Cross Skilling Across Multi-OS Platforms?

drtheman asks: "I have been working in the IT industry for the last 10 years, 7 of those as a UNIX system administrator. I have been noticing over the last year or two that companies are becoming very pedantic about specific skills that a UNIX sysadmin should have. Most troubling for myself is the so called multi-skilled UNIX/NT administrator. It's a given that any seasoned UNIX admin should have *some* Windows knowledge, and cross skilling is something that shouldn't be balked at. However, after coming from large enterprise environments, where the UNIX boys do the UNIX stuff and the NT guys do the Windows stuff, I just find it a little troubling that if I don't adapt with certifications in these platforms I may become unemployable. Do other enterprise admins think that this is too much for us to take on, and companies are just expecting more bang for their buck these days? I can understand that these multi-skilled people are needed in the smaller shops, but I would like to know how it would work effectively in larger ones."

Comments

Cross-skilling is a must

[TripMaster Monkey]

I myself am coming from the opposite direction (Microsoft guru, *nix acolyte), and from what I've seen, a decently cross-skilled admin can pretty much write their own ticket. I wouldn't go so far as to say that if you aren't cross-skilled, you will eventually be unemployable...there will always be work for an admin that's competent enough, especilly a Unix admin like yourself. But a cros-skilled admin brings much more to the table...not just for the obvious reason of being able to work on either platform, but because they can work on both platforms. The point I'm trying to get across here is that Unix/Microsoft interoperability is a big matzah ball in today's tech world, and an admin that can understand how Windows and Unix play together (and why they occasionally don't) will be valued much more...in essence, the cross-skilled tech is worth more than the sum of his parts.

Re:Cross-skilling is a must

[Monkelectric]

I think the market is just plain, weird. I interview at some places -- they want an *all* windows guy and won't consider me because I have unix experience. Other places have insane demands that you know very specific Unix packages, as if its impossible or even difficult to learn something. Other places see that I've been a programmer and don't want to hire me as an admin, other places see that ive been an admin and dont want to hire me as a programmer ... so basically what im saying is , the whole thing just sucks.

Re:Cross-skilling is a must

[joe_bruin]

Everyone here is going to tell you the same thing, diversify. But here's the reality: if you limit yourself to one domain (like only UNIX) you're really closing some doors for yourself. If you know enough of NT administration (I assume you'll have to be interfacing with Windows at some point), you're far more useful. !!HOWEVER!!, don't confuse that with becoming a master of Windows admining, unless you want to face the very real possibility that this is what you'll be doing exclusively in the future. When some PHB in your company decides to put in some Windows servers, who's going to be admining them, you, or your coworker who only knows UNIX systems? Sometimes, ignorance is bliss. Know enough to fix problems when they affect your work. Don't know enough (or at least pretend not to) so that the bulk of the work of NT administration is Somebody Else's Problem.

Re:Cross-skilling is a must

[Audacious]

I would have to agree. Where I work I needed to have the cross platform skills since I worked on Windows95, Windows98se, WindowsNT, Windows2000, and now WindowsXP. I also had to port programs from HP machines to Macintoshes and then to SGIs running Unix. Or try the Perkin-Elmer to Vax 11/780 via Intergraph's 68K Dual projection Micro Workstation. We had to be able to both program as well as run these systems and integrate communications between them.

Presently, we are just doing Windows 2000/XP with SGIs and Suns but we are considering getting some Macs with OS X on them because we are beginning to have some requests for those to run our software. (This is not to mention all of the hundreds of laptops we have to support.)

Heh. At least I'm not having to support the old Univacs, Honeywell 66/60 systems, and NAS9000s we used to have to support. Those were a lot harder to maintain. :-)

But yes. The more systems you know how to use, keep up and running, and even program on - the better it is for you. The fewer systems you know the easier it is for your boss to say "Ok, nice to have worked with you - NEXT!" In this case it truly is that "more is better". Just like programming languages. More is better because each language has its special things it can do. And in some cases you need to know different languages so you can draw upon what you learned using those other languages and so you can apply it to a given problem.

