We actually had two other monitors and we still have one. This product actually replaced one of the other monitors we were maintaining. We went through rather intense outlining of our pre-requisites - here's what we want - and CA actually took care of most of the issues. Our concern was what SYSVIEW didn't have and the other products did have; they accommodated us with it on time, within the specified time frame.

We used MainView from BMC.

We were using a different solution before this tool and moved over to CA because of the total cost. We already had a contract and an existing relationship with CA.

In my opinion, most of the products work anyway so it is primarily the cost factor and the product’s easy to use functionality, that are important factors while choosing a vendor.

IBM has SDSS, the closest thing to competition.

SYSVIEW just has more features. When I first started, SYSVIEW gave me an interface to VSE/Power and the queues, the JOBSUM feature; access to Java output. I've grown to use a lot of the functions, SMS group, SMS data, SMS management, all the things to look at the SMS stuff.

I chose it because it covers a lot of different product all in one. Flasher and DADS for the CICS people; SDSF for SPOOL; and lots of MVS tools that I don't need by having this one product.

In the past, we have used TeamOn.

SDSF and IOF. We didn’t switch, we have both products.

We migrated from our older solution to this one. This is much easier to manage. Our previous solution was heavy with a lot of baggage which required a lot of resource commitment and getting experts in.

We had a previous solution, and we switched because CA SYSVIEW was clearly superior.

We previously used MainView from BMC. Our contract was up for renewal, and the sales lady offered CA SYSVIEW as part of the contract renewal. The pitch was cost savings, and it was priced better, so we went with that.

For us, vendor is general. It's mainly the product that we care about, but cost is definitely in there. This does pretty much the same thing that MainView does at a cheaper cost. That's why it won.

We were and still are using Megamind. We still are because it has been customized for our online regions, but it does not give us the end-to-end. So, that is the reason we are going for the SYSVIEW and the APM, as well.

It was dictated to me from upper management. Apparently someone from CA spoke to one of our upper management. It was the end-to-end solution to what we have been looking for at UPS.

We previously used Omegamon. I think we switched because of financial reasons. Probably CA made a quite good offer, but this was before I started here, so I don’t know about the details.

I previously used the BMC MainView family of products. We switched to CA mostly for cost reasons.

We switched due to a corporate directive.

We were using SDS from IBM. We switched because SYSVIEW is a better product.

No.

I did not previously use a different solution.

Our client used IBM OMEGAMON and other monitoring products previously. We recommended that they convert to CA SYSVIEW which is our global standard, and has a lower cost and full functionality of our standard mainframe solutions.

We previously used a different solution. The main reason we switched was the cost saving but it also provided much more functionality.

We have MainView but SYSVIEW is better for z/OS internals.

We originally wanted to use JAWS, but we figured eventually that we would go with CA because of what they had to offer.

To reduce licencing costs, we merged other products. We needed SYSVIEW as this was the best if not the only monitoring tool for Datacom. We used SYSVIEW to replace CA-LOOK, SAS, MAINVIEW, and could also be used to replace SDSF.