Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

The Perils of Ramming Products Down IT's Throat

ScuttleMonkey posted more than 4 years ago | from the how-bofh's-are-born dept.

Microsoft 461

snydeq writes "InfoWorld's Paul Venezia takes issue with the all-too-familiar practice of management dictating IT solutions to admins savvy enough to know the fiat revolves around far inferior products, in this case Nissan North America's embracing of Microsoft's Hyper-V. 'Very rarely do unilateral decisions by CIOs make for solid IT infrastructures, and they are generally at odds with what the admins on the ground are communicating,' Venezia writes, noting that upper managers who succumb to vendor tricks face a far worse fate than an infrastructure based on inferior technology — one devoid of the kind of expertise necessary to make the best of their flawed purchasing decisions. 'If continuously faced with the specter of having to implement and support clearly inferior products due to baffling, uneducated management decisions, top-flight admins will simply head elsewhere.'"

cancel ×

461 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Had a chuckle at this. (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29496029)

'If continuously faced with the specter of having to implement and support clearly inferior products due to baffling, uneducated management decisions, top-flight admins will simply head elsewhere.'

Yeah, because the job market is just that good right now.

Re:Had a chuckle at this. (5, Insightful)

qoncept (599709) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496085)

Exactly. My entire attitude has changed. I still provide my input at work, do what I can to guide the decision makers toward what I think are the right decisions. But then if they make the wrong decision, I move on and keep doing my job. Maybe they could have done things better, but who cares? I'm still working.

Develop a more positive view of the negatives. (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29496659)

"... who cares?"

You can always be philosophical:

Hyper-V R2 is the Zune of virtualization. Someone needs to write articles about how it isn't so bad, really, like they do for the Zune MP3 player. Vista is the Zune of operating systems. Steve Ballmer, who has little technical knowledge, is the Zune of CEOs. It's a company-wide concept at Microsoft: You don't have to be good to make money, just tricky. That's my opinion, but I'm not the only one.

Re:Had a chuckle at this. (2, Interesting)

digitalhermit (113459) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496661)

It's a good attitude and would mod you up.

I'm the same way. In the past I've been given some bizarre direction. Sometimes it's the fault of IT management, but often the direction may come from the business side. There may be incentives to use a particular product. In some cases, the voodoo of corporate financing may dictate that they lease a product and a vendor may not have that option available so the company goes with a different and lesser product. I've even seen cases where a vendor gives huge incentives for buying a product suite that using a better product is difficult to justify.

But the attitude that you will work with what's given (up to a point :D ) I think is worthwhile.

Re:Had a chuckle at this. (5, Insightful)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496827)

You have to be careful though.

Sometimes "they" will set you up such that, when failure happens, they blame you not themselves. This happened to me where I was suddenly shifted from my usual task of documentation to a board design. I've done board designs in the past, but usually I had several months to review the project, contact parts suppliers, et cetera. They only gave me 2 weeks to finish the task. I said this is an impossible schedule but they didn't want to hear it. Worse - I didn't have the necessary tools on my machine. Even though my manager immediately submitted the request for OrCad install on my PC, it took them a week to get it done.

So long story made short - I worked 100 hours over two pre-Christmas weekends (instead of shopping for my kids' presents) trying to finish a circuit card schematic, layout, and parts list in just *1* week. When I handed it over 1 day past their desired date, first they bitched at me because it had errors (well of course - that's what happens when you RUSH things) and then they blamed me for not meeting their unrealistic schedule. I didn't even get to defend myself and say, "The management was to blame with an unrealistic schedule." I was simply shown the door.

And no you can't sue. Contract workers don't have rights.

Re:Had a chuckle at this. (4, Insightful)

eihab (823648) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496171)

'If continuously faced with the specter of having to implement and support clearly inferior products due to baffling, uneducated management decisions, top-flight admins will simply head elsewhere.'

Yeah, because the job market is just that good right now.

If you are "top-flight" the market has no control over you. Your job security is your knowledge and skills, not the salary you get every month.

Re:Had a chuckle at this. (4, Insightful)

Hognoxious (631665) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496335)

How much demand is there for top-flight buggy whip makers? Longbowmen? Flint-knappers?

Of course the market has an effect.

Re:Had a chuckle at this. (4, Insightful)

99BottlesOfBeerInMyF (813746) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496549)

How much demand is there for top-flight buggy whip makers? Longbowmen? Flint-knappers?

Some. More importantly, if you're a top-flight longbowman, surely you are versatile and can translate those skills into using a recurve bow. Why then, you can compete in archery events and endorse products and make a good living.

Likewise if you're a top-flight sys-admin then surely your skills are not completely in one product, but in the ability to learn products quickly and well and in overall knowledge of procedures and organization. Likewise part of being a top-flight sys-admin is staying current with technology, just as being a top-flight archer is keeping up with the latest bows and techniques. The market might affect how much money and what benefits you are likely to get moving to a new job, but the top-flight people I know in every field are smart enough to know money isn't everything and it's better to take a lower paying job playing with cool toys and enjoying yourself all day, rather than the best paying job dealing with idiots and broken junk that is frustrating and unrewarding.

Incidentally, this is why $100 worth of beer on the company expense account provided in the fridge at work is going to be worth a lot more than $100 divided up as higher salary among your workers.

Re:Had a chuckle at this. (1)

frosty_tsm (933163) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496613)

Incidentally, this is why $100 worth of beer on the company expense account provided in the fridge at work is going to be worth a lot more than $100 divided up as higher salary among your workers.

Depends, is it Coors or Guiness? :-)

Re:Had a chuckle at this. (3, Funny)

sabs (255763) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496679)

He said 'beer' not watered down horse piss.

Re:Had a chuckle at this. (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29496717)

So the Coors then...

Re:Had a chuckle at this. (1)

99BottlesOfBeerInMyF (813746) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496743)

Depends, is it Coors or Guiness? :-)

The last company I was at that did this generally had neither. A typical selection would be: Bell's Oberon, Red Stripe, Hacker-Pschorr, and Hoegaarden. There were also regular lunch meetings and random lunches on the company at local brewpubs.

