Consolidated Business & Enterprise Computing Rant Thread

Discussion in 'Business & Enterprise Computing' started by elvis, Jul 1, 2008.

  1. PabloEscobar

    PabloEscobar Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2008
    Messages:
    14,638
    Start slow, Grab easy wins that offer demonstrated cost savings and more efficient use of time.

    Request that a percentage of the savings you have demonstrated to be allocated to the IT budget, use new found money to implement more changes, (with the same proviso).

    Let the snowball roll for a few years while you turn over all the crappy infrastructure, and boom, your environment is now ticking along nicely, at no *extra* cost to the business.
     
  2. millsy

    millsy Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2007
    Messages:
    13,596
    Location:
    Brisbane
    My soul hurts so bad after reading this when I got to work this morning :thumbdn:
     
  3. Soarer GT

    Soarer GT Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2007
    Messages:
    2,920
    Location:
    Melbourne
    No. You let shit fail so the importance of proper hardware is realised. If you keep on fixing stuff in your own time outside of work hours without recognition... then the business clearly doesn't have a problem worth spending money on.
     
  4. Diode

    Diode Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2011
    Messages:
    1,736
    Location:
    Melbourne
    Quite frankly it's anyone developing Apple shit that needs to put up with their stupid decision to bin XServe. Apple could literally partner with anyone out there to get some friggen intel gear into a 1U pizza box, slap an Apple sticker on it and call it a day. That way we can boot 20 OSX builds with VMware Fusion and clean up the Mac Mini's, and the stupid ripoff Mac Mini/Pro rack mounting solutions.

    Just about anything would be better than what we have to put up with now.
     
  5. chip

    chip Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2001
    Messages:
    3,969
    Location:
    Pooraka Maccas drivethrough
    Or just let people virtualise OS X 'Server' on any old hypervisor
     
  6. OP
    OP
    elvis

    elvis Old school old fool

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2001
    Messages:
    45,382
    Location:
    Brisbane
    Lots of media industry specific shit. Loads of proprietary apps that are industry specific, only available on Mac, and have to be set up to serve a whole site full of users.

    Apple don't care. Their response is to buy a Mac Pro "trash can", put it on a shelf, and attach a thunderbolt-connected Promise RAID array. That's their definition of "enterprise grade hardware", which is a fucking joke (and insanely expensive, and a waste of physical space).
     
  7. GiantGuineaPig

    GiantGuineaPig Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2006
    Messages:
    4,027
    Location:
    Adelaide
    Maybe you need to look at yourself first when you have a go at others about choice... but of course your industry is super special.
     
  8. cvidler

    cvidler Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    15,469
    Location:
    Canberra
    funnily enough, while investigating why a company (that will remain nameless), that sells 'cloud' testing services has so much downtime (gard to rely on the results when the system doing the measuring is so unreliable), I find out it's being run from mac minis stuffed in data centres around the world. What's even worse, they're not even fucking running macos.

    I'd like to strangle whoever thought it be a good idea to try and run a system that gets charged (at a not-cheap price) to customers was scoped to be run on mac minis, when there's ZERO reason to do so. Especially with AWS/Azure/etc.

    /rant
     
  9. OP
    OP
    elvis

    elvis Old school old fool

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2001
    Messages:
    45,382
    Location:
    Brisbane
    Nice attempt at a dig, but you're assuming I'm the one who put that stuff in place.

    No, neither I nor my team are the ones who put that stuff in place, and we're the ones fighting to put better stuff in place. Is our industry special? No. Does it regularly make stupid decisions? Yes. Can my team prevent all of these? No. But we'll work as hard as I can to make sure they happen as infrequently as they can on our watch, and where it slips by, fix it.

    Bad vendors are everywhere, and their bad products creep in everywhere. We've done a pretty good job thus far at removing most of them (replacing shitty little one-off apps running on desktop systems with enterprise grade open source puts the fear of god into most vendors), but there's some legacy that remains.

    I stand by my convictions: there's always a choice to be made. Vendors who try to strongarm you and staff who refuse to try alternatives are the bane of this industry. As a small team, we're getting through these as fast as we can, and we'll never say die.

    FWIW, one of these "mac only" archive and media management products we use just last week was replaced by an alternative product from an alternative vendor that runs on enterprise grade gear, and on Linux. From discovering it to implementation it took us a few weeks, but that's what happens when staff put their own solutions in without consulting IT.
     
    Last edited: Mar 15, 2015
  10. GiantGuineaPig

    GiantGuineaPig Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2006
    Messages:
    4,027
    Location:
    Adelaide
    So again, it's fine in your environment because you don't like it and try to make it change wherever you can. Funnily enough, I think the same way as your above post.

    When I say 'we have no choice' it's because of the same scenarios you're talking about, and we're stuck with it for the time being - and the same will happen in the future now and then.

    It'd be nice if you actually asked and prodded on things, rather than taking every opportunity to jump on the soap box and belittle others.
     
  11. PabloEscobar

    PabloEscobar Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2008
    Messages:
    14,638
    IMHO, Letting it fail just to point at it, and say "I told you so" is a terrible practice.

    If you come into a company and discover relies on 2 tin cans and a bit of string to perform its day to day operations. And on your first day, you discover the string is starting to fray;

    You can wait for the string to break, and then demand for it to be replaced with something better... And meanwhile, the business folds because they can't perform day to day operations.