(Remember the old problem with FTP and trying to transfer binary files? People consistently forgot to tell FTP these were binary files. Or the problem where ascii files were transferred as binary files but the endianness of binary files would make the ascii files not view properly. This is only one of the things system admins used to have to worry about. (In the pre-Netscape et al days.) Now it is more like why someone can not see a given site or other computer on the network. Or what part of a Linux update have we not downloaded yet? Or even "Ya got another virus? Ok, be right over." [There is one person whom I've de-virused many times and I have threatened to just take them off of the net if they muck around with the virus detection software again!])

Anyway, as I've said - my vote would be that "yes, you need to know multiple systems and OSs as well as multiple languages (scripting or otherwise)."

Re:Cross-skilling is a must

[superpulpsicle]

My ultimate advice to people who are currently employed and in the driver seat to make purchasing decisions... buy as much heterogeneous equipment for your environment as possible.

It gives you more responsibility, making it harder for companies to let you go. And more experience into your future resume.

Re:Cross-skilling is a must

[0kComputer]

We iz looking fo' somebody just like ya! We iz seeking uh Unix Systems Administrator/NT Administrator ta provide 3rd level support an' project assistance. You will gots uh strong SUN Solaris background, an' ideally experience wiff Tru64 an' AIX. Other desirable skills include computers/finance, or computers/law, or computers/management, Storage Area Networks, Veritas, Oracle 9i an' Avocent (KVM). Great opportunity wiff uh global organisation. Ebonics uh BIG PLUS. Please send CV as soon as possible ta secure interview slots next week! and shit.

Re:Cross-skilling is a must

[bonehead]

I do exactly that. In fact, I think I may have stumbled across a whole new career path as a result.

I can't even go into much detail about it, but my dabbling in some (relatively) new tech, combined with attending a convention related to the industry that my company is in (not IT related), resulted in me being able to sit in meetings and say "why not just do such and such" and watch peoples jaws hit the floor. My ideas weren't brilliant, in fact they were painfully obvious. It's just that the IT guys didn't understand the industry well enough to see it, and the industry guys didn't understand IT well enough to see it. I've only been home from that convention for a week and there are already contracts being drawn up for my company to partner with some pretty heavy hitters to implement my ideas.

I don't say that to brag, believe me. I'm the type that will probably get so focused on the tech aspect that I get screwed on the business aspect. Nothing to brag about at all. I simply bring it up to point out the value of developing at least a working familiarity in as many different areas as possible.

You don't have to master everything you dabble in, but there is real value in being reasonably well versed in as many areas as possible. Never lose sight of the bigger picture.

Re:Cross-skilling is a must

[lorenlal]

I know the pain of diversifying, only to see one side go completely away.

I used to work at a university as a Windows support guy. I got bored with it, cause it was pretty much the same troubleshooting cases every day. To keep myself going, I started playing around with some of our internal Linux machines and I asked a lot of questions to our internal staff. Pretty quickly, I was doing more *nix support (Solaris, SGI, Linux) stuff than Windows, and after a short time I no longer received Windows cases.

Now, for me, that was some of the most rewarding and fun work I did.

My current employer is exclusively Windows (with a splash of Mac OS 9 and X), and looking back, I felt that I was much more valuable when I was actively working on the Unices too. I've lost alot of my Linux admin skill due to lack of application. I can setup a Linux desktop with almost any flavor (I have my Gentoo desktop running along nocely) but it's not the same.

I guess what I'm trying to say is, diversify if you have the interest, not because it looks good on your resume. Some people are much happier as NT admins, others as Unix admins... I loved working on everything, finding where they were similar, why they were different, and what worked better given a particual user base.

Re:Cross-skilling is a must

[JumpedUp]

I consider myself pretty useful on Windows and Unix/Linux. I have had some recruiters ask me what I specialise in. When I tell them I don't specialise they ask me again. I'm convinced that the varied skills I list on my CV have put some employers (or agents anyways). Maybe they think that if you know both then you obviously know them 50% as well as you could.

Keep in mind

[agent dero]

These are usually recommendations on job sites for resumes that companies most likely will toss out because the guy hiring "knows some guy."