Re:Had a chuckle at this. (1)

gandhi_2 (1108023) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496817)

dealing with idiots and broken junk

oh. ):
*shoots self in head*

Re:Had a chuckle at this. (1)

Gruturo (141223) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496693)

I'm a top-flight flint-knapper, you insensitive clod!

Re:Had a chuckle at this. (1)

CannonballHead (842625) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496791)

Longbowmen?

I hear there was quite a market for them in the Duchy of Grand Fenwick. [wikipedia.org]

Re:Had a chuckle at this. (1, Insightful)

Knara (9377) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496401)

"top-flight" admins exist? I mean, I'm sure that "top-flight" systems analysts and what not exist, but admins?

I know some very good admins, but I don't think the job field for those folks allows as much mobility as, say, a "top-flight" developer

As an aside, "top-flight"? I think this is the first half-dozen times I've ever used that term. Is this some sort of recent linguistic import to the IT field?

Re:Had a chuckle at this. (2, Insightful)

mwvdlee (775178) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496577)

There probably do exist "top-flight" admins. But, like most professions, even "top-flight" personel can be replaced, even if sometimes you need to hire an entire department to replace a single employee.
The only time you can't be replaced is if your skillset is unique AND your job can only be done by one single person.
An employee that can think or perform in a unique way cannot be replaced because no matter how many others you hire, they won't think the same way.
An employee that is 10x better than others CAN be replaced; by 10 others.

Re:Had a chuckle at this. (1)

Knara (9377) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496815)

Sure, but in many many groups "admin" and "operator" overlap, if they're not actually just synonymous terms.

Then again, I may be overestimating how easy it would be for your generic IT worker to develop good work habits and a good knowledge base of their environment. So, you may be correct in your estimation.

Re:Had a chuckle at this. (2, Interesting)

SuperQ (431) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496737)

I don't know anyone using the term "top-flight" for sysadmins either. Mostly they're just bad-ass motherfuckers. :)

But while we're using the term, all the "top-flight" "systems analysts" I've met couldn't sysadmin their way out of a wet paper bag. From what I can tell "analyst" is another word for "failing upwards".

I know many "top-flight" sysadmins and systems-focused software engineers. None of them call themselves "analysts".

Re:Had a chuckle at this. (3, Informative)

jimicus (737525) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496895)

I don't know about top flight, but I can tell you this for nothing:

The industry is full of bottom-flight system admins. People who heard there was money in computing, people who got an MCSE through a company that "guarantees an MCSE in 3 weeks!!11", people who have all the experience that they should be great but still seem to be unable to do even the most basic tasks.

And a lot of employers can't tell the difference between these people and those who really do know what they're doing, even after they've hired them.

Re:Had a chuckle at this. (2, Insightful)

venom85 (1399525) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496443)

Not really. The market always has an effect. Regardless of your skills and knowledge, if there is no demand for those skills, you won't have employment. Once you have a job, your job security *should* be based on your skills and knowledge. (I say should because there are other factors out of your control, some of which are artificial due to government regulation) But the market always has an influence on your employment, regardless of what you know.

Re:Had a chuckle at this. (1)

Brian Gordon (987471) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496511)

Government regulation wat?
I can't think of any artificial regulatory factors visible to admins that are from the government and not from internal policy or the market.

Re:Had a chuckle at this. (1)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496631)

Within the labyrinthine bowels of the military industrial complex, availability of clearances counts.

Sounds like venom85 is referring to jobs as a whole, not just admins, though.

Re:Had a chuckle at this. (4, Informative)

InvisiBill (706958) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496565)

'If continuously faced with the specter of having to implement and support clearly inferior products due to baffling, uneducated management decisions, top-flight admins will simply head elsewhere.'

Yeah, because the job market is just that good right now.

If you are "top-flight" the market has no control over you. Your job security is your knowledge and skills, not the salary you get every month.

Your knowledge and skills don't magically create food or pay your bills. If you choose to walk out on your current job (due to their utter stupidity or any other reason), you don't need job security [wikipedia.org] , you need to get hired elsewhere. Your top-flight knowledge and skills may let you find a new job sooner than a fresh grad would, but I highly doubt there are many admins out there who can simply walk out of their current job and immediately into another one of their choosing in today's economy.

Re:Had a chuckle at this. (5, Insightful)

DrgnDancer (137700) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496847)

I think the thing people are missing here is that our stereotypical "top-flight" admin is not going to hear about the new Hyper-V deployment, throw up his hands and walk out onto the street. He's going to hear about it, argue against it, tell his boss it's a bad idea, and eventually, if the decision was particularly horrid or part of a pattern of bad decisions, start looking for a new job. After he finds a new job (which given the economy may take a bit longer than usual, but *will* happen if he really is that good), then he'll walk out.

Bad management decisions don't result in an immediate loss of talent (unless the bad decision is firing the talented people of course), they result in a gradual drain of talent. Whether you've lost all your good people in a single moment of terrible decision making, or lost them over the course of the last year as they got frustrated and left, you've still lost them.

Re:Had a chuckle at this. (3, Insightful)

erroneus (253617) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496637)

DREAM ON

Real talent, knowledge and skills are no defense. There are plenty of people in HR and other decision making positions who will underestimate and undervalue some while overestimating and overvaluing others. I have seen some truly good people go while some real dirt-bags stay employed and I'm sure others have seen this story played out a thousand times before. And when it starts affecting the longevity on the resume, it doesn't matter how good you are. Employers will see short-term job hopping and wonder if the reason isn't you.

Re:Had a chuckle at this. (4, Insightful)

MBCook (132727) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496225)

The headaches your job provides may end up being too much for the benefit. It may be worth it to people.

Even if you don't judge it worth leaving, are you telling me that if management was constantly saying "use X" when it's not even in the right class, you wouldn't prepare to leave when the opportunity came? You don't want to have to fix problems that you predicted and warned against ahead of time forever.

Remember, you don't have to leave until you have a new job. You could slowly look on the sly for 6 months or a year.

Re:Had a chuckle at this. (3, Insightful)

Ethanol-fueled (1125189) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496877)

...You don't want to have to fix problems that you predicted and warned against ahead of time forever.

I can think of many unemployed grads who would beg for that kind of job security. Keeping a CYA folder documenting your warnings and opinions and use it to deflect unfair blame, then beef up your troubleshooting skills and ingenuity cobbling together broken solutions. You'd be one of the valuable few who knows what the hell is going on when the house of cards begins to fall.

