On 04/08/2011 11:15 AM, Jon 'maddog' Hall wrote: > Not the same issue....this is apples and oranges. I am not asking the > managers to write the solution themselves. I am advocating that they > hire experts to create it for them. Hiring someone (for non-core business purposes) is probably more expensive than buying a software package. Being a "computer person" used to mean you could wire-wrap components while writing code and designing a network interface. The computing world is far more complicated than that now - developers don't have a clue about how systems as a whole work, and sysadmins don't go neck-deep into code. I admit I'm generalizing, and I'll get counterexamples, but that's been my experience over the past 20 years. > What you have advocated in "buying a solution" is someone who goes out > with a barrel of money and buys "any house on the market". All houses > are the same, are they not? All provide shelter. > > But many people look at many houses to find the one that fits them best. > And some people hire architects to design one that fits them, even if > they then get professional builders to build it. I was generalizing. Most people do look at various houses and pick one they like. A few are able to make some decisions before the house is built, and even fewer have enough control to get an architect. >> Be honest here, how many of you built your home desktop from scratch? > I am one. I did order a system built for me one time, but I specified > what I wanted. I do admit that I did not put the pieces of metal oxide > on the disk surface.... > >> How about your parents? > Bought them an HP system....but they are "the managers of today". *cough* I built my own systems at home, thankyouverymuch. :) >> Why do you think there's a discrepancy in those >> numbers? > I already explained that. > My point was that while there is a number (perhaps significant) of do-it-yourselfers, the majority of people will never want to crack open their Dell or HP or Lenovo and see what makes it tick. They want a service - to get to the Internet, to listen to music or watch a movie. For most people, a computer is a commodity just like a car or a house. >> Along the same lines, if you already have a staff of .NET developers, >> why make them learn PHP and Drupal when they can just do something in >> SharePoint? > Because they might actually know what they are doing? I think the number of generalists in various computing fields is dropping. I used to be able to manage Linux and Windows systems pretty well. Windows got more and more added to it and I now rely on Google when something happens on Windows rather than knowing what config file needs to be edited. The same is becoming true with programming languages. (In general, I must stress) People learn a few related languages and that's what they stick with. >> If you already have to pay for software and hardware >> maintenance, why bother training when you can have the vendor on the >> phone in two minutes? > You may get the vendor on the phone in two minutes, but it may take > hours or days to get the right answer. That was the case fairly recently. I'm not sure if having the local staff trained would have sped up that process (actually it may have). > The real question is why do people pay for software and hardware > maintenance and then don't demand good service? TANSTAAFL. > Yesterday I sat with a guy that works with multiple databases, including > SQL and Oracle. You should have heard him grousing about these closed > source "solutions". > > Where are the SLA's of yesteryear? (With apologies to Joseph Heller) SLAs mean that the vendor is on the hook for real money if the SLA isn't met. Or more directly, SLAs mean accountability, and noone wants to be held accountable. You either pay big bucks for an SLA, or you settle for 'best effort' and possibly a lunch the next time the sales weasel comes around.
-Mark _______________________________________________ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
