Home
| Calendar
| Mail Lists
| List Archives
| Desktop SIG
| Hardware Hacking SIG
Wiki | Flickr | PicasaWeb | Video | Maps & Directions | Installfests | Keysignings Linux Cafe | Meeting Notes | Linux Links | Bling | About BLU |
2a. Outsourcing because you cannot hire anyone competent. Example is my son-in-law's previous employer. He quit, moved to Buffalo to take a pretty good job with the Federal Public Defender's office. But, his company has been unable to hire anyone competent to take his place. In this case this is a Windows shop. In any case, he is able to support them after hours. On 01/24/2013 08:58 AM, Grant M. wrote: > So I've only read the most recent posts, but I think there are two different > ways of looking at this: > 1. Outsourcing to save money (this seems to be the most common) > 2. Outsourcing for expertise. > > We actually do the latter, and often interact with the former. The painful > part of the process is dealing with incompetence due to outsourcing. This is a > widespread issue in IT, and I think is actually hurting big business. We often > come across customers that have outsourced their IT and those outsourced people > don't even understand the simplest of technologies. Depending upon the company > it can take years for them to realize their mistake. You get what you pay for. > We sell a different level of support, based mostly around our products and > market space (Advertising & Print). I can't remember the last time I encountered > a tech with a higher level of experience than what is available here. For our > customers they tend to defer to us for the complicated answers. Customers will > pay for it, but we do find ourselves arguing the point often enough, just not > with the folks that count (typically bean-counters). > So you do get what you pay for. Much of outsourced IT is built around Windows > Desktop Support with a bit of Windows server support. Paying more and getting > more, you may get a reasonably skilled MIS/Enterprise IT support that will be > well versed in Microsoft products, networking, and perhaps some SAN/NAS > products. However my experience is that *NIX skills (includes Solaris, HPUX, AIX > and Linux) is something you actually need to pay a premium for. Often there are > in-house admins, and higher-level systems engineers get contracted for projects. > So day-to-day administration is always available, but complicated projects or > issues that directly affect the bottom-line get either T&M resources or contract > experts applied. > > Last point: GOOD Linux system engineers are very difficult to come by. Competant > Linux admins are out there, but it's not always easy to tell them from mediocre > Linux admins. Tinkerers calling themselves admins, and admins calling themselves > engineers are far too common. > > Grant M. -- Jerry Feldman <gaf at blu.org> Boston Linux and Unix PGP key id:3BC1EB90 PGP Key fingerprint: 49E2 C52A FC5A A31F 8D66 C0AF 7CEA 30FC 3BC1 EB90
BLU is a member of BostonUserGroups | |
We also thank MIT for the use of their facilities. |