Security Manager in SLA ??

Thanks for your insights. They are very useful. We love BM to and plan on
sticking with it until Novell eventually pulls the plug.

Matt
[color=blue][color=green][color=darkred]
>>> On 10/20/2006 at 2:21 AM, in message[/color][/color][/color]
<42ugj2h1qjsffb2vvotdfmsdo5663qs6s6@4ax.com>, <emerson.nospam@charger.se>
wrote:[color=blue]
> Well,, I actually like BM in many ways,
> It could do with a facelift ( or 2) and the way it's created and the
> way Novell products usually are setup, it to would be a great product
> if available on more than one platform. Like GW, iFolder,etc..
>
> The issue Im having as a reseller is that Novell themselves pushed NSM
> hard..."sell this" .. "check it out"..etc..etc,,
>
> Sure, we did, and now we have 50% less Novell/BM cases who instead run
> astaro which is a great product. The high Avail. option is really
> popular and works great.
>
> It's a pity they didn't go the whole way with astaro...
>
>
>
> On Thu, 19 Oct 2006 14:17:07 GMT, "Matt Schlawin"
> <MSchlawin@FVLHS.ORG> wrote:
>[color=green]
>>Thanks. That helps clear things up. I had heard that BM 3.9 is the[/color]
> final[color=green]
>>release and then they were going to switch to a Linux based solution.
>>Wonder why Novell just doesn't just buy a company like Astaro that has a
>>good Linux based firewall?
>>
>>Matt
>>[color=darkred]
>>>>> On 10/17/2006 at 1:21 AM, in message[/color]
>><oct8j2l7ca16vv6uc3lm81e5tcm39c83e1@4ax.com>, <emerson.nospam@charger.se>
>>wrote:[color=darkred]
>>> Well, I think the safe bet is; No,
>>> NSM will be removed from Novell's pricelist its the message I received
>>>
>>> So my personal guess is that NSM was just a detour from Novell to make
>>> sure that they'd loose some more BM customers. Well, at least that's
>>> the effect they had for us. We followed the input,
>>> "sell nsm its great"
>>> We did, so now probably half of our BM customers are Astaro users
>>> instead.
>>>
>>> So forward on, it's either BM from Novell or Astaro "non-oem" directly
>>> from them.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, 16 Oct 2006 20:33:25 GMT, "Matt Schlawin"
>>> <MSchlawin@FVLHS.ORG> wrote:
>>>
>>>>We are evaluating a wide variety of products. We currently have BM in
>>> our
>>>>SLA agreement and we love it. We don't love the escalating cost to[/color][/color][/color]
keep[color=blue][color=green][color=darkred]
>>>>SurfControl running on it.
>>>>
>>>>Will SM eventually be put into the SLA agreement (along with more
>>> favorable
>>>>yearly subscriptions) ?
>>>>
>>>>For now we will stick with BM and upgrade to 3.9 but it would be nice to[/color][/color][/color]
[color=blue][color=green][color=darkred]
>>> be
>>>>able to plan.
>>>>
>>>>Matt[/color][/color][/color]