Asset Management Products Let You Gain Network Control

We were disappointed to find that TME 10 does not provide alerting functionality within the base Framework product. A rudimentary notice application gave us the ability to send notices to TME 10 users and groups, but by comparison to the trap types and alerting mechanism provided by HP, Tivoli is lacking. But true to its enterprise architecture those notifications can be set to display in multiple languages across multiple countries. TME 10's query facility is good, and the field names are relatively descriptive and held in logical groupings. We weren't able to create a query across these groupings, however. Like PLATINUM, Tivoli separates the idea of packaging from that of sending. Though more complex, it more cleanly seg regates the process of installing software from its distribution, aligning more closely with the organizational production control structure that large IT shops follow. But unlike PLATINUM, Tivoli includes a delta-based packaging tool, called AutoPack. We found it as easy to use as Seagate WinINSTALL, but lacking in the area of configuration flexibility. Targeting software to users in TME 10 takes a completely different approach than any of the other products tested; it creates profiles and subscribe devices, or machines. The power of this approach is its security and consistency for all TME 10 actions. It doesn't matter to an operator if the task is distributing software or scanning inventory; it is accomplished in the same way. Lacking, however, is any sort of integration with NT Domains or NDS as a target/grouping source. Bruce Boardman can be reached at bboardman@nwc.com
	A Word On The Complexity Of Cost In most cases, the pricing schemes for asset management packages proved to be at least as complex as setting them up. The vendors offered different pricing schemes for all of the products we tested and most of them defined base functionality differently as well, with modules fetching additional per-server or per-client costs. Some of the asset management solutions covered all three asset disciplines--and more--while others focused only on a single discipline. A few of the vendors provided pricing that was fairly flat and comprehensive. But in most instances, the final figure was based on a combination of servers and client agents. Of course, each vendor said it was able to provide all-inclusive corporate pricing on a case-by-case basis. To illustrate the range of pricing for asset-management solutions, we asked the nine vendors to provide a basic pricing scheme for two fictional environments (see "Asset Management Pricing" chart at right). Scenario 1 was a medium-sized campus enterprise with 10,000 nodes; Scenario 2 was a large 70,000 node corporation with multiple locations. Note that even these basic quotes may not represent reality, since the solutions lacked on-site installation, service and support. The midsized campus had Windows NT, NetWare and Unix servers with the attending native directories, and naming features were supported by a centralized IT organization that had distributed support. This 10,000 node corporation did not have any WAN interconnections and all connectivity was at least 10 Mbps. Ten centralized consoles and 10 remote consoles were specified. The large corporation called for the support of 10 sites separated by 56-Kbps to T1 WAN links. In addition to sharing the same needs for operating system and directory support as the midsized corporation, this organizational hierarchy also required support for distribution ser vers and additional consoles due to the WAN links and other localized support requirements. Overall, we were surprised that Seagate Software came in with the lowest cost, considering the broad breadth and depth of its solution. The Seagate solution, however, is a Wintel-only solution. The solutions from PLATINUM technology and Tivoli Systems offered complete coverage and expandability to handle the entire enterprise. But this came at a price. Shocking was the quote from Intel Corp., which didn't have a strong showing in our testing. Its quote seemed to be out of place with its standing. Perhaps the most difficult quote to swallow was the pricing from ON Technology Corp., whose singular feature of software distribution topped the scales at $7 million.

Other Reviews Mobile Users Stay Connected Via Tactica Caprera, the First Offline TP Monitor By Barry Nance