ServiceDesk

We are going live with ServiceDesk on the Sept. 1st...
There are some things I have noticed about the product.... 
-----
I have used the mass re-assigment feature of the application [using the open ticket report assign task to user/group]
I resolved all of the mass re-assigned tickets... they are now marked as closed but are not assigned to me...  they have the original assignment from the original ticket....  [currently support I]
------------
I have also created a new ticket and changed the assignment to myself then resolved the ticket in 1 fell swoop... same thing ... not assigned to me still assigned to the default   support I  group...
----------
Created a template with myself as the assignment - same results...
-----------------------
Along that line   ----  How can you delete a template that is no longer useful or rename it and 'update' it as a useful one.....
--------------------------
Why can you not have the category, or any drop down list in alphabetical order and be able to jump to a section of the drop down by pressing a letter ...  ie... a jumps to 'account management'....  b jumps to 'beta testing'...   etc....  for all drop down lists...
----------------------
Why does the 'select user' when creating a ticket not consistantly search for a user by first name, last name...    i can find myself by searching for  'rhoy'  not by 'hoy'...  if i try 'hoyt, ro....' i get a user not found message...    i have been told to only use e-mail address searching...   my e-mails starts 'rhoy' but my co-workers starts 'pbend' and it will not relolve when searched by that short name but will resolve when searched by the short name of 'bend'....
--- this 'is/will be' very cumbersom and slow as many users do not have e-mail or know their e-mail address in our orginazation....
in addition when creating a 'bogus' user file every one else will have to know how it was created [structure specific] and what agency the creator assigned the user to as our e-mail addresses are department specific....
----------------------------
why when you create a new user contact in the ticket does it not default to the 'primary' user for the ticket....  you then have to search for the contact you just created and then select it as the primary....   too many steps
---------------------------

Wheeew....   Just some things that are keeping me up at night dreading the change over...  Altiris 6.0 sp3 does not have half these issues...

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
corrected post from helpdesk solution to servicedesk
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

8/26    i am not sure if my issues are due to a customized 'install'    but they seem to be items that should have been addressed in a standard install.....  and not needing customazation....
--------------------------
also noted the 'edit process' choice comes and goes...  this allows correcting a ticket title to something meaningful [when users put HELP as the title..]  i have edited one ticket 4 times to get the change to stick...  [so far.. will see tomorrow]  it kept reverting to the original title....
---  also having fields for TITLE and NAME under the process [to me] is strange.....  Title should be Title/name/whatever   all the same...
-------------------

i also have a ticket that is listed as resolved and will not go to closed status.....  i cannot -re-resolve it....

---------------------

Why does the 'select user' when creating a ticket not consistantly search for a user by first name, last name...    i can find myself by searching for  'rhoy'  not by 'hoy'...  if i try 'hoyt, ro....' i get a user not found message... 
=====
I believe the default for the search feature is to search for users based upon their primary email address.  It uses this because the Primary Email address, while not used as a "key" in the database (no references to other tables that I have found yet) is required to be unique (it's used as the unique login ID for a user).

-------------------

i also have a ticket that is listed as resolved and will not go to closed status.....  i cannot -re-resolve it....
=====
Sounds like your organization did like mine and didn't actually follow the intended workflow for tickets in Altiris Helpdesk.  Essentially, the "proper" workflow is supposed to be something like this (simple case):

1.  Ticket gets created by user.
2.  Ticket routed to helpdesk (or other work group based upon categories / routing rules).
3.  Worker works ticket, updates status to "Resolved"
4.  User receives notification that their issue has been "Resolved".
5.  User confirms that resolution did, in fact, work.
6.  User "Closes" ticket.

So, as you see, it's the "USER" not the "WORKER" who is "supposed" to close tickets.  The concept is that the worker, who did not experience the problem, cannot confirm that the issue is closed.  They can only enter a potential resolution.  The user must confirm that resolution and close the ticket.

Service Desk 7 more rigidly enforces this work flow.

Hope that helps.

I do agree that email is the 'glue' that holds service desk together and is critical,  but do keep in mind that not all customer environments support the end user being the person 'closing' the ticket. Actually, id go so far as to say most companies would not want that sort of process to take place ( I do realize its ITIL standards, but not all companies follow ITIL in its most basic form but use it more as a recommendation )

The workflow changes to disable the end user's interaction in the process is rather trivial to implement.

And yes, the 'search user' component dialogs in the advanced incident create dialog ( added in MR2 ) are based off of email. However it does not work consistently and its been reported to Symantec development as a bug, which they are currently investigating..

EDIT: Another thing to keep in mind, concerning '”Altiris HD SP3' doesn’t have these issues”, is that ServiceDesk is NOT an upgrade of Altiris helpdesk. ServiceDesk is a *new* product ( even if they call it version 7, it’s really not ), built to a different structure on a new technology with a different purpose, and is a component in a much larger picture. Trying to compare the 2 is like comparing apples to oranges and really isn’t appropriate.  They may do similar things on the surface, but they really are 2 different animals and everyone should look at it this way.