Talk:Ericom Software

References

I've added several external references, independent analysts (one from a very reputable IT analyst, the Butler Group http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analyst_relations, and they also cited in other articles: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Application_Lifecycle_Management). I am going to remove the request for additional references. Pitvipper 20:43, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Remote Administration category

That's not the same as remote access. What does Ericom produce which provides remote-administration? Tedickey (talk) 20:38, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

I guess it depends on your definition of the term. I did see a few references on their site. If you look on their site: http://ericom.com/wcrdp.asp There are a few headings that seem relevant: Centralized Administration and Management, Remote Desktop Support, Simplified PowerTerm WebConnect Server Management Pitvipper (talk) 22:54, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Well, what I read on their site is regarding applications that a remote client accesses via a server. See Remote administration to compare. Tedickey (talk) 00:14, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

If you look at Remote administration under "Common tasks for which remote administration is used" it lists "Viewing: Remotely assisting others", on the Ericom site http://ericom.com/supportview.asp it lists the product features, including: "PowerTerm WebConnect's SupportView, is the perfect tool for remote assistance. With SupportView, the client requests assistance and the administrator, supervisor, or trainer can "take over" the user's session and control all the cursor moves, etc. as if the administrator is sitting at the keyboard." So the Ericom product addresses one of the key features of Remote Admin and there are several others listed as well. Pitvipper (talk) 03:47, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Removes marketing language

I've removed peacock statement by the marketing manager WP:PEACOCK, and contrary to WP:CONFLICT. Statements such as "takes full advantage of the security and solid foundation of Windows 2008" are essentially misstatements -- If it takes full advantage, then there won't be any updates or patches.

I don't think so.

This article is already so close to being tagged as an inappropriate company advertisement, it doesn't need statements like this.

67.169.126.27 (talk) 20:33, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Undo Deletions

First of all, you need to sign your post, anonymous users are not to make such edits. Second, the quote that you deleted was from MICROSOFT, not the company in the article, Ericom. Are you saying that Microsoft is making a misstatement about their own technology??? The language that you replaced it with makes no sense technically. Please refrain from edits. Pitvipper (talk) 01:28, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

I am very unclear as to why you think any of your statements are correct. I would suggest you thoroughly read Wikipedia's guideline sections. You can find it here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:List_of_guidelines

My first comment is that there is no reason for him to not contribute because he is anonymous. See the official comments on this Wikipedia's "contributions to Wikipedia" page:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Contributing_to_Wikipedia

Specifically the quote:

"You do not have to log in to read Wikipedia. You do not have to log in even to edit articles on Wikipedia. Just about anyone can edit almost any article at any given time, even without logging in. However, creating an account is quick and free and provides several benefits, as listed at Wikipedia:Why create an account?."

Next I want to point out that one of the premises of participation on Wikipedia, as outlined in the behavioral section of the guidlines page:

"Assume good faith Unless there is strong evidence to the contrary, assume that people who work on the project are trying to help it, not hurt it."

"Etiquette Contributors have different views, perspectives, and backgrounds, sometimes varying widely. Treating others with respect is key to collaborating effectively in building an encyclopedia."

"Please do not bite the newcomers Many new contributors lack knowledge about Wikipedia policies. Nevertheless, always understand that new contributors are prospective "members" and are therefore our most valuable resource."

As for the actual deletion of that section. I agree with the original deletion as it contains no real relevant information about the company. Very little research will show that the statement is from a paid marketing personnel at Microsoft. This marketing representative was talking about a marketing program with little technical value that Ericom participated in.

A more factual comment would be that:

"Ericom participated Microsoft Windows Server 2008 certification program."

This is factual, does not contain any marketing or semi marketing information. It does not mislead, while the statement in question hints that some vague technical value in being certified. It does not mention any specifics of what it means to be certified, any requirments or any benefits. It is simply a non-technical, non-informative, buzz word statement that does not need to be here.

If someone would like the quote to remain, then it really needs to link to an article explaining what this program entails, or at the very least SOME information other than the name of the program.

So basically, the editor in question, deleted a marketing reference from a third party. I stand by his first statement that this page is almost entirely a marketing document. It includes almost no facts but only marketing statements. The article desperately needs some actual non-marketing content to meet the minimum requirments for a Wikipedia page.

As a last note, my company is a partner with Ericom and as such there exists a conflict of interest which I feel is improper for me to edit this article. However, I do think it does need to be entirely re-written as almost none of the current content should be here.

An alternative would be to simply remove the page because it does not meet many of the guidlines for an article.

Teran Wanderer (talk) 18:18, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Ericom Software. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090709185949/http://www.microsoft.com:80/windowsserver2008/en/us/ts-product-home.aspx?pf=true to http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2008/en/us/ts-product-home.aspx?pf=true
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080509100555/http://www.deloitte.com/dtt/article/0,1002,sid%3D49633%26cid%3D95422,00.html to http://www.deloitte.com/dtt/article/0,1002,sid=49633&cid=95422,00.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:26, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

{{|checked=true}} This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Y The help request has been answered. To reactivate, replace "helped" with your help request. The text containing content that is written like an advertisement has been removed, and the article now reads from a neutral point of view in accordance with Wikipedia's policies. 172.58.225.23 (talk) 02:55, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

This is a bot, not an editor.—CYBERPOWER (Message) 23:32, 15 May 2017 (UTC)