From CC3 to......something else

[Edu-IT]

At the end of the day, is it not about what works for the school and not what works best for your head teacher? Seems she's missing that point based on your post.

 

 

Their CC3 network is working perfectly at the moment but the new head teacher wants all their computers to look like a home computer, not with RM Explorer making it look simplified or dumbed down.

You can turn that off in CC4 and have a regular Windows XP/Windows Vista and soon to be Windows 7 theme.

[Dexi]

Just point out all of the pitfalls of moving away from CC3, and the extra costs and time needed to maintain another network. Then highlight that if they were to move away, they wouldn't get X-good-feature-of-CC3 etc..

 

Trust me, I've been trying to do that and save them time and money for a solution that won't be as suited to them but the heels are digging in. It's a case of asking my opinion, then because it wasn't her opinion it gets dismissed as incorrect. I'm therefore trying to find a trustworthy solution.

 

I haven't tried CSE's software as mentioned earlier but might have to investigate that further.

[Dexi]

At the end of the day, is it not about what works for the school and not what works best for your head teacher? Seems she's missing that point based on your post.

 

 

 

You can turn that off in CC4 and have a regular Windows XP/Windows Vista and soon to be Windows 7 theme.

 

I agree with you on that.

 

Haven't seen the option in CC4 to change to a regular xp theme yet, but will now check it out on the RM site to confirm that for her.

[webman]

How childish for someone to give me negative rep in this thread with the comment "Aw bless. Bossman's little lapdog strikes again!". Grow up

 

Was it you mb2k01?

[mb2k01]

Thanks a lot Webman! No it wasn't!

 

I've never given anyone negative rep on here (and probably never will!), and when giving positive always put mb2k01 on the end so they know it's me!

Out of curiosity, who is meant to be your "lapdog"?

Edited January 13, 2010 by mb2k01

[webman]

Thanks. Apologies for jumping to that conclusion

[Marci]

*snip* but the new head teacher wants all their computers to look like a home computer, not with RM Explorer making it look simplified or dumbed down.

 

Stop using RM Explorer *shrug*... we don't use it at all at our place. Besides the logon screen / logout button, everything looks and behaves like a standard GPO-restricted vanilla machine as far as the end-user is concerned - fully CC3'd tho.

[mb2k01]

I've just gone back and read your reply to my earlier post, so can understand why you might have automatically assumed the negative rep was from me, but I can assure you it wasn't.

If it's something an Admin can verify I'd be happy for them to look in to / confirm.

 

It does look like my previous post touched a nerve though? Quite a passionate response!

Can you honestly say that you've never had trouble installed software on an RM CCx network?

You've never had to repackage MSI's or go hunting for RM specific MSI's?

Edited January 13, 2010 by mb2k01

[webman]

Yes, it probably did Will just put it down to jealousy of such a good team (bossman and I) running such a good network

 

Yeah we've used RM Blueprints before, we've had to contact vendors before, and we've also experienced one or two hurdles; but those are minor in comparison to the rest of the software we have installed. The majority just work, some need minor tweaks, and some need re-building.

 

Who, on a vanilla network, can honestly say they have had zero problems allocating/deploying software?

[Dexi]

Stop using RM Explorer *shrug*... we don't use it at all at our place. Besides the logon screen / logout button, everything looks and behaves like a standard GPO-restricted vanilla machine as far as the end-user is concerned - fully CC3'd tho.

 

Yeah, I said that too. Apparently because the programs list still shows the programs in groups and not like home where you have to browse through all the manufactures to find the right software is a bad thing. I think it was more of a clutching at straws comment to explain why she wants away from an RM network, without the knowledge of what she is saying for a decent reason.

[mb2k01]

I don't think any one on any flavour network could honestly claim zero issues - besides, if that was possible we'd be out of a job!

 

The flavour debate is often fuelled by personal experience, which is partly where I'm coming from -I've had a strong background in RM c2.2/2.4 to cc3 and also transitions to CSE and Vanilla from RM products. I've experienced first and second hand some awful support and shakey products / services.

 

The second part of the debate is often cost. Again, because of my background I've come across multiple situations where there has been a choice to make, or advise upon. The fact is that side by side, a non-RM network (let's not even say Vanilla - pretty much any non-RM network!) will often be considerably cheaper than one with an RM stamp on it!