If the situation becomes hostile and/or abusive (as often happens when a single morsel of meat is thrown in a cage with starving dogs), it's lawsuit time. Those with medical insurance could go under the care of a shrink and tell him that the stress of the job is causing them to feel suicidal, then they could have a nervous breakdown and claim disability. Employers will think twice about using hard-working employees as whipping boys when they're paying for 'em to sip Mai Tais on the beach every day for a year.

Re:Had a chuckle at this. (1)

JWSmythe (446288) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496921)

Yeah, because the job market is just that good right now.

    Exactly.

    Hell, Imagine you're offering a job. That job is a mix Win31/311/95/98/ME/NT/2k/XP/2k3/Vista/2k8 environment with 500 machines in a single broadcast domain; AND no machine had ever been patched; AND patching was explicitly forbidden; AND security precautions of any sort were forbidden; AND every machine had at least a dozen viruses; AND I would be one of a team of two, and the other guy is a blind mute quadriplegic from somewherelseivania who was only hired to fill some really sad attempt by upper management to meet EEOC guidelines. Oh, and did you mention that it is salary with the assumption of 40 hr/week, but the reality will be over 100 hr/wk, but the salary is $17k/yr.

    I'm one of I'm sure quite a few Slashdot readers who is out of work right now. $17k is a damned lot more than I'm making now. You could probably have a few thousand candidates who would show up, and we'd all smile and ask "so you can afford to pay me, right?" We'd all seem happy to work at it, until the day comes when a real job comes along.

    Unfortunately, none of us won't get that job. We'll get undercut by some kid right out of high school who will say "Hey, I'll do it for $10k/yr". What's he care? He still lives with mom, and she's paying for his gas and food. Of course, he'll eventually end up being the 40 year old guy that is STILL living with him mom, and goes on a psychotic murder spree, and no one will ever really know why. "Oh, he seemed like such a nice guy. He was quite and kept to himself. But yes, we did notice UPS bringing boxes with old Soviet symbols on them, and some said things like Kalashnikov".

    Hmmm. Maybe I'm happier being unemployed. At least when that guy cracks, I won't be anywhere near him. :) We already lost one recently. Well, the network admin for San Francisco didn't actually crack and shoot anyone, did he? He just ran with all the passwords. :)

   

Nothing to worry about (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29496035)

If you had read the entire article, you would find that they are going to run vmware inside the hyper-v instances, so everything will work out in the end.

Re:Nothing to worry about (0, Troll)

ArhcAngel (247594) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496129)

I want to set up a Hackintosh [wikipedia.org] in Hyper-V so I can run parallels [apple.com] .

Funny. (1)

Futurepower(R) (558542) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496157)

Typical Slashdot. A joke only a technically educated person would understand.

I know this is on-topic, sorry for that, but here is a quote from the article: "According to Burton Group, VMware and Citrix XenServer are the only two enterprise-ready hypervisor platforms on the market."

What will we do until the old codger managers with no technical knowledge, and no interest in learning, retire or die? The problem gets worse every day. When I say "old", I am not talking about chronological age, I'm talking about mental disability.

Re:Funny. (1)

Achromatic1978 (916097) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496777)

I know this is on-topic, sorry for that, but here is a quote from the article: "According to Burton Group, VMware and Citrix XenServer are the only two enterprise-ready hypervisor platforms on the market."

Apropos of anything else, most "reports" from "The XYZ Group" have so little intrinsic value I think their real genius is in convincing corporations to shell out tens of thousands of dollars a year for five page reports full of "insights" that are cobbled together trinkets of such vague handwaving generalities, sprung forth from probably ten minutes with a search engine and an hour condensing a synopsis that is entirely geared to whatever notion The XYZ Group feels most beneficial to itself to pimp, be it to push people towards tech that surprise, surprise, it does consulting on, or otherwise.

Re:Nothing to worry about (1)

denis-The-menace (471988) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496707)

Maybe because you can't do the opposite.

I know you cannot install Hyper-V on W2K8R2 running on a VMware machine. I accidentally tried to do it about a week ago.

Rant (4, Insightful)

DoofusOfDeath (636671) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496075)

'If continuously faced with the specter of having to implement and support clearly inferior products due to baffling, uneducated management decisions, top-flight admins will simply head elsewhere.'"

This sounds suspiciously like a whining threat, rather than a fact. How does the author know what fraction of admins leave in a situation like this?

Sure, many admins probably consider leaving when crap like this happens. Heck, I consider leaving my job whenever a purchase takes too long to go through.

But this summary sounds like a barely veiled threat to upper management: a claim that if you do this, your good admins will leave. I want evidence for such a claim before I believe it.

Re:Rant (4, Insightful)

laughingcoyote (762272) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496145)

While I can't quote you an exact figure offhand (and doubt anyone can), I will bet you the rent that the number is nonzero. Why take the risk? If it does happen, you're stuck with a double whammy-an inferior, ill-fitting product, and newly hired admins who don't know your company to try and run it. Even if they don't leave, you're still stuck with an inferior, ill-fitting product with your well-trained admins to run it.

On the other hand, the more autonomy you let people have, the more likely they are to stick around. (This is well known enough I hope you don't need proof, and that's really all this comes down to anyway.) And since they're the experts on IT equipment (that IS why you hired them, right?), now you have the best equipment for the job and your well-trained, seasoned admins to run it. Why would you want something else?

Re:Rant (5, Insightful)

causality (777677) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496371)

And since they're the experts on IT equipment (that IS why you hired them, right?), now you have the best equipment for the job and your well-trained, seasoned admins to run it. Why would you want something else?

In other words, don't be an incompetent manager. Incompetent managers hire people whose expertise they distrust so they can waste time and effort second-guessing their motives and use their authority to undermine technical decisions that should instead be made with facts and logic. This behavior is a bit like paying a doctor to diagnose a disease and then calling him a liar when he makes the diagnosis - if you honestly believe you know medicine better than the doctor does, why would you hire him? It should surprise no one that this behavior, especially when it occurs in a top-down environment where calling bullshit could get you fired rather than respected for your honesty, can only alienate your staff. It's also no great leap of logic to conclude that the brightest and most talented workers (IT or any other) don't wish to be alienated and don't want the neurotic load caused by regular reminders that the person who hired them for their expertise does not trust their expertise.

