From CC3 to......something else

[synaesthesia]

a grand for hardware migration?

I do wonder if RM have ever toyed with Acronis Enterprise with Universal Restore instead of BESR. Turns a day's work into a couple of hours.

[morganw]

the support that you really do need because yes that bloated software isn't "there" yet, the too-much-time you spend managing the management software instead of just using it.

Indeed.

60 percent of the time it works every time.

[Chunky]

Developing one isn't *that* hard - I've got an ace one I prepared earlier right here which has more attention to detail that most people have had hot dinners, but with no bloat whatsoever. The reason I'm not sipping cocktails on a beach between typing sentences is all the other stuff: To make your fortune with that system you need the document writers, the graphics designers, the marketing, sales, support blah-blah-blah and those things put costs up. Meanwhile RM get to amortise their costs across quite a large customer base i.e. charge a lot of people less than they would if it were a few.

RM are obviously expensive compared to d-i-y (subject to your daily cost), but I don't think the system alone is that expensive. It's the other factors like the CC4 workstation hardware requirements i.e. they all need to be pretty good, the support that you really do need because yes that bloated software isn't "there" yet, the too-much-time you spend managing the management software instead of just using it.




RM made something called "Client Connect" ages and ages ago so you could run Vista on CC3. Don't know how well that worked, but you can find it on their web-site.



Quite. I had an interesting time considering the options last summer, but left that above system at 2008+XP. Now is still too early, but by the summer it's probably got to be 2008R2+Win7.

But if I was a school with a happy, meets-the-requirements 2003+XP right now, then I can see sense in wanting to stick with that until 2013 and moving to the next Windows (repeatedly rumoured to release in 2012). If nothing else, more of that really crap old curriculum software might have gone away and thus make the change less traumatic.

I know what you're saying. They should make it illegal for teachers to even think about asking to install software that's from the ark (as I guess 99% of us get asked things like "OOh.. , I really need this version 0.9 or Omnigraph for DOS/windows 3.11 on the network".

RM Client Connect was an epic fail. I'm going to ride out the OS storm on XP until 2012/2013 and see what's out then. (someone's bound to produce something nice based on W7 by then!)

(and maybe funding from the government will have increased by then too...

Anyone for Smile?



Chunks

NB: My examples are not meant to imply our Maths department are actually like this - it's just an off-hand example - they eventually piad up and got a newer version for XP IIRC

[MattGreaves]

CC4 DOES add alot of overhead, but it does come with some nice features, like background installs.

In my opinion, CC4 isn't worth having; it doesn't provide anything i cant do with vanilla and OSS within 2 weeks. And i could probably remove the CC4 overhead easily this way. There is one limiting factor at the mo for CC4 - no win7 support. But it will be added we are told.

Windows 7 support is being introduced with SR2 when it is released during the Summer term.

Hi all,

I just caught the tail end of this thread, and have a suggestion for the OP.
The idea that the RM server hardware is creaking seems to be one of your main concerns - this would quite easily be fixed - You could buy a new server and then it would cost £995 for RM to then perform a hardware migration for you. On face value, nothing on the system would have appeared to have changed (unless you factor in the nice extra hard drive space, raid, etc, you'd put on the new server, etc.)

RM Community Connect 3.1 (Server 2000 based) has planned support until at least July 2010.
(if you have this, then I'd say consider all options... but... )
RM Community Connect 3.2 has planned support to at least 8th April 2014

So, if you have CC3.2 then you could upgrade your hardware via the hardware migration, and give yourself another 4 years to consider all your options.
(which isn't a bad thing, given all the changes in OS, etc, at the moment)
Your new hardware could be then used in the future for any solution you may consider.
(so effectively, you're paying the £995 for the convnience of carrying on with a system you already know)

I had a hardware migration carried out when I had a server moved from CC3.1 to CC 3.2 - despite a little apprehension (there's a lot of scare stories out there) it went like a dream - and the network from a user point of view looks and feels the same, bar a huge speed boost - the system feels more responsive)

I personally am holding off from a changeover to CC4 or vanilla, as there's so much confusion with the new OS'es, etc. I'll wait for things to settle down, and carry on using a tried and tested solution.

Hope my ideas help,

Chris Norman aka Chunky
RM Communities Moderator

We have been informed by RM that support for CC3.1 is being withdrawn as of July 2010. This is the point where schools will have to bite the bullet and migrate to CC3.2 (Server 2003 based). We still have 2 DCs running Server 2000 which means we need to replace them to entitle us to RM support. This is fine, however to do this we are looking at quotes in the region of £4-6k and will leave us with a system that in 4 years time will feel very outdated and enhancements will have stopped being developed.
In some ways I do agree with you Chris that waiting 4 years is a worthwhile option as it gives you a better understanding of the different systems out there such as CSE, but it equally gives you time to develop your own in-house system. On the other hand with the planned budget cuts aimed at the education sector could put an obstacle in the path of any future network migrations!!

I, nor the OP saw any problem with his current solution - obviously he's using CC3 and also has CC4 in his considerations. I'm coming from an "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" kind of place - I don't like spending muh either, and am in pretty much the same boat, so that's what I did.

From RM's Roadmap document, They will continue to support Windows XP Machines, and supply PCs with the option of windows XP licences until 2014 (which if you go for standard machines, aren't that pricy, and it's always good to haggle on prices with them anyway)
The stopping of supply isn't only a problem if you buy RM equipment - no idea why you think that RM makes its own parts - they buy in boards from Tier 1 and rebadge on most stuff - hence guaranteeing their support. XP will eventually die off, but that's not to say it's impossible to buy new kit for it to run on.