 

The cost savings in many cases may be something you can therefor reallocate to services which you otherwise wouldn't have been able to afford - like Smoothwall for example (because another RM product, RM SafetyNet Plus, doesn't work the way you'd want it to either!)

[CommodoreS]

What an interesting thread (apart from some of the b1tching).

 

I am in a similar situation - looking for a replacement for CC3 that is not CC4 for schools which are planning on upgrading their systems this year.

 

I look after quite a few Primary schools, and the CC4 SR1 schools are all unstable in one way or another, and take much more time to look after than the CC3 networks. RM Support is also rather poor. IMO CC4 is the Vista (or ME) of school network systems.

 

I am surprised there is not many (if any) decent easy to use reliable solutions for systems for the primary school market, that are affordable and suitable. I am sure if someone was to develop one, they would make a small fortune out of it and a lot of happy people.

 

I will have to look into CSE - it might be the solution I am looking for. Does it also provide a feature for imaging/building workstations and allocating MSI packages, and if not what are the people who use CSE, use for this?

 

No one seems to have mentioned the most recent release of Ergo Free2Teach on here, and it is a product I have asked about on here before, but did not get many replies. Surely someone must have used it at some point?

Free2Teach - Ergo Computing - Full-scale ICT solutions provider

[mb2k01]

I will have to look into CSE - it might be the solution I am looking for. Does it also provide a feature for imaging/building workstations and allocating MSI packages, and if not what are the people who use CSE, use for this?

 

I'm not sure how accurate this is based on their current product as I left a few years ago, but they used to use a re-badged version of Ghost for Imagaing, and Prism Deploy for package creation / distribution.

When we essentially de-CSE'd our network and went vanilla we actually continued using Prism and Ghost for a while as we paid support for those seperately.

[Chunky]

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

[CommodoreS]

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

 

The problem with this solution is that you then have again bought into RM again with RM Server Hardware and a RM Maintenance Contract for it.

 

While RM may continue to sell XP compatible machines, it is going to get more difficult to obtain 3rd party machines with XP Licences, and I expect XP Drivers will stop being produced at some point. Only a problem if you buy RM equipment, but there is some much better and cheaper kit out there with better support.

 

System development is also as important as support and RM seems to have stopped this when CC4 was released, apart from the Security Updates some of which are withdrawn shortly after they are released, and then releasing 3 months worth at once. I am sure they could have developed Vista and Windows 7 clients for CC3, but have not done so to get people to buy CC4.

 

Now Windows 7 has been released, that seems to be the way to go, and I am going to be looking for systems which support this.

[Chunky]

The problem with this solution is that you then have again bought into RM again with RM Server Hardware and a RM Maintenance Contract for it.

 

While RM may continue to sell XP compatible machines, it is going to get more difficult to obtain 3rd party machines with XP Licences, and I expect XP Drivers will stop being produced at some point. Only a problem if you buy RM equipment, but there is some much better and cheaper kit out there with better support.

 

System development is also as important as support and RM seems to have stopped this when CC4 was released, apart from the Security Updates some of which are withdrawn shortly after they are released, and then releasing 3 months worth at once. I am sure they could have developed Vista and Windows 7 clients for CC3, but have not done so to get people to buy CC4.

 

Now Windows 7 has been released, that seems to be the way to go, and I am going to be looking for systems which support this.

 

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.

 

Technically, there was no way of supporting Vista on CC3, as the underlying methods used in the CC3 system differ from standard - that's all. To accomodate fitting in vista clients, RM would have had to remodel CC3 almost completely. Not a financially feasible option. (and no point possibly causing problems with a large base of CC3.x users when the CC4 platform was being developed for just that) When CC4 was released (personally, I'd have liked to have seen more testing) it did suck away some of the support - but that doesn't detract anything from CC3 and the solution it provides.

 

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)

 

For example, the OP could save the money he would have paid for Ranger or CC4 or similar licences and puth it into the planned infrastructure upgrade. To me, it' was a no-brainer, especially in the current financial and technology development climbate (ie, the OS'es).

