Slashdot Mirror
The Increasing Cost of Red Hat Linux?
An Anonymous Coward asks: "I work at a company with a large number of Linux servers in the data center. We're currently evaluating what distribution we want to use moving forward. Upgrading to Red Hat Enterprise from 7.2 would cost ~$350k just for the systems we already have deployed. Due to the change in Red Hat's release policy, we either have to move to Enterprise, or change distributions. Also, we don't have Oracle on any of these systems, but we will need it in the future. This leaves us with rather limited options. I'm interested hearing what other Slashdot readers are running, and planning?"
'nough said
I don't know where you've been hiring or looking for tech jobs in the last couple of years, but outside the Silicon Valley, most UNIX/open-source geeks I know would be thrilled to have a $25k/year job they felt appreciated and useful at. I'm not talking about script kiddies who use Red Hat 'cause they're so 1337, I'm talking about experienced admins who know how to maintain and run large networks, write and update C/Perl/SH/Java code, and are more than willing to keep a pager next to their pillow for midnight emergencies.
I've worked with folks from NASA, Boeing, the NSA, etc., and IMHO, their internal IT departments aren't any more capable than your average medium/large corporation's, they're just more paranoid and conservative about upgrades, connectivity, and innovation. Most of them still run their critical systems on old VAX or IBM mainframes, because they're too paranoid about upgrading to a new, "unproven" system like UNIX or Windows NT. The quality of support they get isn't a product of what they pay their employees, it's the natural outcome of not changing your basic system configuration for 25 years, and keeping the same people on board to support and maintain the identical set of massively-outdated boxes.
You absolutely *can* find experienced, capable admins for less than $35k a year, if you're willing to pay attention to anything besides where they earned their degree, or what overpriced commercial certifications they have -- just look at your average MSCE for an example of how little the corporate "stamp of approval" means in terms of competence. What really matters is whether the people screening and hiring new IT staff have any clue about the technology involved, and whether the company creates a working environment that any self-respecting geek would care to be a part of.
Basically, it can be as simple as installing a couple of pinball/Street Fighter arcade machines, putting an espresso maker in the break room, and not worrying about whether your network guys show up before 10-11am on days when nothing is going wrong. In that kind of working environment, you can take your pick of entirely competent full-time network or system administrators in just about every major urban area in the western world. Of course, if you force everyone to show up at 8:30 wearing a tie and sport coat, and you'll attract only the least self-respecting segment of the geek population, and have plenty of trouble filling high-level positions without offering rediculous compenstation packages.