Very sorry, two corrections:
Attending from the Purchasing Department: Deb Harvey.
Details: Dean Williams recommended that CIT no longer develop supported
software installers for Win98 platform after June 30, 2003 (as opposed to
On Wed, 18 Dec 2002, Stefanie Ploof wrote:
> Business School: Nicole Chittenden.
> Computing & Information Technology: Geoff Duke, Dean Williams, Greg
> MacKinnon, Stefanie Ploof, Andy Gingras.
> Mathematics & Statistics: Larry Kost.
> President's Office: Pam Barden.
> University Training & Developmeny: Lynn Cummings.
> 1a. Sunset date for Windows 98.
> Should we make the date sooner than June 30, 2004? Use the CAP program
> more heavily as the path for upgrading machines?
> Dean Williams says there are still many Windows 95 machines out there that
> are being replaced through the CAP program even though Windows 95 support
> ended June 30, 2002. The next version of MS Office to come out will not
> run on the Windows 98 platorm.
> We briefly discussed what "support" entails:
> - people trying to do new things on their machines but can't
> - people trying to do the same old tasks but bugs in products prevent them
> from doing so (effectively or at all)
> Geoff Duke pointed out that CIT does not hire new staff each time a new
> operating system comes out so CIT must let old products go, hence sunset
> dates for products.
> Much discussion concluded with the decision of June 30, 2004 as the latest
> date for ending support of Windows 98. Further discussion will be
> generated on the Advocats and IT-Standards lists. Greg MacKinnon
> suggested an addition of the definition of support when the message
> requesting discussion is sent out.
> Current standards and sunset dates can be found at:
> Dean William suggested that CIT no longer develop supported software
> installers for the Windows 98 platform.
> 1b. Mac OS 8 sunset.
> Dean Williams proposed that the date for ending support of Mac OS 8 be
> moved from June 30, 2004 to June 30, 2003. Dean will also be proposing
> sunset dates for OS 9 and X in a separate message. At a meeting member's
> request, Andy Gingras estimated that only 10% of the university is using
> 2. Printer/Copier support.
> Greg MacKinnon said that many requests come into CIT to set up these
> multi-functioning printer/copiers after they have been purchased. Not all
> the printer/copiers are friendly with the campus network or to one common
> operating system. As a result, CIT cannot support many of these purchase
> Deb Harvey said that her department does not decide the brand that the
> individual department purchases. We have a contract with Icon who sells
> Canon and Savin printers, some with network connections.
> Greg mentioned that before we had the contract with Icon people were
> buying many different brands without consulting with CIT. He also said
> that Icon is setting up the printer/copiers as peer-to-peer networked but
> CIT does not support this type of network printing, only networked print
> services through Netware and HP Jet Admin.
> Geoff Duke requested that CIT be involved with choosing the units that the
> purchasing department will suggest to departments, Deb Harvey agreed.
> Dean Williams suggested standards for the copier/printers.
> Andy Gingras recommended we make standards for all of our hardware. Much
> discussion about standards of hardware was then discussed.
> Dean Williams proposed that printer/copiers must be purchased through the
> purchasing department and that there be a short, specific list of models
> that can be purchased. He also proposed that Icon must provide CIT with
> one unit of each product we choose to support for testing purposes before
> we go ahead with selling to individual departments.
> Greg MacKinnon suggested that the vendor must come to CIT ahead of time to
> ask if a new model can be sold on our campus.
> Pam Barden suggested that each department on campus have a "champion" who
> is responsible for inventorying that departments hardware and software and
> that the champion be the liaison with CIT. Discussion about high
> turn-over and mid-grade positions who already have too many job
> responsibilities has made this model fail in the past.
> Dean Williams said that each department has a business manager and that
> maybe some of the champion responsibilities should be written into each
> department's business manager job description. Further discussion of this
> idea will occur on the IT-STANDARDS list.
> A proposal to meet again in January was made, specifics to be discussed on
> the IT-STANDARDS list.
> Stefanie B. Ploof
> CIT Client Services, CALS ITO
> Computing Analyst II
> University of Vermont
Stefanie B. Ploof
CIT Client Services, CALS ITO
Computing Analyst II
University of Vermont