<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Director’s Blog &#187; administrative</title>
	<atom:link href="http://ls.berkeley.edu/blogs/lscr/category/administrative/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://ls.berkeley.edu/blogs/lscr</link>
	<description>Tom Holub\'s thoughts on computing in Letters and Science at UC Berkeley</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 20 May 2008 00:28:16 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
	<language>en</language>
			<item>
		<title>&#8220;Software Assurance Renewal&#8221; messages</title>
		<link>http://ls.berkeley.edu/blogs/lscr/2008/01/29/software-assurance-renewal-messages/</link>
		<comments>http://ls.berkeley.edu/blogs/lscr/2008/01/29/software-assurance-renewal-messages/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Jan 2008 02:23:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Tom Holub</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[administrative]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[strategic planning]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[windows]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ls.berkeley.edu/blogs/lscr/2008/01/29/software-assurance-renewal-messages/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Today, a number of departments received messages from CDW-G about needing to renew Software Assurance for one or more of their licenses.  The messages look like this:
Dear HENRIETTA TWITTLEWHEEZE
The Software Assurance (SA) portion of the current three year UC Microsoft Select license agreement will expire on January 31, 2008.
Select SA coverage provides you with [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Today, a number of departments received messages from CDW-G about needing to renew Software Assurance for one or more of their licenses.  The messages look like this:</p>
<blockquote><p>Dear HENRIETTA TWITTLEWHEEZE</p>
<p>The Software Assurance (SA) portion of the current three year UC Microsoft Select license agreement will expire on January 31, 2008.</p>
<p>Select SA coverage provides you with the right to upgrade to newer versions released during the term in which you own SA.  SA is valid for the term of the agreement, purchased in one, two or three year increments depending on when during the three year agreement period you purchase the license with SA.  Renewals are all for the full three year period.   SA also provides you with certain learning tools and trainings that Microsoft makes available to customers who own SA.</p>
<p>If you purchased or renewed Select SA coverage at any time from January 2005 through December 2007 and wish to renew that coverage, *you will need to submit your renewal order to CDWG by February 26, 2008* to ensure process time before the deadline with Microsoft.</p>
<p>Your order(s) that need to be renewed are:<br />
Q5877392</p>
<p>Items ordered were<br />
ACAD MS SEL VIRTUAL PC MAC LIC/SA 1Y</p></blockquote>
<p>I think I can speak for the majority of our departments when I say: Huh?</p>
<p>What happened here is that the department (often unwittingly) purchased a license  for Microsoft software that includes Software Assurance (SA) for one year.  (That&#8217;s what &#8220;SA 1Y&#8221; means at the end of the license).  Usually this was unintentional and caused by the confusing CDW-G price lists.  What it means is that you purchased the right to upgrade your software to the latest version, for a period of up to one year.  (Actually, it&#8217;s not really a full year; it&#8217;s whatever portion of the year was left until January 31, and it&#8217;s not pro-rated).  If you renew your SA (by paying an additional license fee), you&#8217;ll continue to have the right to upgrade to the latest version; if you don&#8217;t renew, you&#8217;ll have to buy a new license when you want to upgrade.</p>
<p>Our general recommendation on SA is, don&#8217;t buy it unless there&#8217;s a specific reason to.  The way the pricing works is that you pay almost double the stand-alone license cost for the right to upgrade to a future version you don&#8217;t even know you&#8217;ll want.  Better just to buy the stand-alone license, and buy another one when you know you want to upgrade.  (Back in the old days, you could buy a cheaper upgrade, but Microsoft and most other software companies have done away with upgrade pricing.)</p>
<p>But, if you got one of these messages, you already bought SA, so what should you do?  First of all, you should make sure you have the most recent version of the software; you&#8217;ve purchased the rights to it, so grab it before your rights expire.  If you already have the latest version, you probably don&#8217;t need to renew SA; you can just buy a new license when the time comes.</p>
<p>Licensing is one of the issues we&#8217;re examining as we develop a strategic plan; this situation highlights the high cost of managing and keeping track of software licenses the way we currently do.  I would like to move to a model where a standard suite of software licenses is paid for centrally or included in our yearly rates, so that departments don&#8217;t have to spend so much energy on these kinds of issues.  It will take a fairly significant reworking of how computing in L&amp;S is funded, but I think we can do it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://ls.berkeley.edu/blogs/lscr/2008/01/29/software-assurance-renewal-messages/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>L&#38;S computer configurations on The Scholar&#8217;s Workstation site</title>
		<link>http://ls.berkeley.edu/blogs/lscr/2007/10/10/ls-computer-configurations-on-the-scholars-workstation-site/</link>
		<comments>http://ls.berkeley.edu/blogs/lscr/2007/10/10/ls-computer-configurations-on-the-scholars-workstation-site/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Oct 2007 23:40:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Tom Holub</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[administrative]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[announcement]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ls.berkeley.edu/blogs/lscr/2007/10/10/ls-computer-configurations-on-the-scholars-workstation-site/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[For several years now, I&#8217;ve coordinated a bulk purchase of computers for L&#38;S units.  The idea of the bulk purchase is to save us the time we spend configuring identical or nearly-identical computers one at a time, and the extra 10-20% more we spend for those computers than we would if we bought them [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>For several years now, I&#8217;ve coordinated a bulk purchase of computers for L&amp;S units.  The idea of the bulk purchase is to save us the time we spend configuring identical or nearly-identical computers one at a time, and the extra 10-20% more we spend for those computers than we would if we bought them all together.  Purchasing in bulk just makes sense.</p>
<p>However, coordinating the bulk purchases has been challenging.  The vendors give me pretty tight timelines, so there&#8217;s not much opportunity to publicize the deal before the deadline for the discount expires.  I always get requests from managers the day after the deal expires.  And the rest of the year, managers have to decide whether to buy a computer when they need one, or wait for the bulk purchase to save a little money.</p>
<p>So this year, I&#8217;m trying something new.  In collaboration with The Scholar&#8217;s Workstation, I&#8217;ve managed to get a web page for <a href="http://www.tsw.berkeley.edu/eStore/landingpagels.tpl">L&amp;S computer recommendations</a> placed on the TSW web site.  This page will include Dell desktops, and Apple desktops and notebooks, with discounted pricing and our configuration recommendations.  I plan to add Windows laptop configurations as well.   We will keep the page current, so you&#8217;ll be able to get our recommendation and pricing any time during the year, not just during a two-week period in September.</p>
<p>I think this will work a lot better for L&amp;S than the bulk purchase program did; the challenge will be keeping up with the changes in products and technology.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://ls.berkeley.edu/blogs/lscr/2007/10/10/ls-computer-configurations-on-the-scholars-workstation-site/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Towards Less Seamful Services</title>
		<link>http://ls.berkeley.edu/blogs/lscr/2007/08/02/towards-less-seamful-services/</link>
		<comments>http://ls.berkeley.edu/blogs/lscr/2007/08/02/towards-less-seamful-services/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Aug 2007 17:57:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Tom Holub</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[administrative]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[strategic planning]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ls.berkeley.edu/blogs/lscr/2007/08/02/towards-less-seamful-services/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[At this week&#8217;s UCCSC conference, I spoke about a report that I&#8217;d helped write, on providing &#8220;less seamful services,&#8221; and better collaboration between distributed and centralized IT units.  I spend a lot of time thinking about that issue, because LSCR is positioned right in the middle of it; to IST, LSCR looks like a [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>At this week&#8217;s <a href="http://uccsc.ucsc.edu/">UCCSC</a> conference, I spoke about a report that I&#8217;d helped write, on providing &#8220;less seamful services,&#8221; and better collaboration between distributed and centralized IT units.  I spend a lot of time thinking about that issue, because LSCR is positioned right in the middle of it; to IST, LSCR looks like a department, but to our departments, LSCR tends to look like centralized IT.</p>
<p>(Aside: I would prefer that our customers  view us as peers and partners.  We do make an effort to behave that way: for example, we locate our folks in departmental space rather than moving off-campus to an office where we could all sit together.  We&#8217;d rather be closer to the users.  But looking at the survey and interview results so far, it seems we have a ways to go to really be seen as integral by most of our customers.)</p>
<p>The report was done as part of <a href="http://www.morassociates.com/itlp/vi-itlp/vi-ldrshp-home.html">ITLP</a>, which is a leadership program for IT folks in higher ed.  The program included folks from Berkeley, UDub, Minnesota, and Penn State, and the report we did surveyed people in distributed and centralized IT at all four of those universities.  Because they&#8217;re all large public research institutions, the issues tend to be pretty similar.</p>
<p><a href="http://ls.berkeley.edu/~tom/uccsc2007/presentation.ppt">My presentation (.ppt)</a> focused on the communication and collaboration challenges.  We have a ton of meetings, but we spend too much time <strong>presenting</strong> to each other and not enough time <strong>talking</strong> to each other.  Our communications tend to be along accepted and formalized lines, and we often gloss over or ignore the underlying issues which keep us from moving forward.  And yes, there is an irony that I was making this point via a PowerPoint presentation; however, the most important part of my presentation was a break-out session where I got the folks from each campus to talk to each other about the pressures or barriers they are facing in their local organization.   I think it went well; the room got noisy enough that it was hard to hear, which I took as a good sign.</p>
<p><a href="http://ls.berkeley.edu/~tom/uccsc2007/report.doc">The report (.doc)</a> addresses the above issue of communication and collaboration, and also has a number of recommendations to make the user experience better in specific technical areas (desktop support, email, and information systems).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://ls.berkeley.edu/blogs/lscr/2007/08/02/towards-less-seamful-services/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>LSCR Director&#8217;s Blog</title>
		<link>http://ls.berkeley.edu/blogs/lscr/2007/07/16/lscr-directors-blog/</link>
