 | Individuals with a conflict of interest, particularly those representing the subject of the article, are strongly advised not to directly edit the article. See Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. You may request corrections or suggest content here on the Talk page for independent editors to review, or contact us if the issue is urgent. |
 | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
I think that software asset management warrants its own page and that to add this amount of information to the IT asset management page would make it too cluttered DMD2007 By sanjiv 15:54, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
- Why do you think it warrants its own page? I think some of the information in the article is pointless. For example, I think both the "Process" and the "Tools/Technology" serve no real purpose and can be deleted. I also think that "Goals" and "Role in an Organization" can be summarised in a couple of sentences (keeping them is debatable). I vote for merge. -- Kmsiever 16:44, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
Sources such as the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) and Gartner, Inc. recognize software asset management as its own entity, not just under the umbrella of IT asset management. Managing software assets within a company or organization is imperative to security, productivity and the effectiveness of IT spending. Those interested in software asset management deserve a more in-depth analysis than is provided by a couple of sentences under IT asset management. DMD2007 22:19, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
- SAM can be considered part of an overall IT asset management program, or it can be considered in a stand-alone context. The largest software provider in the world treats SAM as its own concern and there are hundreds of firms around the globe that consult on SAM independent of IT/hardware asset management. The ISO standard referenced by the author above is ISO/IEC 19770, exclusively focused on SAM. Nothing about hardware. Why not merge ITAM into SAM? It presents the same thorny issues. There seems to be sufficient independence of SAM from ITAM to leave them separated and cross-reference where appropriate. 24.18.151.239 23:40, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
SAM is about saving investments in software licenses as working capital. Enterprises need rules to protect their software resources. Additionally SAM is about legal regulations.
Both topics can be very painful to organizations if they are not in compliance with either their standard operational procedures and/or legal regulations.
There is no analogy in ITAM for this kind of pain because way too much money and additional the organization's image could be on stake. On one hand companies collapsed because of incompliance. On the other hand understanding SAM can save employments and create .
IMHO the article needs some improvement. SAM is all about procedures, processes, policies and of course documentation. Tools serve are a very! important role. But only specialized tools - not ITAM tools. So there is a big difference. An enumeration of tool types can be read in ITIL SAM best practice. A link would be sufficient. More important is to provide information about the difference. Why should I go for an additional tool when there is already a systems management and a software distribution? Most people do not understand. This is real a challange for the author. The reader should have a good understanding why it is important to focus on SAM. This is not only about Microsoft! They are pushing the topic. This is good for everybody. But I would not mention them in the article. Leave it to some links.
IMHO operational value first - then legal.
Dear reader, if you lost my point: I vote for no merge and improvement concurrently. :-)
WolfK 00:17, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
dennisc68 12:05, 04 November 2008 (PST): I feel that ITAM is becoming more and more an umbrella for managing all types of assets belonging to the IT organization. An ASSET is more than the hardware. I agree that SAM is very special and deserves it's own page, also Hardware Asset Management it's own and then the main ITAM page can discuss the various aspects and reference other pages.. like Procurement, Standards, Finance, Contracting, etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dennisc68 ( talk • contribs) 20:04, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
Reduce this article and keep SAM separated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Novider ( talk • contribs) 09:45, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
- Determine the cost versus value of providing information.
- Responsibilities and allocation of ownership.
- Satisfying the individual's need for information.