Some of the best managers are delegators who do not micromanage more than what is necessary for business or legal reasons. They hire good people whose decisions can be trusted and then they let those people make good decisions with minimal interference. They're also open to suggestions for how processes and methods can be improved and whether it would be economical to replace existing tools with superior ones, with "superior" being defined by the needs of the business and how well they can be met with a particular solution. The control freaks and the ones who want to deemphasize the contributions of subordinates so they can look good just don't understand these things, to the cost of everyone who has to work under them. In fact, I wish a dollar figure could be calculated that would show how costly this type of manager really is.

Re:Rant (5, Insightful)

Kokuyo (549451) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496531)

Why would you want something else indeed.

Because we IT folk are not trustworthy with money. If left to our own devices, we tend to geek out on cool new tech that is untested and has not proven its stability in any meaningful markets. Unless we are kept on a tight leash, we will start many projects in parallel, never finishing any, just because we want to do fun things instead of work.

At least that's the vibes my management gives off. Frankly, I don't know where this comes from. I mean it's not like I'd want to constantly work around annoying bugs. One would think it would be in my interest first and foremost to have infrastructures that works. Me being the storage and backup guy, it would fall to me to restore lost data so you can bet your ass, your family and your eternal soul that I'll stay away from the cool stuff as far away as possible. I want the reliable stuff.

See, in my company we've had to increase our budget estimates because we knew that management would cut them to shreds anyway. We had to make sure what would be left would be enough to do anything at all. It's basically a self-fullfilling prophecy: They don't trust us and tie our hands in so many ways that we have to start to lie to them to get anything done.

It's frustrating and I, for one, am fed up with it, because on top of it all, when something eventually breaks, it suddenly becomes your fault again. That and the meagre salary I get make me wish I had done something worthwhile. Being a carpenter sounds really neat compared.

Sorry for the rant.

Re:Rant (2, Insightful)

99BottlesOfBeerInMyF (813746) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496663)

Why take the risk? If it does happen, you're stuck with a double whammy-an inferior, ill-fitting product, and newly hired admins who don't know your company to try and run it.

Who cares about that? So long as you don't get fired for it you've made a friend in the vendor and they'll continue taking you out to strip clubs and bars on their sales slush fund every time they have a new product or version. If you ever need a new job, like if your company is going under because their IT doesn't work, well there's one more contact who might be able to help. And even if the company isn't going under, the best way to move up is to switch companies anyway and now you can say you revamped and modernized an entire IT infrastructure. Heck you could get a job as CFO somewhere.

Re:Rant (1)

RingDev (879105) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496771)

I would venture a guess that significantly more admins (or IT folks in general) quit due to personality and political conflicts than technological decision conflicts.

Until about 3 years ago I worked in a shop that had surpassed 100% turnover in 3 years. Of all of the employees that were there when I started, only 1 non-management employee was still there when I left. Everyone else had been replaced (some twice) or had left a vacant seat. All but 1 of those departures cited personal conflicts with a specific supervisor and extremely poor leadership and management.

In my current position, we have lost some people. But not a single one that I know of has quit over the conversion to Notes, or the adoption of any of the significant 3rd party apps or hardware solutions we have. Sure, people bitch and moan about Support Works (aka "Crap Works") and Notes, or when we heard about the price tag the previous network management paid for the NAS... but no one has left for those reasons.

If you hem employees into a technology that is not inline with their career goals, they will likely be more willing to move if they see a good opportunity. But if you have a hostile work place, skilled employees will flee.

-Rick

Re:Rant (3, Insightful)

megamerican (1073936) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496159)

The good admins will definitely leave when the company goes bankrupt after so many bad decisions. Admins leaving voluntarily will of course vary depending on the current job market/economic conditions.

The proof is common sense. If you make someones job terrible enough then they'll leave given the chance.

Re:Rant (1)

ianare (1132971) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496623)

The proof is common sense.

Which is to say, no proof at all !

Re:Rant (4, Insightful)

plague3106 (71849) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496163)

Well there's the flip side of the coin too. Perhaps there's nothing at all wrong with the technology, but the admin isn't as good as he thinks he is, and fails to understand how to use it to its fullest, or worse, because of dogma in THEIR head, refuse to.

Re:Rant (5, Interesting)

SatanicPuppy (611928) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496869)

Here's the best/worst example I've ever seen.

I used to work for a company that had a huge managed information infrastructure built up of a number of XML feeds from various business units that went through a custom, in-house, processing system, were categorized, databased, and aggregated out to various parties. The in house system was huge and idiosyncratic, but it worked. There were a number of people (2) who maintained it, and were well paid.

So the old company gets bought by the new company, and the new company derides the old system as worthless, fires all the developers, and discontinues the use of the code. The developers ask for, and are granted, the right to open source the code (who's going to want it, right?)

So the new company shops around to a bunch of third party people, and finds someone who is willing to take on the whole infrastructure for a nice low price. Managers are patting themselves on the back so hard they're getting shoulder problems, "This is so much better than that old crap system HA HA HA!"

Well, as I "migrate" all my information stuff it quickly becomes clear that no one at the new 3rd party company understands their processing software, but that all our old codes, all our weird categorizations...All that stuff still works. Well, that's damn peculiar.

The old processing system used to send back an acknowledgement if you sent it a certain series of codes, telling you receipt time, process time, etc, etc. So I sent up the codes, and got back a response, complete with software version information. Fuckers had taken our OWN CODE and SOLD IT BACK TO US, and like a bunch of morons, the goddamn PHBs had PAID for it!

There is a tendency to trust a 3rd party just because you don't know the problems they're having. Be wary, however, that they don't just turn around and make you pay for what you already had for free.

You've got to be joking (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29496413)

The author doesn't even have to be in IT to know this. It's been endemic in human affairs since about the end the Neolithic and probably earlier. In Britain you've John Ruskin complaining about cheap goods driving out quality in the 19th century. In the Old Testament you have the Hebrews being forced to make bricks without straw. Look what happened then; the Hebrews left. In the 19th C. labor unions formed; the language gained the term Luddite. In this century I expect that instead of leaving they'll just expose the CIO's extra-curricular pecadillos on Youtube, or perhaps photoshop some if the guy's just stupid but squeaky clean.

