Uh Clem's Admin World

I started getting the error below when I launch my Notes 8.0.1 client.  I also get it when I try to set a different bookmark (workspace of course) as my homepage.   I searched the web and only found one posting which was ND8 feedback in the ND8 forum, but this posting related to starting the admin client first, which I am not doing.

So I tried to do the obvious and create a ClientBookmark.nsf file using the bookmark.ntf template.  This seemed to work!

Even though the problem "seems" to be fixed I'm left with some questions.   Why is there a ClientBookmark.nsf in addition to the Bookmark.nsf?   Isn't one enough?  Also, why don't I find any documentation on this?

Huh???



I'm not sure what I did to cause this.  I found it after coming back from lunch.  The details button is greyed out.

So now that 8.0.1 is out I can start planning my rollout.  The first step was to deploy it to my boss and a few IT colleagues.  Their first questions were "so what's new?"  I realized I was going to need to communicate to my users what IS new with this version over Notes 7, but with limited training time I needed to hit the highlights that mattered most to them.  So I started looking into the "What's New" docs in the readme and on the IBM sites.  I quickly discovered that a lot of these materials are a lot of fluff and stuff that my users really don't care about.  What I need is a nice, short list of the most important features that the users will really care about.

So what do you think are the most useful features that the user will REALLY care about, or REALLY like?  A few that come to mind are message recall,  new attachment handling,  quota guage, and integrated Sametime buddy list in the sidebar.

While installing Notes 8.0.1 today I was reminded how lame most progress bars are.  The Notes 8x install progess bar is one of the worst.  It must go across 50 times during the install! What use is that?

The replication progress bar is just as bad.  It is based on the the number of documents, and doesn't take into account the size of the documents.

The IBM Download Director progress bar is pretty accurate.  It's even multi level.  It shows you the progress of the current file as well as the overall progress of all files.  Now, granted, file download progress bars are much easier to build since all bytes are the same size.

So I guess the problem really lies on trying to report on the progress of processing data chunks of varying size, such as an application install or a replication.   Why hasn't someone figured this out?