I honestly can say I don't have a certification in any regards, I have experience, and "I know people."

IMHO, 9 times out of 10, knowing somebody will get you farther than another bullet point on a resume

Re:Keep in mind

[Ratbert42]

Keep in mind that a lot of job listings are B.S. anyways. They list incredibly specific skillsets so very few people are actually qualified. Why? So they can continue to employ the guy on the H1B visa that already has that job. Why else would you see a job listing for a mainframe CICS C++ programmer that knows web design?

More likely

[temojen]

The HR people have a checklist of skills (or worse, certifications and buzzwords) but don't actually know what the job requires.

Re:More likely

[fiveRocketCars]

I can testify to that point. The HR folks are generally given a boiler plate job description in which they ask if you have the specified skills. They usually don't even know what the acronyms stand for.

Competent/confident individuals should just appease the HR folks with yes/yes/yes/..., and then talk to a technical person at the next stage to see what the company is looking for, and if you are a good fit.

And those ratings of 1 to 5 are very subjective, and think of some of the idiots you've worked with in the past, and what rating they would chose for themselves, and then chose your own accordingly.

Realistically I might consider myself a 3-4 level at a particular skill (because I know there is ALWAYS, much, much more to learn), but for an HR screening interview, i'm always a 5 for the critical skills.

Re:More likely

[laird]

While it's certainly true that HR people only know keywords and not substance, there's a good reason to hire people with cross-platform experience -- it's much better for the company.

First, it gives the company more flexibility. If you need more NT or UNIX work done right now, you can shift people fluidly rather than having one team idle while the other is idle.

Second, it leads to more mature and coherent decision making. If you have separate UNIX and NT teams, they'll each come up with a completely different set of answers for everything (and usually compete, which is crazy for morale), so you'll end up running two separate environments, and thus two of everything, so IIS and Apache, Active Directory and LDAP, etc., with little to no integration. But if you hire people who understand both platforms, you can come up with a a unified strategy for the entire company, and make decisions based on technical issues rather than religion.

Re:More likely

[eno2001]

Actually, politics get in the way. A lot! From what I've seen, HR will as the IT dept. for a job description. The heads of the IT dept. will talk about what they really want, but then they have to take a step back from a lot of it because it might not be "politically correct". For instance:

Manager A: "We want the candidate to know his limits within the department. That last guy had a Messiah complex and he was damn near useless".
Manager B: "Yeah, but we can't really say it that way. Hmmm... how else can we phrase that"?
Manager C: "How about, 'works well with others'"?
Manager A: "Yeah. It's cliched, but it should filter out the people who are god's gift to IT".

Or this scenario:

Manager A: "We need someone who can work on their own with just a little nudging and who has really good Unix skills for this position".
Manager B: "Well, don't forget that this guy will also be managing some Windows servers that interact with the Unix systems because the Windows guy doesn't want to touch them".
Manager A: "Yeah. I forgot about that. Hmmm... cross-platform admin"?
Manager C: "Well, he (or she) is really going to be mostly Unix".
Manager A: "Let's leave out the Windows part".
Manager B: "We can't because it's essential to the job and the Windows guys will have a fit if they still have to try and work with Cygwin".
Manager C: "OK. What about this, 'Must have strong Unix background but be willing to work closely with Windows servers and possibly train or simplify Windows/Unix interaction'"?
Manager A: "That's going to make it sound like a big job. Anyone really think that we'll get a competent Unix admin who would want the job"?
Manager B: "OK. Let's leave out the Windows part and just filter the folks when we get the second interview".

So you see... sometimes, the fault for the generic job listings lie with the politics.

Re:More likely

[cayenne8]

I find that an SA, at any level...if you work as a good DBA or other high level user...can if you have a good working relationship, can help drive new purchases...steering away from MS, and go for Unix/Linux boxes. I work with Oracle a great deal, and I know I work to push avoidance of MS whenever I possibly can.

With security in DoD systems...we run into the ability of granual rights privs. Now, on Oracle systems on windows...we have to have an SA sit with us to log us in, and basically sit and read a book while we do simple things like apply the new quartely security updates, or new software.

