<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xml:base="http://www.itskeptic.org"  xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel>
 <title>The IT Skeptic - Comments for &quot;Problem management process graph is wrong&quot;</title>
 <link>http://www.itskeptic.org/node/1345</link>
 <description>Comments for &quot;Problem management process graph is wrong&quot;</description>
 <language>en</language>
<item>
 <title>Are there any?</title>
 <link>http://www.itskeptic.org/node/1345#comment-4199</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;Maybe everybody is smart enough not to subscribe???&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;nah, for every fad there is a customer...&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <pubDate>Tue, 10 Mar 2009 19:03:21 +0000</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>mbuzina</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">comment 4199 at http://www.itskeptic.org</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>neither</title>
 <link>http://www.itskeptic.org/node/1345#comment-4197</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;seems like neither of their subscribers wants to comment...&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <pubDate>Tue, 10 Mar 2009 06:27:23 +0000</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>skeptic</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">comment 4197 at http://www.itskeptic.org</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Any ITIL Live user reports yet?</title>
 <link>http://www.itskeptic.org/node/1345#comment-4195</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;Haven&#039;t seen any on the web and I know that Skep has asked. Anyone have any insight into this? Inquiring minds want to know...&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;kengon&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <pubDate>Mon, 09 Mar 2009 21:33:17 +0000</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>kengon</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">comment 4195 at http://www.itskeptic.org</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Again a good example of &quot;(un-)intelligence of the market&quot;</title>
 <link>http://www.itskeptic.org/node/1345#comment-4188</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;That goes to show, markets tend to go to high risk products with lousy quality and a large marketing budget....&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Sometimes being skeptical is close to building a depression. I have continued this BOKKE a little on my own blog in the post &lt;a href=&quot;http://buzina.wordpress.com/2009/03/05/quality-of-the-itil®-documentation/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Quality of the ITIL(r) documentation&lt;/a&gt;, for those who want to read a bit more.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Is there anyone out there who pays ITIL(r) live? Are they really improving? Or plainly copying stuff from others that have improved the processes on the web?&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <pubDate>Mon, 09 Mar 2009 09:21:15 +0000</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>mbuzina</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">comment 4188 at http://www.itskeptic.org</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>The known-error sub-process</title>
 <link>http://www.itskeptic.org/node/1345#comment-4178</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;What seems to have happened is that they forgot to write the known error sub-process. It is mentioned a couple of times elswhere in the SO book but not in the Problem Management chapter.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Aale&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <pubDate>Sat, 07 Mar 2009 09:15:00 +0000</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>aroos</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">comment 4178 at http://www.itskeptic.org</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>ITIL V3 process documentation sucks </title>
 <link>http://www.itskeptic.org/node/1345#comment-4171</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;Agree.  I&#039;ve heard it said that a workaround is a pre-req to a Known Error but the book is quite explicit that it isn&#039;t 4.4.5.7&lt;br /&gt;
ITIL V3 process documentation sucks at a strict process level.   Sometimes this arises because it isn&#039;t a process at all (see many of &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.itskeptic.org/user/220&quot;&gt;JVB&#039;s&lt;/a&gt; comments).  other times like this one it is just &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.itskeptic.org/node/423&quot;&gt;vague (sloppy?)&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;TSO are busily improving the process documentation on ITIL Live.   Or so I&#039;m told - I ain&#039;t paying the price of a small car to find out.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;OGC isn&#039;t going to do anything about it in core ITIL V3: &quot;process&quot; is so last millenium, &quot;service&quot; is where it&#039;s happening.   Besides, look at the aftermarket it generates...&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <pubDate>Fri, 06 Mar 2009 20:45:08 +0000</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>skeptic</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">comment 4171 at http://www.itskeptic.org</guid>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
