|
Sections |
| Title | Starting Page | Number of Pages |
|---|
| Executive summary
In a nutshell
The Ovum view
Production is conspicuously absent from ALM
Throwing software â??over the wallâ? to ITO is no longer viable
Software should be treated as a durable good
â??Design for manufacturingâ? reduces surprises
Ti | 0 | 1 |
| Executive summary | 0 | 1 |
| Table of Contents | 2 | 1 |
| Application performance: the missing link in the application lifecycle | 3 | 23 |
| In a nutshell | 0 | 1 |
| The Ovum view | 0 | 1 |
| Executive summary | 3 | 1 |
| Production is conspicuously absent from ALM | 4 | 2 |
| Production is conspicuously absent from ALM | 0 | 1 |
| Throwing software “over the wall†to ITO is no longer viable | 0 | 1 |
| Tips for users and vendors | 6 | 3 |
| Mapping the application lifecycle to production | 9 | 9 |
| Software should be treated as a durable good | 0 | 1 |
| “Design for manufacturing†reduces surprises | 0 | 1 |
| Product support | 18 | 8 |
| Tips for users and vendors | 0 | 1 |
| To users: make the business case for bridging the AD/ITO silos | 0 | 1 |
| There is ROI in eliminating waste | 0 | 1 |
| Software warranties rebuild IT credibility, add teeth to SLAs | 0 | 1 |
| To vendors: products should support data and process federation | 0 | 1 |
| Sell beyond the silos | 0 | 1 |
| ITIL has promoted awareness to federate data between AD and ITO domains | 0 | 1 |
| No standards for integrating AD and ITO domains | 0 | 1 |
| Make the opportunity possible: let the customers lead | 0 | 1 |
| Mapping the application lifecycle to production | 0 | 1 |
| IT should adopt a design-for-manufacturing mindset | 0 | 1 |
| ALM has synergy with ITIL | 0 | 1 |
| Reconciling IT service delivery processes with Agile development approaches | 0 | 1 |
| Core assumptions | 0 | 1 |
| Application lifecycle stages: convergence of ITSM and APM | 0 | 1 |
| Inception: software requirements and ITIL service strategy | 0 | 1 |
| Construction: application and construction/ITIL service design | 0 | 1 |
| Transition: application release/ITIL service migration | 0 | 1 |
| Operation | 0 | 1 |
| Product support | 0 | 1 |
| The scope of this survey | 0 | 1 |
| IBM Rational | 0 | 1 |
| Product integration | 0 | 1 |
| Inception | 0 | 1 |
| Construction | 0 | 1 |
| Transition | 0 | 1 |
| Operation | 0 | 1 |
| Process development | 0 | 1 |
| HP | 0 | 1 |
| Inception | 0 | 1 |
| Transition | 0 | 1 |
| Operation | 0 | 1 |
| List of Figures | 0 | 1 |
| Figure 1: ALM mapped to ITIL v3 lifecycle | 0 | 1 |
| Figure 2: PPM extended to the entire application lifecycle (to become APM) | 0 | 1 |
| Figure 3: Inception – software requirements and ITIL service strategy | 0 | 1 |
| Figure 4: Construction – application and construction/ITIL service design | 0 | 1 |
| Figure 5: Transition – application release/ITIL service migration | 0 | 1 |
| Figure 6: Operation stage | 0 | 1 |
