Linux jobs outpacing Windows jobs
in [General Linux]
|
From: Kholmann is aka little 'Petey Toro' OLAY! on 4 Nov 2009 10:40 smr wrote: > K�hlmann is aka 'Petey Toro' OLAY! wrote: >> Matt wrote: >>> smr wrote: > >>>>>> It's always better to slowly shift people's perceptions of things - >>>>>> "this is something we've been using to do some jobs in the company" as >>>>>> opposed to "this is the new thing head office forced on us." But that >>>>>> first box is a difficult issue - somebody needs to administrate that >>>>>> single CUPS server. >>>>> Which brings us full circle: Linux jobs outpacing Windows jobs. >>>>> Somebody >>>>> is hiring *new* Linux Admins and NOT hiring new Windows Admins... >>>> My post doesn't go quite full circle, my point is that companies that >>>> gradually adopt into Linux need to start with a single installation - >>>> "that first box". Eventually this leads to companies with a huge >>>> installed base of Linux that really like it but initially it's lots of >>>> machines running some other operating system and one running Linux. >>>> >>>> I would*n't* say that they would hire a new Linux admin at *that* point, >>>> I think that's something the existing staff would handle. I'm saying >>>> that at that point the existing staff need to administrate all of the >>>> systems they had before as well as this new box that runs an entirely >>>> new system - so what you're left with is relying on the current staff to >>>> learn to professionally administrate a new operating system for a single >>>> machine while doing their normal jobs at the same time. I'm saying >>>> that's off putting to administrators. It's great once you start moving >>>> lots of machines over to Linux and you can set up scripts that handle >>>> lots of machines at once and that's where it really shines but it's >>>> dealing with the hassle of the test machine that's a stumbling block. >>> >>> I'm thinking that more often, that first Linux box is being maintained >>> mainly by whoever is using it, If that first user is not mainly a >>> sysadmin, he asks permission to use Linux, and they say okay, but you >>> have to maintain it yourself. Same thing happens if he is mainly a >>> sysadmin, but then it might be that the guy was hired specifically as >>> somebody who knows Linux and as somebody who can expose the other >>> admins and their bosses to the practice of running Linux. That would >>> be followed by incremental steps toward Linux by the company, stuff like: >>> migrating the servers, switching some users to cross-platform FOSS >>> apps such as OpenOffice, migrating one department as an experiment, >>> and hiring more admins and other workers who have experience in both >>> worlds. >> LOL, it's obvious no one here has been through any conversion effort >> from one platform to another in any shape form or fashion. >> >> This is some kind of a total joke here, and it's two home users >> conversing with each other. > > I thought it was two people talking in generalities (an idea or > conclusion having general application) about the social pressures > applying to people bringing Linux into their business but if you have > specific details of what we're talking about I'd love you to add to the > conversation. You know the day-to-day business needs of computing for a department within a corporation doesn't center around office products, which is only a very small fraction of the department or the corporation computing business needs. A department within a corporation in order for the department to do day-2-day business operations has enterprise level in-house written and 3rd party software solutions that are platform and business specific. Enterprise solutions like payroll, inventory, accounts payable, accounts receivable, general ledger, purchase order, insurance, transportation needs to move product, etc, etc just to name a few and many other such specialized applications that are being used within a corporation. The enterprise solutions are also interfacing with each other, and they are running on workstations, Web servers with data being persisted to database servers, etc. So no, no one is going to start doing something out of the norm, like a rouge sysadmin individual that has a hankering to start using Linux and blew smoke into someone's ear about switching to an all Linux platform from a MS platform, and all of the other departments within a corporation converts to the Linux platform. That's simply not going to happen. Linux may find a little niche need within a corporation that's on the MS platform, just like client/server has a niche needed within a corporation that has day-2-day business needs centered around the IBM mainframe iron horse.