		<comments>http://ls.berkeley.edu/blogs/lscr/2007/07/16/lscr-directors-blog/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Jul 2007 01:48:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Tom Holub</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[administrative]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[announcement]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ls.berkeley.edu/blogs/lscr/2007/07/16/lscr-directors-blog/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[One of the things we&#8217;ve been hearing from folks in L&#38;S is that LSCR doesn&#8217;t communicate enough; that we&#8217;re quick to respond when they call us, but we don&#8217;t do enough to tell people about what&#8217;s going on in technology in the industry and on campus.  Part of the reason for that is that [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>One of the things we&#8217;ve been hearing from folks in L&amp;S is that LSCR doesn&#8217;t communicate enough; that we&#8217;re quick to respond when they call us, but we don&#8217;t do enough to tell people about what&#8217;s going on in technology in the industry and on campus.  Part of the reason for that is that to communicate via our web site or email is fairly time-consuming for us.  Before we&#8217;ll put up a post on our web site, we want to be sure it&#8217;s correct and complete, which requires us to spend time developing the content, and then going through an editorial process before a page can go live.  For a lot of our content, that process is important; for example, our <a href="http://ls.berkeley.edu/lscr/advice/email/thunderbird/">Thunderbird</a>  pages couldn&#8217;t be published until we were sure Thunderbird was going to be our email client recommendation, and we&#8217;d developed enough content to be worth making an announcement.  (And really, we still haven&#8217;t made a formal announcement about Thunderbird, because as soon as we do that, people will want to know when we&#8217;ll be migrating them, and we&#8217;re still working on our schedule for that.  The short answer is: within the next six months).</p>
<p>We need a communication mechanism that has a better signal-to-noise ratio than email (what percentage of your incoming email did you actually read today?), but less formality than our web site.  Fortunately, technology has already helped us out with this one; blog software is easy to install and use (we&#8217;re using WordPress), and it&#8217;s easier to be informal in a blog context.  Plus, the ability for readers to add comments can create an open dialog that saves everyone from having to ask the same questions over and over.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ll be posting news, announcements, and random thoughts about computing in L&amp;S on a regular basis.  Pretty soon (once it goes through our editorial process!) we&#8217;ll have an advice article on how to subscribe to blogs using RSS, which can keep you updated without the notices getting lost in your email.</p>
<p>We&#8217;re also planning to offer blog space to any departments who use our server for their web site; if the department chair or IT manager wants a blog, it&#8217;s easy for us to add a new blog to fit into your existing web site.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://ls.berkeley.edu/blogs/lscr/2007/07/16/lscr-directors-blog/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>LSCR strategic planning retreat scheduled for 7/18/07</title>
		<link>http://ls.berkeley.edu/blogs/lscr/2007/07/13/lscr-strategic-planning-retreat-71807/</link>
		<comments>http://ls.berkeley.edu/blogs/lscr/2007/07/13/lscr-strategic-planning-retreat-71807/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Jul 2007 21:40:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Tom Holub</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[administrative]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[strategic planning]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ls.berkeley.edu/blogs/lscr/2007/07/13/lscr-strategic-planning-retreat-71807/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[LSCR has been involved in a strategic planning process for over a year now.  We&#8217;ve done a lot of work on developing a clear mission and vision for the organization and for computing in L&#38;S in general.  We got good information from the L&#38;S computing survey which many of you answered earlier this [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>LSCR has been involved in a strategic planning process for over a year now.  We&#8217;ve done a lot of work on developing a clear mission and vision for the organization and for computing in L&amp;S in general.  We got good information from the L&amp;S computing survey which many of you answered earlier this year, and we have been conducting follow-up interviews with individuals.  The CIO&#8217;s office is also helping out by conducting an external consulting review of our current operations.</p>
<p>On Wednesday, 7/18, LSCR will be participating in an off-site retreat (at the Headlands Institute in Marin) to synthesize some of the information we have gathered.  Our focus will be to come up with some specific action plans and strategic goals which will guide the next phases of the process.  We expect that in calendar 2008, we will have some concrete proposals to improve computing in L&amp;S.</p>
<p>The retreat will require the participation of our entire staff, so we will be operating with a skeleton crew on 7/18.  We will have someone watching our queues and able to contact us by cell phone if necessary, but we&#8217;d like to ask you to limit your requests on Wednesday to obviously urgent calls, or indicate whether the call can be deferred until we&#8217;re back at full staff on Thursday.</p>
<p>Thank you for your patience as we try to find ways to better meet the needs of our customers and the college.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://ls.berkeley.edu/blogs/lscr/2007/07/13/lscr-strategic-planning-retreat-71807/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
