""J.D. Chaiken"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > I would have to disagree with you on some of your points. More often > than not predictions turn out to be wrong.
I believe this is incorrect, and I've actually talked about this with other people on this board. It's not that most predictions are incorrect. It's that most predictions are boring. Consider this. I can predict that if you smoke, you will injure your health. In fact, every doctor in the world will tell you that. But everybody already knows that smoking is unhealthy. So it's boring, and you will probably pay no attention. It's still a prediction though - it's not guaranteed that if you smoke, you will have bad health. The only time we pay attention to predictions are if they are, first of all, not boring, and second of all, if they're wrong. That's why we tend to think that many more predictions are wrong than they appear. It's that the obvious and boring predictions are quickly forgotten about. Consider a simple economic prediction. For example, I can predict that the US economy in the next 5 years is not going to be dominated by the steel industry. I doubt that anybody would disagree. It is possible that the economy will indeed be dominated by steel - but how likely is that? It's a boring prediction that nobody cares about, but still a prediction. >Take Wall street for a bad > example. There's no doubt in my mind that major changes will occur in the > IT industry. Of the dozens of new technologies that become available each > year, some of them will most certainly mature. Most of them will fail, and > if you could tell me exactly which ones would succeed then there's no point > in working at all. Just invest in the successful ones, rake in the money, > and do IT work for free because you love it. On the other hand, surely you will agree that some possible changes are a lot less likely than others. It is extremely unlikely that the world is going to be moving back to, say, Banyan Vines, for example. It is possible - but very very unlikely. It's all a matter of judging likelihoods. Obviously nobody has a crystal ball, but there is still common sense you can apply to ascertain which changes are likely to happen and which changes are not. > > I agree with you on some points though. In the US, I doubt there's > going to be a buildout boom anytime soon, and R&S skills may not be as > profitable now as they were just a few years ago. But by no means do I > think that the skills are not valuable. For the next couple of years I > believe that in order to prosper you'll need to develop other skills (as > with every industry, but especially with IT) . The skillset that Doctors > and Lawyers possessed 20 years ago is all but obsolete now; Which is why > they are required to continue their education with continuing education > courses. Right, and that's exactly my point. Unfortunately there still continue to be people who think that R/S is all they need in their toolkit. I think a lot of people want to believe it's still 1999. > > Remember that most of the world is still underdeveloped. Take China for > instance. if just 1% china went out and bought a computer and hoped to > connect to the internet, those R&S skills would be heavily in demand, > throw in all the developing former Iron Curtain nations, and the continents > of Africa and much of South America, and you have plenty of R&S job > openings. I have full faith in the power of capitalism, I'm certain that > eventually the undeveloped countries will develop, and they are going to > need qualified, experienced people to help them out. I would posit the situation where IP networking really does become plug&play and super-reliable - like the way electricity is today in the West. In such a case, a boom in IP buildout doesn't necessarily mean much of a boom (probably only a mild boom) in R/S skills - because IP networking was made easy. And furthermore, most of the boom in jobs would occur locally to where the buildout occurred. Just like if most of the Third World electrified itself, it wouldn't mean that electricians in the West would be sitting pretty. There would be more demand for electricians in Africa, but not really for more electricians in the United States. > > Security is hot this year, and next year it could be something else. > Working in the IT industry means that you will need to rebuild you entire > skillset every few years. I believe that Cisco realizes that, which is why > recertification is so important. It won't surprise me at all if the CCIE > tracks appear to converge a bit more in the next 3 to 6 years. Gone are the > days when you started your career and retired with the same skillsets, and I > wouldn't want it any other way. > > > Jarett > > > ""nrf"" wrote in message > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > ""Marc Thach Xuan Ky"" wrote in message > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > > A few points: > > > When I was fresh in the IT industry (over 20 years ago) the old-timers > > > who had been working maybe four years already would tell me that there > > > was no future in programming, after all they said, who uses a chauffeur > > > now that cars are so easy to drive? > > > Cars need very little maintenance now, there are still plenty of > > > mechanics because there are more cars. > > > Phone companies still employ a lot of telephone engineers, large > > > corporates often have on-site telephone staff. There are more phone > > > companies now. Voice is a commodity. > > > Here in London during the 80's property boom, electricians and plumbers > > > on the large contracts were being paid a lot more than any network > > > engineer I heard of at the time. > > > > I would just add that many times (actually, more often than not, > predictions > > actually turn out to be correct). For example, decades ago, people > > predicted a decline in the number of jobs in farming. And indeed the > number > > of jobs in farming declined substantially. People also predicted a huge > > decline in the number of jobs in old-school manufacturing - steel, > mining, > > etc. And indeed that came to pass. And even for those jobs that didn't > > decline, there was significant change in what they did. Mechanics can't > > just know how to fix carburetors, now they have to understand > > fuel-injection. > > > > IT has always been an industry of change. What was hot at one point of > time > > may not be hot at another. IBM mainframe skill was in big demand back in > > the 70's, and it has been on a slow decline ever since. COBOL was also > huge > > back then, and enjoyed a brief resurgence due to y2k, but is now > declining. > > I believe R/S skill will fade into the background because quite simply not > > as many organizations are building out new networks anymore, nor do they > > really need to. The networks are built with most likely only incremental > > buildouts in the near-future, and so now the question is what are you > going > > to do with the network. That is what is going to get you jobs. For those > > of you who are still waiting for another huge network buildout boom, well, > > sorry to tell you, but that train has left the station. > > > > > > > > > rgds > > > Marc Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=59553&t=59553 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
