Re: Cartographers unite!
What’s wrong with the diagram? - Do not show it to a Tasmanian if you value your life.
36 publicly visible posts • joined 25 May 2018
There is a new CIO. First step - review Opex expenses - boy our cloud bill is expensive.
Let’s migrate it back in.
Two years down the track, having spent twice their previous cloud bill on consultants and contractors to bring it back in, they can’t get the skilled staff, still waiting on hardware, mis-configured their security.
CIO is now working on other things - like how to reduce headcount. Let’s put more out on the cloud…
Politics isn’t meant to be rational. If Mauritius claimed the use of .io was neo-colonialism, it would be hard for the INIA (or ISO) to resist the political pressure to remove it. Unless, of course, there was money to be made…
I expect .io to be retained, but control of the domain to go to Mauritius, who will re-negotiate the payment scheme with Bellevue.
I've worked in larger organisations my whole career, and Linux on the desktop is dead in large organisations, not because of the technology but because of the people.
Repeat after me - LINUX IS NOT FREE.
When you hire a new worker, the most important thing is to get them productive ASAP. 95% of new office workers already know Windows, some sort of email, Word, Excel and perhaps PowerPoint. So you don't need to train them in these office fundamental tools. Probably they know O365, but if not, anyone in the office can sit down with them and in a couple of hours cross-train them over to O365.
Give them Linux and they are already starting to worry that they have made a mistake in taking on this job. How do you do this, how do you do that? For the first couple of weeks they are struggling - call that $2000 of lost productivity, plus the support costs (as much again?). That's assuming they haven't decided they don't want to be here.
Even if Linux and the associated tools were BETTER than Microsoft, they are unfamiliar to new starters so person+Microsoft is productive FASTER than person+Linux. And Managers want productive staff NOW. Any everyone knows that when they go to their next job, they'll be back on Microsoft anyway, so why bother learning these new tools.
I've worked in one larger organisation who tried standardising on Google Tools. But every time they exchanged a document with an external vendor, they had to convert it onm the way in, and then back to Microsoft on the way out. And the format wasn't always right, or that formula didn't carry across. Dangerous and risking when we were talking multi-million dollar contracts.
This is why Microsoft owns larger businesses, and any business who wants to do business with larger businesses.
I’m an IT contractor so I’ve moved between a significant number of (Australian) businesses. I know of only one large organisation that uses Google rather than Microsoft for its productivity suite. If you have new professional or office staff, you can assume they will already know Microsoft, but will need training in Google if that’s what you want to use as your corporate standard. That’s why Microsoft is embedded in larger businesses and government agencies. Total cost, not just platform cost.
Replace AI with “trains” and 2020’s with 1820’s and exactly the same argument holds. Revolutionary new technology starts as unregulated and dangerous, but eventually transforms the world. Without the railways, we’d all still be stick in our little villages growing our own food. Who knows where AI will take us, but it is most probably to remove more drudgery of work.
I’ve been in IT for almost five decades. What strikes me most is the number of times new tech is introduced without considering what has already been developed. Developers love developing, so they re-invent the wheel time and time again rather than tweaking current technology.
Why do marketing types play silly buggers with product names. As a practitioner, many hours of confusion occur because technical meetings at cross purposes as people don’t know if they are talking about the same thing or something different. Not only Microsoft, every vendor does the same.
The contract will be based on generic requirements. Implementation depends on meeting specific requirements - i.e. what really works. The specific requirements can only be discovered by implementing something that highlights what it doesn’t do. Every every time. There is no such thing as a fixed cost contract that results in a successful implementation.
Doesn’t the local fire board have the right to inspect premises to see if they are conforming to standards? Or do they have to wait until people die in a fire? I’m genuinely interested if that is the law in the US. In Australia, the work safety regulator has the right to enter premises to see that everyone on site is safe, including safe materials handling practices, shift lengths, work demands etc. are safe and will not cause injury or harm. It is a condition of the company holding a license to run a business.
The IT industry uses vocabulary that is more marketing blitz than technical all the time. Fuzzy marketing terms are the norm, not the exception. Edge just means non-centralised. Not putting everything in the same cloud data centre or two. Spread it about. No need to be more specific than that.
One significant problem is the MP's are now professional politicians, and rarely have any STEM skills at all. They don't understand software beyond using Facebook and Twitter, and even then, they have assistants to do this. One prominent Australian MP was caught out because he didn't own a smartphone to be able to present his vaccination status at a pub for entry.
If you want to integrate Salesforce, then Salesforce has an integration tool. If you want to integrate with Workday, or ServiceNow, they also have their own integration tools. But if you have (like many large organisations) a portfolio of hundreds of specialised applications for specific parts of you business, with different API's, file uploaders or even none (database access required), Boomi integration sits in the middle and talks to all of these. It used to be called the middleware layer, and there are advantages in separating it from the applications - particularly when you want to move vendors.
I haven't seen a single compelling reason to upgrade. Then again, I hung onto XP as long as I could and then upgraded to 8.1. I only upgraded to Windows 10 when I bought a new main machine with it installed, and liked it enough to upgrade my laptop and spare machine.
Windows 11 looks like Vista or Windows 8 to me - a version to avoid as long as possible.
The problem with rating obscenities is that their effect depends very much on context. If my son is playing games on the computer, I'm quite used to hearing "No fucking way" all through the night. I hardly even hear the obscenity. However, if my boss at work replies to my suggestion to a way to improve the workplace "No fucking way." this is grounds for a complaint to HR about their bullying.
There was once a major outage on Sydney Trains because of an intermittent failure on a router in the signal box. The IT network was configured in failover with a pair of routers in load sharing.
One router failed - any the second router took up the load. Should have been fine and the failed router could have been reloaded at leisure.
However, the failed router, now without load, restored itself and took up its part of the IP traffic - and then failed under load. Repeat multiple times per second and packets were being lost everywhere.
This stopped the trains as this disconnected the signal box from centralised rail control.
Trains stopped for hours as the IT network technical staff couldn’t track what was going on, then needed to physically replace the faulty unit. Of course, couldn’t get there by train, so they had to drive there in traffic built up due to no trains.
Corporates buy Office 365 for Word, Excel, PowerPoint and Exchange - must haves in most enterprise sized businesses. Upgrade to premium and you get Teams, SharePoint (which many want anyway) and Skype for business. All done with one signature from the CIO.
Forget about usability or features, corporate IT departments are looking at the dollars and ease of getting it approved. Why would any corporate even consider paying for Slack?