Print

Print


Attending
---------
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.


Details
-------

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:

http://www.uvm.edu/itnetwork/standards

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
Macs.


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
printer/copiers.

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