    Or you can point out the frayed string, and say 'I can replace the string, or we could go for $solution, which would last us far longer than replacing the string each time, and bring $features to the table, that we could start to use to streamline day to day operations. At which point, they will choose to replace the string, but in the back of their heads, the idea has been planted, and they are thinking about how $features could be used.

    Or you could just replace the string and continue drawing your wage... at which point they discover that a monkey can replace the string, and you get replaced by Bobo.
     
  12. OP
    OP
    elvis

    elvis Old school old fool

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2001
    Messages:
    45,382
    Location:
    Brisbane
    Absolutely not. It's terrible, and needs to be changed. No excuses.

    Nobody cops the brunt of my spiky personality more than my own self. The person I judge the harshest is me. I'm not perfect, and never claimed to be, but you can be damned sure that I treat myself with a stricter set of rules than anyone external.

    If you want to call that belittling, I can't stop you, but I disagree. I call it demanding a minimum standard.

    As I've said before, there is *always* room for improvement. That especially goes for myself, as much as anyone.

    If it makes you feel better, I even have a list of things I need to improve at my current workplace. Currently it's at 448 items. Not even kidding. The "shitty non-enterprise Apple gear running important production tasks" problem covers 2 of those items (3 as of last week, until we replaced it as I mentioned earlier in this thread).

    It will only ever be "good enough" when the list reaches zero. It will never reach zero.
     
  13. millsy

    millsy Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2007
    Messages:
    13,596
    Location:
    Brisbane
    GGP is right though, you need to lighten up on the whole proprietary stuff is evil when you use mac mini's lol.
     
  14. OP
    OP
    elvis

    elvis Old school old fool

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2001
    Messages:
    45,382
    Location:
    Brisbane
    If you think my message is "proprietary stuff is evil", then you haven't been listening to a word I've said.

    Did you catch the posts about how we use Google Apps? Or how our single most expensive proprietary software license costs $100K (for a single seat)? Or how we use some of the most advanced proprietary particle simulation software on the planet?

    You've completely missed the point of what both GiantGuineaPig and myself are even arguing about, if you think it's entirely around proprietary software versus open source.
     
  15. GreenBeret

    GreenBeret Member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2001
    Messages:
    19,370
    Location:
    Melbourne
    I have a similar goal to elvis, likely because his rants have subliminally programmed my brain :p

    For me, it's bespoke / vendor lock-in unmanageable solutions vs redundant, config managed, version controlled and test automated solutions.

    In my recent jobs, vendor lock-ins are very rare. In fact, most of my pains have been from bespoke solutions based on open source software.
     
  16. OP
    OP
    elvis

    elvis Old school old fool

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2001
    Messages:
    45,382
    Location:
    Brisbane
    Agreed. 99% of "bad open source" stuff I come across is because some cowboy hacked the shit out of something and didn't stick with upstream-provided binaries and standard configuration methods.

    Generally that's a result of people who don't understand the commercial side of open source. I hear it all the time - shit like "RHEL uses a really old version of Apache, so it must be insecure, so we compiled from source". A simple 5 minute conversation about security patch backporting typically sorts these knobs out, but sadly it's often too late by then.
     
  17. NSanity

    NSanity Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2002
    Messages:
    18,441
    Location:
    Brisbane
    Why do they backport and effectively fork rather than stay current?

    What advantages is it giving?
     
  18. Zedd02

    Zedd02 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2004
    Messages:
    1,131
    Location:
    Townsville
    It's not impossible to have a situation where the way a program works changes between versions to the extent that the original configuration cannot work with the new version and vice versa. The reasoning behind back-porting is that then you have an environment that is 100% as expected, and yet still relatively up-to-date.

    The only time this fails is when the processing within the program causes the issue. At that point, most distro's will update to the next best version (not to the latest) and attempt to stay as near to the original system as possible.
     
  19. OP
    OP
    elvis

    elvis Old school old fool

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2001
    Messages:
    45,382
    Location:
    Brisbane
    Compatibility. If new versions have different config file syntax, or new binary API/ABI changes, it breaks things. Distros like CentOS are renowned for their long term stability. The generally are supported for 15 or so years (10 years of active support, 5 years of extended support), with overlaps every 5 or so years to give users a bit of choice.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux#Version_history
    https://access.redhat.com/support/policy/updates/errata

    Example: OpenLDAP changed their config file format drastically in a particular release about 5 years back. RHEL continued to supply the existing version that came with their release, but back-ported security fixes in from newer releases ensuring the end users could keep their current production servers patch safe, but also secure.

    When that version of RHEL EOLs, so does RedHat's support for that patched product.

    This is precisely *why* it's a good idea to pay RedHat for support of free software in a commercial environment. And this is precisely *why* RedHat is now a billion-dollar-per-year company.
     
  20. NSanity

    NSanity Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2002
    Messages:
    18,441
    Location:
    Brisbane
    doesn't backporting the stuff effectively hamper the FOSS advantage of "anyone can sort it then compile"?

    I mean if you ask Apache, OpenSSL or whatever to help you out w/ a RHEL/Fedora backport - they'll tell you to fuck off i'd imagine.

    TBH it just sounds like you're taking the biggest advantage of FOSS and drilling it down to a single vendor.

    Sure RHEL/Fedora publish source - but code familiarisation is still a thing...
     

Share This Page

Advertisement: