[hobbit] Hobbit versus Unicenter/TNG

[Ralph Mitchell]

On 2/7/07, PAUL WILLIAMSON <pwilliamson at mandtbank.com> wrote:
> >>> ralphmitchell at gmail.com 02/07/07 9:50 AM >>>
> >
> >  I don't know about the recent versions of TNG, but back in 1998
> > TNG-2.1 (2.0 maybe?) took around 40 minutes to bring up the 2D
> > map.
>
> It only takes about 20 minutes now, and it defaults back to the
> view it wants to show you every time.

To be fair, we did have about 40,000 objects in the database.

> > I only have Hobbit's client-side running on a few of my own servers,
> > because my own PHBs have decreed that TNG is the only monitoring
> > tool to use.  Oh, and NetCool.  Oh, and BMC Patrol  Oh, and
> > HPOpenView.  Oh, and Mercury.  Oh, and OnCentauri...
>
> Funny that should come up.  We've gotten BB (and slowly introducing
> Hobbit) and Netcool very well integrated.  It makes the PHBs happy,
> both because they don't have to spend tons of cash to replicate
> BB/Hobbit, and they get their golf outings and other unnamed perks
> paid for by the vendors.

I set up BB (v18b3) when I sat on the monitoring desk for a while.
The officially blessed tool is TNG, so it would be a question of
integrating BB/Hobbit reports into TNG, rather than the other way
around.  If I *really* had to do it, my scripts could write a log file
for TNG to watch, instead of sending the the Hobbit status message.

> I know at a previous job, I was told the only reason we went with
> software from vendor X rather than vendor Y is because vendor X
> could get us tickets to every home Baltimore Orioles game.  I couldn't
> believe someone was willing to actually say that.

I've heard of golf games changing PHBs minds.

Ralph Mitchell