Client Management Suite

A niggle I have with the current version of the interface is that a lack of data presented at any instant could be down to two things,

1. There is no data
2. There is perhaps some data, but explorer's busy getting it

It would really help clarify the information on the interface if there were in every widget a place holder entry which said something like "Loading Data...". Or even have some indication in the console (traffic light, glowing button, mouse turned to hour glass... anything) that the stuff is happening.

That way, you know there really is nothing there, or whether you just have to wait a bit longer.

As this indication of a busy widget is missing in most instance, I never know really if there really is no data to present, or whether I just have to hang on a bit more.

Although This would be great to implement as a general design philosophy!

This would be HUGE.  I can't tell you how many times I have been working in the console and saw blank pages and thought it was either a bug, that section really had no data, or (most common) the data appeared right as i clicked something else, causing the data to disappear... which inevitably leads to me clicking the previous option again and then waiting all over again...

Are there specific pages within the console that are taking too long to load that you would need this progress indication?  If yes, which pages or views?  The new reports should have a little progress indicator but most of the other pages don't.  Additionally, if something is taking a long time to load we would investigate how to make it quicker...

Thanks!

Andrew

Hi Andrew,

I know this might appear to be an 'icing on the cake' type of request, but from a user point of view this is fairly valuable. Even actions which you might think should be fast to process for many reasons occasionally might not be.

A human interface ought to lead the user though 'stages', giving them a good visual indication of what stage they are at. In Hampton this philosophy is not in the design.

I first hit this on when looking at drop down boxes in the scripted install wizard. I would click on boxes to find them empty. I then thought they were empty, and assumed I didn't create my file sources correctly so went back to do that. Same for license keys. If I had been patient, those blanks would have populated. But then the question is how long do you wait to be sure a blank field is really a blank field.

On the idea of letting the user know where they are in the process, in the scripted install 'wizard', when you create your file source and license codes you are returned to the original screen. The entries however in the file and license drop downs are still blank - there is no indication anything has happened.  You have to now go back and select the entries manually that you just added. This appears odd as you've just spent the last 15 minutes getting this info in there.

(when you add a file source in scripted installs by the way, I find that part of the interface just seized for about a couple of minutes until the Java piece finally says 'Copying Files...'). I nearly killed the browser.

Some of this uncertainty on data  might come down to the habit of the interface popup windows having a non-standard approach of buttons with "Save" and "Cancel". When you click 'Save' the window is still open. You don't want to cancel, so you click the exit button at the top of the window.  This design is slightly unintuitive for me

Other times when I get interface lags is when navigating the main interface for computer/tasks you can also be left with looking at blank (or nearly blank) windows as the data trickles through. 

All of this results in the feeling that I am fighting the interface.

Kind Regards,
Ian./

we noticed it yesterday when going through all the policies for first-time setup.  haven't gotten real deep into anything just yet - we're just beginning to really play with it for our 6.x to 7.x migration.  It seems to be a little more responsive than the 7.0 test server we also have up on an identical VM, (ie: it lags less often) but the lag is still quite annoying.

our server and network aren't particularly slow, and it's not consistently slow on any given page or item.  sometimes a page loads quickly, and sometimes not.  sometimes we end up clicking on items 3-4 times because there's no indication that it received my click - no progress bar, hourglass, spinning ring in IE, etc...

edit: Ian posted at the same time... and stated facts much more thoroughly than I.  Thanks, Ian.

totaly agree

in additiona when you go into organization views/active directory/domain/container and select 3,000 workstations and then try to assign a location, i wait for anything up to 25 minutes for the actual menu to load, most of the time i end up selecting only a 1,000 and waiting 5 minutes for the menu to load, eventualy being abl eto assign these AD workstation objects from a AD container to a mnualy created 'location'

this is also true of the user objects which have to also be manuly processed in the same way

I think the main issue is that the kinds of work that need to be done in software like Altiris do not lend themselves well to a web-based UI.

Web-based, while nice in that it is easy for anyone to access, is hampered by the limitation on how much data and how fast it can display.  The Symantec /Altiris web UI is particularly bogged down by this because even with a basic setup there is simply too much data to display, and IIS can't process it quickly enough.

To put it another way, the Symantec web-based UI is generally crap, and Symantec needs to release a proper 32 bit console and stop messing around with web-based junk.

Agreed.  When I found out that the big boss wanted the service desk to use the DS 6.9 web console exclusively and not have the 32bit console, i actually felt sorry for the service desk.  crazy, i know, but true.

After having used the DS 6.9 32bit console for a while, going to the web console feels like trying to reassemble a fine swiss timepiece while wearing thick winter gloves and eyeglasses with the wrong prescription.  So far what i've seen in 7.0 and 7.1 doesn't seem much better.

Silverlight is a small step in the right direction, but it still relies on funneling everything through IIS rather than letting the client (console user, that is) hit SQL directly.

'Please' can the Symantec Powers that be, kindly comment on the above two posts and put all our minds at rest that they do indeed have a brilliant solution just around the corner and that we have absolutely nothing to worry about!

I myself was an avid fan of Altiris and passionate about the product, but i cant help but feel the year of 2010 has promised soooo much, delivered so little (amongst so much potential) and i just hope we not watching a slow death of a quite brilliant product!

7.1 was meant to be the saviour of version 7...and yet i can already hear myself think.....wait for version 7.2....honestly...i'm running out of patience :(

This was the first thing I noticed with the silverlight components as well. Even though it is web based silverlight would allow the devs to add this functionality.

For this to be released without any "progress" indications will lead to many support calls to Altiris Administrators in companies that implement 7.1

Pleas Symantec put this high on the priority list.

A little ironic no?