From: JEDIDIAH on 4 Nov 2009 11:37 On 2009-11-04, Kholmann is aka little 'Petey Toro' OLAY! <Toro1(a)toro1.net> wrote: > > > smr wrote: >> Köhlmann is aka 'Petey Toro' OLAY! wrote: >>> Matt wrote: >>>> smr wrote: [deletia] > So no, no one is going to start doing something out of the norm, like a > rouge sysadmin individual that has a hankering to start using Linux and > blew smoke into someone's ear about switching to an all Linux platform > from a MS platform, and all of the other departments within a > corporation converts to the Linux platform. That's simply not going to > happen. No. It's going to be the CTO or CIO that's doing the pushing. That horse left the barn a LONG time ago. And yes Linux did first go in the back door of corporations being deployed by individual admins on an as needed basis to deal with the usual corporate burdens. That was about 10 years ago. Things are a lot different now. Linux hasn't been "outside the norm" in a long time. -- If you are going to judge Linux based on how easy it is to get onto a Macintosh. Let's try installing ||| MacOS X on a DELL! / | \
From: Mr. Majestic on 4 Nov 2009 13:40 JEDIDIAH wrote: > On 2009-11-04, Kholmann is aka little 'Petey Toro' OLAY! <Toro1(a)toro1.net> wrote: >> >> smr wrote: >>> Köhlmann is aka 'Petey Toro' OLAY! wrote: >>>> Matt wrote: >>>>> smr wrote: > > [deletia] > >> So no, no one is going to start doing something out of the norm, like a >> rouge sysadmin individual that has a hankering to start using Linux and >> blew smoke into someone's ear about switching to an all Linux platform >> from a MS platform, and all of the other departments within a >> corporation converts to the Linux platform. That's simply not going to >> happen. > > No. It's going to be the CTO or CIO that's doing the pushing. No, that would be the senior staff members in IT department making justification to managers, managers making justification to the IT director, the IT director making justification the to CIO or CTO, CIO or CTO making justification VP's heading departments, and then CIO or CTO with VP's making justification to the corporation president. JEDIDIAH you are a dumb home-user that has never seen it happen. > > That horse left the barn a LONG time ago. And yes Linux did first go > in the back door of corporations being deployed by individual admins > on an as needed basis to deal with the usual corporate burdens. How would you know since you never had a job in IT in a corporation as a home-user? > > That was about 10 years ago. Things are a lot different now. > > Linux hasn't been "outside the norm" in a long time. > I wouldn't trust anything you had to say with you being home-user as far as I could toss a building somewhere. OLAY!
From: Ignoramus8745 on 4 Nov 2009 13:49 Keep something in mind here: we often talk about how Linux is installed in companies without blessing of senior management, and then makes some progress. Here we have a different story, which is that companies are now requiring people they hire to have Linux knowledge. This is now a matter of corporate policy, as opposed to some low level enthusiasts. i
From: Balwinder S Dheeman on 4 Nov 2009 13:55
On 11/04/2009 02:55 PM, dennis(a)home wrote: > > > "Robert Heller" <heller(a)deepsoft.com> wrote in message > news:6L2dnaHX0ueKU23XnZ2dnUVZ_hCdnZ2d(a)posted.localnet... > > 8> > >> Which brings us full circle: Linux jobs outpacing Windows jobs. Somebody >> is hiring *new* Linux Admins and NOT hiring new Windows Admins... > > Of course there is another explanation.. > windows is getting easier to administer so you need less admin staff. > Blame M$ for making it too easy. ;-) I'm surprised to know this, because I have observed that the developers of this operating do know and, or care about even where to store temporary and, or log files. Moreover, there are no such things as File-system Standards Base and, or a POSIX complaint like pre-requisite. That world still lacks a good native shell, you can't format and, or defrag more than one disk at time on such a multi-tasking operating system which still is a single use sign on only; or is not a full mutli-user, multi-tasking and preemptive as yet. IMHO, windows is too immature compared with Unix, Linux and, or FreeBSD. I wonder, why the hell Unix, Linux and, or FreeBSD want to make and, or behave these like windows; even a seasoned Unix, Linux and, or FreeBSD user would find http://werc.homelinux.net/links/reference/unix_prog_design.pdf a useful and interesting paper. -- Balwinder S "bdheeman" Dheeman Registered Linux User: #229709 Anu'z Linux(a)HOME (Unix Shoppe) Machines: #168573, 170593, 259192 Chandigarh, UT, 160062, India Plan9, T2, Arch/Debian/FreeBSD/XP Home: http://werc.homelinux.net/ Visit: http://counter.li.org/ |