Re:Rant (2, Insightful)

King_TJ (85913) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496435)

The bigger issue is one of morale.... Sure, the admin might not *leave* over this, but he or she is likely to feel a lot less empowered in the company. When you realize your "expert opinions" have little value in a corporation, and that's what you THOUGHT was one of the key things you could provide them to "add value" in the first place - how excited will you be about doing you job well?

I have to say, I'd never call myself a "top flight" sysadmin. I'm probably someplace in the middle. There's more out there I know nothing about than things I'm familiar with. But I still take pride in a job well done. By contrast, I *really* dislike it when users keep coming to me with issues I discover I can't fully resolve because I'm limited by buggy or ineffective software tools.

I think I'm happy working for small businesses for that reason, rather than larger firms where the salary is much better. For example, I'm currently the ONLY sysadmin for the place I currently work for, so I can largely design the network any way I like. I don't have someone telling me I can't, for example, use Linux for a task because "the other sysadmins don't really know Linux that well and it makes them uncomfortable". (I ran into that at a previous job, and it wasn't even a very big company.) I can easily see how corporate "red tape" and old policies would prevent a lot of good, cost-saving and efficient changes from being made.....

Re:Rant (2, Informative)

pla (258480) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496857)

This sounds suspiciously like a whining threat, rather than a fact.

Threat, fact, whatever you want to call it, doesn't much matter. If a company/executive/manager/teamleader treats their employees like crap, those employees will consider their options. For any halfway-decent employees, their options will include "get the hell out of Dodge" (no pun on Nissan from TFA intended).

Sure, only the best-of-the-best can walk on a moment's notice and pick their job of choice the next day, but all but the worst-of-the-worst can start seriously looking and find something else within a few months.


How does the author know what fraction of admins leave in a situation like this?

I don't think he intended it as a statement of hard statistics, just mentioning a basic attribute of human behavior - People will only put up with so much.


As an aside, I would point out that the options open to those actually trapped in their jobs should appeal even less to any company - Sloppy work because they just don't care; Deliberately reduced output (though nothing bad enough to outright fire someone over); Perhaps even going so far as to deliberately sabotage projects in a way no one could ever "blame" them for (in most IT-related fields, we have options to do exactly that literally dozens of times per day, most untraceable and almost always excusable as legitimate oversight). Having someone tell you to go fuck yourself and walk out counts as the best option (short of actually treating people like people rather than as interchangeable robots which exist solely to do your bidding), in most cases.

Poor admins (1, Flamebait)

DerekLyons (302214) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496119)

Pity the poor admins - having to actually [shudder] do what their boss wants rather than having the boss catering to their whims and biases.

Re:Poor admins (4, Insightful)

SendBot (29932) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496195)

It's like being a contractor, using a pneumatic hammer, and having the foreman come up to you and insist you use a carrot to perform your nailing. Then the boss expresses discontent at your declining performance, especially since he made an executive decision he thought would make things works better.

Yeah, it sounds like a dumb analogy, but human civilizations have been building structures much longer than your boss has had exposure to IT concepts. I'll be happy to stand by my carrot analogy and relate real-world examples.

Re:Poor admins (3, Insightful)

guruevi (827432) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496589)

The thing is, the contractors have already established what the best tools are to use. If a contractor changes their tools from eg. DeWalt to Ridgid (or whatever cheap/underpowered manufacturer you can find at Home Depot and Lowe's) because the salesman took them out to lunch and went golfing with them then the contracting business won't last very long since the thing will keep breaking every day/week or so. Eventually the people working will either walk out before the business is bankrupt or the boss will change back to the original brands.

The issue with IT is that nobody can really measure how well something new (or old) is doing. And thanks to Microsoft, people have gotten used to servers restarting and people being unable to work for computer-related issues for minutes or even hours. It also depends on your admins. A good admin will hardly have to restart a server while a rookie will always do it since that's for him the easiest way to restart a particular service. Also, a lot of products that are good are expensive and a lot of products that are bad can be kept together somewhat by a good admin. The boss-man doesn't really care whether the whole system is teetering on a small string, as long as it works somewhat they will be happy. Software usually works initially and under certain specifications it will always work but it will become unstable over time or under specific conditions and then the admin will get the blame. With the advances in remote capabilities and the ubiquity of the Internet it's like a contractor always having a technician available with all backup tools and spare parts available in less than 5 minutes. If that were the case, the contractor might not worry about having tools break in the middle of work, they just give it to the technician that will be able to fix it.

Off course the sh*t always hits the fan later on and it's usually when the decision makers have moved on or put themselves out of blame by a (or a series of) good quarterly report. Usually it's when the technician (to use the contractor example) is on vacation on a cruise for 2 weeks (that's a really great excuse/vacation if you're an always-on-call admin) or he has been hit by a bus.

Re:Poor admins (2, Insightful)

erroneus (253617) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496919)

"The issue with IT is that nobody can really measure... thanks to Microsoft..."

Preaching to the choir my man. Someone else once said "Failure is not an option! It comes standard with every Microsoft product."

Re:Poor admins (3, Insightful)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496207)

Admins are there for their expertise. If you show blatant contempt for that, don't be surprised if they flee. They will do so because of the expectation that they will be blamed when you ignore their advice and things go wrong.

Admins have to clean up after your poo.

Re:Poor admins (5, Insightful)

JustNiz (692889) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496295)

Yeah its funny how hiring employers require tons of experience, yet ignore it once you get the job.

Re:Poor admins (3, Funny)

denis-The-menace (471988) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496727)

You need to have that printed on a T-shirt!

Re:Poor admins (2, Insightful)

Foofoobar (318279) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496261)

here at my work, management makes 'plug and play' purchasing decisions; they just want to but something and plug it in. It doesn't matter that their are open source alternatives that can save them thousands of dollars a year. It doesn't matter that these may be better or better tested. They feel like they will have to rely upon internal staff to support these tools and they would rather be able to contract out support.

They fail to understand how IT works and how the people who work for them work on a day to day basis. In their world's, everything would be perfect if everything ran under a GUI, was automated and supported outside the company. These are the things that define 98% of managers buying decisions.

Re:Poor admins (0, Troll)

TooMuchToDo (882796) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496275)

You're correct. It's much more fun to watch an inept manager make a poor technical decision you're forced to implement. The fun part is when you get to tell the CIO your boss is a moron for his decision(s), you walk out, and watch your old boss get the shoe a month later due to said decisions.

Not that I'd know from experience or anything =)

Back in the real world... (4, Insightful)

Hognoxious (631665) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496485)

It's fun to watch a coin land on its edge, and about as likely.

On my planet, it works more like this: the CIO and your manager were frat buddies (whether that's a coincidence is left as an exercise for the reader) and one day when they're playing golf the subject of you, and what a disobedient little asshat you are[1], comes up. Your job goes to India, and by Newton's laws you go out the door.

[1] HR would express it as having a weakness in interpersonal skills, an inabilty to see the big picture, and reluctance to be a team player. No matter, you're fired anyway.

Re:Poor admins (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29496281)

The CIO is not "the boss" and those mandating sub-par tools are a liability to their employer.

Re:Poor admins (1)

OrangeMonkey11 (1553753) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496305)

Those are the exceptions; there are some of us who actually care about what we do and actually know what we are doing but ended up working for completely F*cking idiot(s).

Re:Poor admins (2, Interesting)

_Sprocket_ (42527) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496373)

Pity the poor admins - having to actually [shudder] do what their boss wants rather than having the boss catering to their whims and biases.

Right now, I'm in the process of implementing several projects that came down via fiat. In the process I've discovered that the products we bought don't work together. They don't do everything we expected they would do. And they are implemented on platform choices that the CIO, who purchased all this, has specifically stated we would not implement in our environment. I will be expected to make it all work now and in the future.

This isn't about simple whim. This is about people doing their jobs. The high-up management deals with the big picture. The folks in the trenches deal with all the technical details that can make or break a project. And while everyone affects each other, we all have our little piece of the puzzle to hash out.

Re:Poor admins (2, Insightful)

MBGMorden (803437) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496437)

Except that often the manager has no clue what he's talking about.

Bottom line is that managers know about the business side of things - how the numbers work (even that's deabatable, but I'll give them as a group the benefit of the doubt). However, IT's exepertise is in the technology side of things. When either starts trying to assert authority outside of their area you get crap results.

In general my approach is that I'll do anything they want if they push the issue (keeping full documentation of just WHO called what shots in those cases), but I'll flat out tell them as nicely as possible: "Look, you hired me based on my expertise. If you're trusting that decision, then you're also trusting that I wouldn't steer your wrong when it comes to something like this. Your idea will not work because ________.". If they still want to try a dumb thing then so be it, but I'll also remind them (nicely) when the SHTF that it was their decision.

Re:Poor admins (2, Insightful)

blhack (921171) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496685)

Pity the poor admins - having to actually [shudder] do what their boss wants rather than having the boss catering to their whims and biases.

Part of being the admin is having a more integral understanding of what your boss wants than she does.
If you ARE just doing exactly as the boss thinks she wants, then your job is likely either obsolete, or your are a reset-button-specialist, not an admin.

Shades of the rejection of linux (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29496131)

There's a lot to be said for product familiarity. A lot of IT shops would rather live with a product's shortcomings than use unfamiliar technology,

VMWare is not ready for the desktop^M^M^M^M^M^M^M virtualized server!

Re:Shades of the rejection of linux (1)

MaerD (954222) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496667)

You seem to have confused your backspace and carriage return key there.. You may wish to be ma

ore careful in the futur

Just like any other industry.. (4, Insightful)

Renraku (518261) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496147)

Just like every other industry that has to buy products, rarely do the experts have much say in which products would work the best.

How can you hold authority when you have to get the workers to make the decisions for you? Today it's which widget to buy, tomorrow it's how many hours they have to work, and next week, they'll be supervising themselves!

So here, employees, make the best of this Z-brand Widget that doesn't fit your needs at all. We bought 10,000 of them, and so help you if you don't use every single one of them.

Did I mention that Z-brand sent us managers to Vegas for a few days? Of course I didn't, because workers shouldn't know what goes on elsewhere in the company!

Don't bother to RTFAs. (4, Informative)

MarkvW (1037596) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496193)

These links are all just speculation and fluff. There's no news in any of the articles. Don't waste your time RTFA.

FYI

Re:Don't bother to RTFAs. (2, Funny)

mujadaddy (1238164) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496557)

Don't waste your time RTFA.

So I've been right all along!

Not Sure What The Point Here Is (2, Informative)

Petersko (564140) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496197)

So this is just some guy's opinion, right? Just like the hundreds of opinions that will undoubtedly fill up the page below this one of mine?

"Many places are Microsoft-centric, but exactly zero are 100 percent Microsoft." By which he means... "They may run Microsoft products on the servers and desktop, but there's absolutely no way that they are using solely Microsoft applications and products in every part of the infrastructure, from the switches to the firewalls."

Well bra-vo. Golf clap.

Re:Not Sure What The Point Here Is (5, Insightful)

plague3106 (71849) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496265)

Indeed... which is funny, because no where in the actual article does Nissan say they regretted the decision.

And that guys opinion misses the point; when people say they are an MS shop, they're talking servers / workstations.. nobody cares AT ALL what OS the switch or router is running..

The only non-computer device where I wish there was a different OS is my cable box, which runs linux. The reason I wish it ran something else? It locks up quite a bit, and takes forever to reboot.

Re:Not Sure What The Point Here Is (2, Funny)

Korbeau (913903) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496327)

The point? I think it's to lead you to their Zazzle store or make you buy Windows Sentinel after seeing their ads 6 times.

Re:Not Sure What The Point Here Is (1)

malevolentjelly (1057140) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496431)

You, sir, have just reached Internet Enlightenment.

Pun intended? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29496211)

Quoth:
> to know the fiat revolves around far inferior products, in this case Nissan North America's

Fiat in the same sentence as Nissan?

scnr
theCoward

Re:Pun intended? (0, Offtopic)

mangu (126918) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496715)

> to know the fiat revolves around far inferior products, in this case Nissan North America's
Fiat in the same sentence as Nissan?

Well, I suppose "the Fiat revolves around" means that a Fiat [wikipedia.org] can run circles around a Nissan [wikipedia.org]

Hail The Engineer (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29496221)

Personally, I wouldn't work for ANY company that dictated IT solutions to its IT people.

You either trust your engineers, or you don't. It's as simple as that. You went to school, learned, practiced, gained experience, and work doing what you do for a living so you CAN be trusted. An employer that doesn't understand this is probably doomed to fail anyway. Thats what happens when people don't trust engineers. Bridges fail, cars catch on fire, foam falls off of solid rocket boosters, and yup, IT solutions fail to solve problems.

Sometimes it's NOT that simple (3, Insightful)

Petersko (564140) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496433)

"You either trust your engineers, or you don't. It's as simple as that."

When it comes to IT, "Engineers" (forgive the quotes if you are actually an honest-to-goodness Engineer) sometimes CAN'T be completely trusted because they suffer from any of the following:

- AIHIAH syndrome - pronounced "eye-eye-ah" ("All I have is a hammer" - java/visual basic come to mind)
- "I've Seen The Light!" (religious worship of open source to the exclusion of everything else)
- "Sure I tried it, it don't work." Failure to actually test alternatives to his/her "preferred" solution.

So while you might be comfortable having somebody like this maintain the existing environment, they probably shouldn't be entrusted with decisions about the future.

Of course some IT folks are talented, open-minded, and diligent about testing alternatives. Treasure these. But don't automatically grant this kind of trust to every IT person.

What if your admin is clueless? (4, Interesting)

spiffmastercow (1001386) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496289)

At my work the sysadmin refuses to upgrade from SQL Server 2000 Standard Edition (which had its support discontinued several years ago, though he still hasn't installed the latest service pack from 2004 or so), despite the fact that we have a budget (and need) for a high end clustered system with a nice pretty SAN. The execs are now pushing it because we're getting deadlocks constantly, but the admin insists that if everyone would stop using the database to do anything, we'd be fine, and refuses to upgrade.

Re:What if your admin is clueless? (1)

hondo77 (324058) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496421)

Wait. The executives want a sysadmin to perform an upgrade but the sysadmin refuses? Who is running this company? I don't think it's who you think it is.

Re:What if your admin is clueless? (4, Insightful)

mccalli (323026) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496457)

At my work the sysadmin refuses to upgrade from SQL Server 2000 Standard Edition...despite the fact that we have a budget (and need)... The execs are now pushing it because we're getting deadlocks constantly, but the admin insists that if everyone would stop using the database to do anything, we'd be fine, and refuses to upgrade.

Re-apply the budget. Upgrade the admin instead.

Cheers,
Ian

Re:What if your admin is clueless? (3, Insightful)

blhack (921171) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496479)

This is happening because your "admin" is an inexperienced idiot. He is refusing the upgrade because he is afraid that it is going to make him look foolish when he doesn't "know" the new system.

This doesn't solve your problem, but at least now you know what is going on.

This is not the same as what the article is addressing. What TFA is talking about is when admins know more about the topic at hand than their bosses, but their bosses power-trip their way into failure.

Re:What if your admin is clueless? (2, Informative)

Abcd1234 (188840) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496553)

This is happening because your "admin" is an inexperienced idiot. He is refusing the upgrade because he is afraid that it is going to make him look foolish when he doesn't "know" the new system.

Well, or, to be fair, he may be concerned the cure may be worse than the disease. Upgrading to a new major revision of a core system component has non-trivial risks. Now, if the admin isn't communicating those risks, that's a different problem. But it's not fair to immediately assume that he just doesn't know what he's doing.

Re:What if your admin is clueless? (1)

tsstahl (812393) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496523)

Replace his dogeared copy of whatever industry press book he is using with one that features the version you want.

Re:What if your admin is clueless? (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29496543)

At my work the sysadmin refuses to upgrade from SQL Server 2000 Standard Edition (which had its support discontinued several years ago

Not true. You can still get tech support for SQL Server 2000:

http://blogs.msdn.com/sqlreleaseservices/archive/2008/02/15/end-of-mainstream-support-for-sql-server-2005-sp1-and-sql-server-2000-sp4.aspx [msdn.com]

In fact, extended support for the previous version, SQL Server 7, ends 2010-12-31.

(some businesses really, really, really don't want to change SQL server versions)

though he still hasn't installed the latest service pack from 2004 or so),

Ok, that is pretty dumb.

despite the fact that we have a budget (and need) for a high end clustered system with a nice pretty SAN.

You can cluster with SQL 2000. And even without a cluster, it will run nicely on a SAN.

The execs are now pushing it because we're getting deadlocks constantly, but the admin insists that if everyone would stop using the database to do anything, we'd be fine, and refuses to upgrade.

Deadlocks can sometimes be avoided by adjusting your SQL code.

Frankly, the best reason to upgrade from SQL 2000 is native 64-bit versions, which lets you use LARGE amounts of memory for your DB. Not to mention DB mirroring.

Re:What if your admin is clueless? (1)

spiffmastercow (1001386) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496849)

I guess I should clarify here... He also opposes the SAN. And as for adjusting the code to avoid deadlocks... It seems like that's my full time job now. Trying to squeeze every last bit of speed from a dying beast. I'm constantly having to cache reports that should be real-time, use nolock hints where they don't belong, and cut features in order to reduce server load and deadlocks.

Begging the question. (4, Insightful)

RightSaidFred99 (874576) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496367)

His whole rant is based on the "fact" (assumed) that Hyper-V doesn't meet Nissan's needs. He has no idea what Nissan needs. He has no idea if Hyper-V does or does not meet those needs.

VMWare is indeed very mature and full of features, some of which are missing from Hyper-V. Now let's pretend we aren't snide little commentators and dig in more. What does Hyper-V have that VMWare doesn't? Like... an affordable price? Like...being built into and integrated with Windows Server 2008 very well?

Worthless article picked for SlashDot solely because the author makes nonsensical rants against a Microsoft product.

A more insightful article might have been about IT and IT pundits sometimes like to pretend _they_ are the business. Your boss will set certain parameters for you to do your job. Now sometimes they may just seem TOTALLY CRAZY, I mean like "don't spend $50 million on a virtualization solution, instead spend $10 million on this other product we've got a deal for with Microsoft to get much more cheaply". Crazy to save money though, I know. It's all about the admins and their expertise, right

Re:Begging the question. (3, Interesting)

Etrias (1121031) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496571)

Maybe it's because Hyper-V isn't a mature product and VMWare is the best out there for virtualization.

You're being dishonest about your numbers anyway. For $50 million dollars, that's enough licensing to get Enterprise level support from VMWare for over 16,500 processors.

But the problem is that if Hyper-V doesn't work well, doesn't fit the needs of the company, why spend your hypothetical $10 million for a solution that doesn't work? That's the problem with clueless CIOs who look at the financial cost of something and balks rather than looks at what the goals they want to achieve and get the best solution for it. The cheaper option will always end up costing more money than the right solution.

Re:Begging the question. (1)

RightSaidFred99 (874576) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496835)

Maybe it's because Hyper-V isn't a mature product and VMWare is the best out there for virtualization.

You're being dishonest about your numbers anyway. For $50 million dollars, that's enough licensing to get Enterprise level support from VMWare for over 16,500 processors.

I'm not clear what's "dishonest" about completely made up numbers used by way of example. The point wasn't the literal numbers, it was just that cost is a part of the equation.

Not true. It depends on what you're doing. Running a few hundred VM's on a few racks of blade servers? Hyper-V might be completely sufficient and almost certainly much cheaper if you've got existing Win2k8 infrastructure.

Running tens of thousands of dynamically allocated, provisioned, and managed VM's on thousands of hosts across a vast enterprise? Hyper-V might not be nearly sufficient.

Based on what I read about what Nissan is doing, sounds pretty small fries. I don't know why Joe Blow, IT commentator would think he knows anything about how or why the product was selected.

All the CIO needs to know could be read in 30 secs (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29496411)

What is really unfortunate is that IT disasters that the rest of us could really learn from, seldom see the light of day for fear of legal action, career blight, or the taint of guilt by association. Every once in a while I think about what I'd put in an "anti-case-study", the stories we admiins could tell.....

There are a million "Hyper-V versus VMware versus Xen" articles on the web, take 10 minutes and read 4 or 5 of them, hell, take half an hour and do some in-depth surfing :-) First out of Google for me was this little gem from the 360 blog:

VMware versus Xen versus Hyper-V [blogspot.com] .

Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds (3, Funny)

jtownatpunk.net (245670) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496453)

"Just put it on the cloud. I saw an IBM commercial last night that said this would solve all of our remote access problems."

Re:Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds (1)

Scragglykat (1185337) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496539)

Were their servers in the clouds or their heads?

Simply Put: I won't be buying a Nissan (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29496459)

LEAF or no LEAF; I will stick to The Germans and their crazy Linux-based systems. You can't compare the two anyway.

You's just gotta learn howto speak 'management'... (1)

lbalbalba (526209) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496467)

'Nuff' Said...

Typical Slashdot Anti-MS Spin on the article (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29496533)

Wow, did anyone read the article about the Nissan migration? Where do you get that it is inferior or ill-fitting tech, or that it was forced. Sounds like they are a MS shop and want to stick with MS products with a familiar interface. The real issue is forcing virtualization onto this type of production environment, not which virtualization product to use...

Computers, Italian cars? (0, Offtopic)

Thelasko (1196535) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496535)

fiat revolves around far inferior products

The Italians [wikipedia.org] are gonna be pretty miffed when they find out you called their cars inferior!

Re:Computers, Italian cars? (1)

snspdaarf (1314399) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496913)

fiat revolves around far inferior products

The Italians [wikipedia.org] are gonna be pretty miffed when they find out you called their cars inferior!

It's true. So, what are they going to do, invade Algeria?

Products not bought by admin (1)

smooth123 (893548) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496597)

The interesting thing admins forget is that they do not pay for the product. And they do not get paid or taken out for dinners to buy the product. For Admins that are disgruntled with the product purchased I bet the company can find another 100 admins to replace. Well in all fairness all CIOs are replaceable too. I have seen it happen. If you cant buy them, go by them...

Mmmm....my projects smell like chicken (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29496729)

but taste a little fishy

The Golden Rule (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29496753)

He who has the gold makes the rules.

The boss makes the decisions. Full stop, end of sentence.
It is not your place to do what you think is best for the company, you are paid to shut up and do what you are told.
When I want your input, I will take my foot off the back of your head and ask you for it.
You are more than welcome to quit and find somewhere else to work. I have a stack of resumes on my desk several inches thick.

The Platform (4, Funny)

Arancaytar (966377) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496851)

The Magician of the Ivory Tower brought his latest invention for the master programmer to examine. The magician wheeled a large black box into the master's office while the master waited in silence.

"This is an integrated, distributed, general-purpose workstation," began the magician, "ergonomically designed with a proprietary operating system, sixth generation languages, and multiple state of the art user interfaces. It took my assistants several hundred man years to construct. Is it not amazing?"

The master raised his eyebrows slightly. "It is indeed amazing," he said.

"Corporate Headquarters has commanded," continued the magician, "that everyone use this workstation as a platform for new programs. Do you agree to this?"

"Certainly," replied the master, "I will have it transported to the data center immediately!" And the magician returned to his tower, well pleased.

Several days later, a novice wandered into the office of the master programmer and said, ``I cannot find the listing for my new program. Do you know where it might be?''

"Yes," replied the master, "the listings are stacked on the platform in the data center."

-- The Tao of Programming

It's all doom and gloom... (2, Insightful)

gravyface (592485) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496853)

until you read the referenced Nissan article, and realise that maybe the "good relationship with Microsoft that we leverage and utilize" was worth more to them than filling the feature gaps in Hyper-V vs. VMWare/XenServer. It's even possible that the MS "good relationship" discounts they're most likely enjoying are what allowed them to move forward with the project in the first place. If either of those are the case, then how can you fault the CIO on this decision?

If by IT you mean... (1)

Tetsujin (103070) | more than 4 years ago | (#29496915)

If by IT you mean your mom, then I can attest to the perils of ramming products down her throat. She's a biter.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>