systems management. Systems management systems usually provide a set of FCAPS functions and are intended to manage the IT infrastructure of an enterprise, while system administration programs carry out some particular function. Please review the article once again, take a closer look at the systems management standards and determine whether they are used in tools you mentioned or just familiar to you. — Anrie Nord (talk • contribs) 2007-04-17 23:37Z

By the way, you've just added the descriptions of those system administration tools to the list of systems management systems. Once again, these articles are about enterprise-wide management systems, not system administration tools. You should revert your edits or allow me to do it. Maybe you were confused by wrong categorization of the articles, weren't you? — Anrie Nord (talk • contribs) 2007-04-17 23:55Z