 

It may be that you have the technical ability to create your own vanilla Win 7 / 2008 server network - but consider the time needed to create/retrain/manage the new system. (and also the current tech's technical ability, and that of the staff that will be using it) Is NOW the right time to make these decisions?

 

Chris Norman aka Chunky

RM Communities Moderator

Edited January 22, 2010 by Chunky

[bossman]

@all:

 

Just want people to know that yes there are differences of opinions on which platforms one should run with and there is always going to be a well debated discussion about who thinks there setup is the best, it is only natural for people to defend what they are used to.

 

On a lighter note isn't it great that our community can still beg to differ in a responsible manner and not let it slip into gutter level, I often sit and ponder what we all would be doing without EG.

 

@mb2k01:

 

I like the cut of your jib young man, as you have said you have gained quite a lot of experience based on your time spent working on different platforms, I too have been Microsoft trained but only after I took up the role of technician with this school, I then took over a network which was on the point of collapse and brought it bang up to date at that time 8 years ago.

 

Having looked at what was on offer at that time (CSE, Ranger, Toshiba, Microsoft Vanilla, RM and a few others) RM was the one product that stood out from the crowd for the management tools and as I was on my own at that time, I chose not to have my time taken up by finding other tools to manipulate the network with.

 

8 years later (Still same servers) different workstations (not purchased from RM) the RM platform win2k sp4 is solid in it's performance. Login times for new profile (even when network fully loaded) 25 secs and if the student logs out and then logs back in it's 5 secs, they have remote access to their own work area, VLE (Moodle), staff have remote Sims and helpdesk 24/7/365 everything that they require to service their teaching and learning.

 

I know I could have acheived this with a Vanilla platform but would have taken me far longer to realise with time restraints. I am Microsoft acredited and Cisco acredited and I am fully aware of what I could do with a Vanilla platform the only reason I run with RM is that it does what the school requires with the minimal of fuss and expense.

 

In all the 8 years, our actual IT downtime is just 3 hours and all it has cost was the initial expense of the hardware 2 Servers and MIS Server and workstations (not purchased from RM) we have no SLA agreement with anyone as we do everything in house (no cost except our time) as the network has grown we have just added to using the knowledge we have gained both with Microsoft and RM.

 

I don't think it comes down to the platform, but the person who manages it from the initial design of the network to the upgrades and migrations. We are all very knowledgable people in our own right and we all deserve a hearty pat on the back for the daily use of our networks from the customers who use them.

 

I say good day to you all and keep up the good work have a good weekend. :)

[mb2k01]

@bossman

 

I give thanks not only for the fair and balanced post, but for using the term "cut of your jib" which has often given me funny looks when used myself!

 

It sounds like we were faced with similar paths, as I made the choice for CSE at a time when I was alone too. As my previous posts summarise, I made the choice for different reasons, some personal, but the majority for the good of the school at the time.

 

There definitely isn't a right or wrong choice to make if it's RM vs. Other large / reputable supplier (or decent in-house team used to managing Vanilla from design upwards). It is all down to informed decisions and what works best for the school and the team. RM just didn't work for me or the school at that time, and it was certainly a school decision rather than just an mb2k01 decision!

 

Although I can't really give much detail, I'm actually actively working with RM now in my latest role, but to replicate a lot of the positive aspects of our system to a new co-designed network installation co-implemented between RM and myself. They're not all bad and I can see a decent way forward on this project, but their off-the-shelf connect packages definitely aren't what I’d recommend to anyone looking at alternatives like the OP.

[bossman]

@mb2k01:

 

It's good to communicate at whatever levels and this is what makes people so special, it is kind of you to relay your thoughts in such a way and I thank you for this.

 

Have a good weekend :)

[PiqueABoo]

I am surprised there is not many (if any) decent easy to use reliable solutions for systems for the primary school market, that are affordable and suitable. I am sure if someone was to develop one, they would make a small fortune out of it and a lot of happy people.

 

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.

 

I am sure they could have developed Vista and Windows 7 clients for CC3, but have not done so to get people to buy CC4.

Technically, there was no way of supporting Vista on CC3,

 

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.

 

there's so much confusion with the new OS'es, etc.

 

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.

[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!!

[Guest Guest]

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!