I'm merely saying, in laymans terms for you, if you're running CC3.1, then yes, look at the alternatives now - but remember you may be rushing into a solution (if you make a snap decision). But, if you're running CC3.2, consider a hardware migration (you're going to be buying new server hardware anyway) and save on the knock on costs of liences for workstations, etc.
I personally decided CC3.2 works well enough for me, and that CC4 isn't quite mature enough to move to - it's what works best for you. (and also what's financially viable)

Chris Norman aka Chunky
RM Communities Moderator

I disagree here - RM hardware is expensive in comparison to other suppliers with the same/better hardware specification. I can easily speak to a local supplier (nowhere near the size of RM) and he can be several hundred £'s cheaper than RM for a better spec'd machine that includes 3yr warranty and builds to CC3 with no problems. On the other hand, for people who don't have that alternative the extra premium means that you are getting a machine that is guaranteed to work with the CCx systems and saves you the hassle of finding drivers to import to get your non-RM hardware work.

I support a Primary school which runs CC4 currently and I would agree that in our instance CC4 (disregarding the cost involved to migrate) is not (as Chris puts in) "mature" enough to move to.

Its pretty obvious that people have different opinions of RM and CSE/Vanilla networks and as previously stated its down to what works for their individual school. From what I can see, alot of people take a dislike to RM for legacy reasons, but also the cost implications of running an RM network.
I support 7 schools ranging from vanilla systems (in some cases designed and commissioned by myself and a colleague), RM Storebox, to CC3/4 networks. Based on the station numbers in my schools and the skill sets involved in the majority of them, I would not hesitate to recommend RM for its ease of use - lets be honest for general day-to-day tasks its very easy to administer - and costs aren't too bad for a small scale implementation.
This thought process changes however when I consider the secondary school which I work in. 4 DC's (Server 2k/2k3), approx 700 clients (Win XP) running on a CC3 network. For us to "upgrade" to CC4 then we are looking at a huge outlay which although we get a good system, to me is overpriced. Budgets for us are looking bad for this year and look even worse for the following year (who knows what they will be like in the years to follow), so for us we need to look at a system which will provide us with the nice features of CC3 and 4, but also give us updates and flexibility in the coming years to ensure that we have a system that is up to date and performs well. We have to make that decision soon as I feel by the time 2014 rolls up, CC3/Server 2003/XP is going to look very outdated, although I do admit it would probably still do everything we would require of it!!

[jstuttard]

it's funny how projects change from the initial "lets to do this" when you start getting quotes in! The costs of a new server, moving to Windows 7 and Server 2008, managed wireless and 72 fizzbook spins has come in very high! About £38K!

I'm seeing what you are saying Chucky, it'd be relitivly inexpensive to have RM come and in and replace the server and move the image over. Although not a very future facing option, it has its advantages.

I'm going to present the options to the governers and see what they say, as ever it comes down to money in the budget!

[synaesthesia]

I must admit some of RM's prices didn't used to be that competitive but recently in both the server and workstation departments they've been able to beat just about everyone hands down. I've had some cracking deals especially on desktops from them which are giving stupidly high powered systems for less money than Acer/Dell/HP/Whiteboxes Built by your Heads Best Mates Cousin who can Work VCRs that are barely capable of word processing with Vista without curling up in a metal ball and crying into their mousemat.

[maestromasada]

I'm really disappointed and increasingly worried for what I'm reading here, and I wish I knew about this forums before.
We've been running RM 3.2 for a few years and this summer time we are getting the upgrade for CC4 (nearly June and still they haven't provide with installations dates!!). I knew that CC4 had problems when it was first released, and I thought it would now mature and in a good state to migrate to, but that's not the case, is it?
You guys that migrated from CC3 to CC4, any advice in increasing performance?
Thank you very much in advance.

[synaesthesia]

It's really not all that bad as long as you've some decent hardware behind it. Anything more modern than a 2GHz P4 with at *least* 1GB of ram should be absolutely fine, and thankfully RAM isn't a hugely expensive commodity so a fairly cheap upgrade all round.
There's little else you can really do with it performance wise - obviously a decent network behind it will certainly help. Hopefully you'll have SR2 installed off-the-bat meaning you'll lose the RMGina login system which does add a bit of time - I've started removing this already from my SR1 networks and this has helped login time by quite a bit. However until everything's running solid state and PC's boot up in 1 second flat, people will never be happy Had one member of staff jokingly moan at me that the PC she was using was taking an age to start up. Had great delight in informing her that 1 minute from start to login and a further 10-15 seconds to full usability is hardly bad - especially when I'd just added another 2GB of ram the week before and it used to be well over twice that time, not that she noticed!

[maestromasada]

Thanks for the tips Synaesthesia! our specs are not that bad, but will invest in ram just to be on the safe side.

[Roberto]

I'm not a fan of CC3 / CC4 but in my opinion it makes a lot of sense to have that or something like it if you want to buy a solution from someone and use it pretty much "as is" without customising it. This can work well for a smaller org, or one with a small support team, where you want something that "just works" without a lot of bother.

If you start wanting to make changes and set up custom stuff that the people designing your "middleware" didn't anticipate then you can end up fighting against their stuff, and the value of having it rapidly changes.

[circlestech]

We are looking into CC4 but the costs seems quite huge!

[CommodoreS]

CC4 is still very unstable. Its a good system to have if you don't mind having to rebuild stations every time a software core update is released, which is quite often. Everyone is waiting for update 85 to be released before rebuilding stations after installing SR2, but RM has not been telling anyone when they are going to release update 85, and have only just said it could be yet another 2 weeks away, leaving one week of holidays left. It does not make things easy when planning to update several schools. Even the main ATSS partners are complaining and saying stuff like they want to blow up the system with C4. RM Communities