- What levels and forms of information should be provided( how to determine the scope and methods for key practices;like in information sharing) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ranjan0123 ( talk • contribs) 09:35, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
What about adding examples like GLPi? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.123.219.227 ( talk) 09:50, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
- While a list of notable applications with their own Wikipedia articles could be created, Wikipedia is not a textbook or link directory. Multiple examples just as "examples" without sufficient context are generally not helpful in an encyclopedic article; and links to non-notable products and other promotional external links are usually removed (see also WP:EL). I have fixed and edited your message per WP:TPG, and added an internal Wiki-link (such links are generally preferred when available). GermanJoe ( talk) 10:19, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
| Individuals with a conflict of interest, particularly those representing the subject of the article, are strongly advised not to directly edit the article. See Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. You may request corrections or suggest content here on the Talk page for independent editors to review, or contact us if the issue is urgent. |
|
| This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
I think that software asset management warrants its own page and that to add this amount of information to the IT asset management page would make it too cluttered DMD2007 By sanjiv 15:54, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
- Why do you think it warrants its own page? I think some of the information in the article is pointless. For example, I think both the "Process" and the "Tools/Technology" serve no real purpose and can be deleted. I also think that "Goals" and "Role in an Organization" can be summarised in a couple of sentences (keeping them is debatable). I vote for merge. -- Kmsiever 16:44, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
Sources such as the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) and Gartner, Inc. recognize software asset management as its own entity, not just under the umbrella of IT asset management. Managing software assets within a company or organization is imperative to security, productivity and the effectiveness of IT spending. Those interested in software asset management deserve a more in-depth analysis than is provided by a couple of sentences under IT asset management. DMD2007 22:19, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
- SAM can be considered part of an overall IT asset management program, or it can be considered in a stand-alone context. The largest software provider in the world treats SAM as its own concern and there are hundreds of firms around the globe that consult on SAM independent of IT/hardware asset management. The ISO standard referenced by the author above is ISO/IEC 19770, exclusively focused on SAM. Nothing about hardware. Why not merge ITAM into SAM? It presents the same thorny issues. There seems to be sufficient independence of SAM from ITAM to leave them separated and cross-reference where appropriate. 24.18.151.239 23:40, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
SAM is about saving investments in software licenses as working capital. Enterprises need rules to protect their software resources. Additionally SAM is about legal regulations.
Both topics can be very painful to organizations if they are not in compliance with either their standard operational procedures and/or legal regulations.
There is no analogy in ITAM for this kind of pain because way too much money and additional the organization's image could be on stake. On one hand companies collapsed because of incompliance. On the other hand understanding SAM can save employments and create .
IMHO the article needs some improvement. SAM is all about procedures, processes, policies and of course documentation. Tools serve are a very! important role. But only specialized tools - not ITAM tools. So there is a big difference. An enumeration of tool types can be read in ITIL SAM best practice. A link would be sufficient. More important is to provide information about the difference. Why should I go for an additional tool when there is already a systems management and a software distribution? Most people do not understand. This is real a challange for the author. The reader should have a good understanding why it is important to focus on SAM. This is not only about Microsoft! They are pushing the topic. This is good for everybody. But I would not mention them in the article. Leave it to some links.
IMHO operational value first - then legal.
Dear reader, if you lost my point: I vote for no merge and improvement concurrently. :-)
WolfK 00:17, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
dennisc68 12:05, 04 November 2008 (PST): I feel that ITAM is becoming more and more an umbrella for managing all types of assets belonging to the IT organization. An ASSET is more than the hardware. I agree that SAM is very special and deserves it's own page, also Hardware Asset Management it's own and then the main ITAM page can discuss the various aspects and reference other pages.. like Procurement, Standards, Finance, Contracting, etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dennisc68 ( talk • contribs) 20:04, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
Reduce this article and keep SAM separated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Novider ( talk • contribs) 09:45, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
- Determine the cost versus value of providing information.
- Responsibilities and allocation of ownership.
- Satisfying the individual's need for information.
- What levels and forms of information should be provided( how to determine the scope and methods for key practices;like in information sharing) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ranjan0123 ( talk • contribs) 09:35, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
What about adding examples like GLPi? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.123.219.227 ( talk) 09:50, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
- While a list of notable applications with their own Wikipedia articles could be created, Wikipedia is not a textbook or link directory. Multiple examples just as "examples" without sufficient context are generally not helpful in an encyclopedic article; and links to non-notable products and other promotional external links are usually removed (see also WP:EL). I have fixed and edited your message per WP:TPG, and added an internal Wiki-link (such links are generally preferred when available). GermanJoe ( talk) 10:19, 21 October 2018 (UTC)