Yeah , but it's much more satisfying looking after your own network and making executive decisions on hardware/software etc took me a year or so to straighten it all out but I'm pleased with our network , we even have our own exchange server , not that EMBC email thingy.. I did not like their mindset , like they all came out of the same thought factory
Stayed with RM as vanilla networks tend to be created in the shape of the current technician. Technician leaves, result, new technician takes nearly six months to unpick the previous work and then change it into their image. At least with RM I have some stability as I am not dependant on an individual technician.
I agree it's an easy path for some , just a very limiting and controlled one , for me it makes my job for satifying knowing I did this and that and fix it all myself rather than have some RM tech flick through pages on the phone with me ! whenever It falls over , but to each his own I guess
irsprint84 (18th April 2011)
As for controlled? I've seen vanilla networks locked down far harsher than any RM system I have come across. It is not about the systems ... it is about the way people make use of them. This applies to most middleware, etc.
I agree with you , it might be an effective way to manage a school as you say it's down to the school , and I agree that even most people on RM Would possibly be able to manage a vanilla network , my point is for me and the way I want to be able to work , We were with RM 4 years but found we have saved money and gained more from managing our own than to have it managed for us, I like to drive , and prefer not to be the passenger , I only knock them from personal experience not anyone elses , goes for most things in life some people get by and have no real problems with anything but some do , .....
As far as cost effective is concerned, with a vanilla network, you also have to weigh up the technician or network manager's wage, adding about 30% for on costs and then compare it with the cost of RM. Our solution is a semi managed network with some equipment guarantees e.g. Server and filters. We purchase our PCs from whoever we want and then add the RM stuff to them. We also employ a technician to assist us with development and the day to day stuff. I sleep at night because I have RM to rely on if my Technician should leave or become ill. There are times when I have found RM frustrating but when we had a major issue they were there to help me resolve the issue in a reasonable time frame.
As far as I am concerned any damage that occurs to RM as a business is a good thing. RM=Profit over Provision.
We have dropped RM and some other schools are following.
I was at a meeting last month and the RM rep seemed worried from the response from the floor when everyone stayed quiet at his request for any questions.
Look out RM the milking cow is running out of milk!
The biggest disadvantage of RM is cost. it is not bad tool, but for what it is, I don't think it worth the quotes they provide (I have RM CC3). Plan for this summer: remove RM servers, start with fresh domain under win 2008R2. Huge job, but I'm sure it will be worth it.
There are more people in IT Windows network literate than RM network, so Vanilla is much bigger standard.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)