A total waste of money. On the Unix/Linux systems, we can be given proper privs where we can do what we need to...even sudo or IAS systems...and not have to have an SA sit 'babysitting' us.

Sure..you need to know a bit about all OSes...but, if everyone pulls together in the server room...you can sway in many cases the PHB's to go for a working platform....something MEANT for the server environment.

Sure...win can be good for the desktop, but, we gotta all pull together in the server area to get a platform we can all work on easily.

Reduncancy

[michelcultivo]

I'm a Linux administrator, and when one new job appear my IT Director ask me of my windows skills. I said to him that I known something about Active Directory and installing web servers, not so much like a MCSE or MCSA. He told me that's enough and hired me, this lesson tell me that the business is looking for one specialist that known a little about other OS. That's all folks.

Abstract your knowledge

[MacFury]

The key to being extremely valuable is to know why tools and programs work. Once you know generally why something works, say, TCP, you can apply that knowledge to specific cases regardless of their platform.

Almost everything boils down to a matter of syntax

I realize this is the simplistic view, but it has helped me in my daily jump between Windows, MacOS X and various Unix platforms.

Put it in terms you can understand

[Hadlock]

What they're trying to tell you is, if you're a 12th level Unix Mage, it wouldn't hurt to pick up a 2nd level XP Paladin. If your party's level 15 XP Paladin dies, the party still needs the Paladin's basic skills, like light network healing and saving patch all infected computers roll abilities. You can keep working on getting your level 18 Unix Mage, with the Write kernel from scratch Feat, but you're gonna have to make some sacrifices for the party to keep it moving forward.

Re:Put it in terms you can understand

[freeradica1]

The whole point is that you create a Multi-class character once you get to the 12th level as a Unix Mage. That way, if the level 15 XP Paladin dies, your lvl 12/2 Unix Mage/XP Paladin can do all the healing and patching you need.

Re:Put it in terms you can understand

[corsec67]

Dang, the parent post should be put in a post hall of fame. In one simple post, he covers: Windows vs Unix, the fight against hackers, D&D, and workplace politics.

A common name for cross-skilled admins...

[toupsie]

Your Boss.

I am always surprised how narrow minded UNIX-only admins are. The way to succeed in the IT Admin game is to be able handle the most hardware, platforms and operating systems. The more you learn, the more you earn. Your UNIX experience will pay off in Windows administration as most UNIX admins are used to "getting their hands dirty" whereas a lot of Windows admins I meet are "Next, OK, Apply, Cancel" kind of guys. Plus Windows is becoming more command line oriented (Thank God!).

Boys? Guys?

[cniebla]

...the UNIX boys do the UNIX stuff and the NT guys do...

Shouldn't we have to be MUCH MORE willing to accept that there are girls in IT? we start by accepting this fact, and being less and less "boy" centric, and many will come ;)

Re:Boys? Guys?

[ErikZ]

Shouldn't we have to be MUCH MORE willing to accept that there are girls in IT?

Statistical anomaly.

I've gotten jobs that way

[Geekboy(Wizard)]

I know Windows decently, Mac and Unix quite well. I've been asked to several interviews specificly because I can do two of them (Normaly they want Mac or Unix (so far not both), and a little bit of Windows as well).

I'm not certified in anything. I choose to actually know the subject than to have a pretty piece of paper. Besides, I have a colour printer for when they do care about pretty papers.

Cross skilling: yes, Windows: no

[hagbard5235]

Cross skilling is a definite must. Being able to manage the *nix servers, keep the J2EE containers going, manage the network, address security issues, etc, even if only on a decent enough level to be able to assist the *real* experts in those areas in interfacing into your area of expertise is a real plus.

However, I've noticed that almost everyone I know in IT who knows jack about Windows has been made unhappy by that knowledge. Maybe I'm just to far out in enterprise land (where NOTHING important is EVER put on a Windows box), but Windows knowledge leads to having to address all of the stupid annoying issues Windows boxes sprout. I'd far rather spend my time architecting useful solutions to hard problems in the enterprise level stuff than have to fight with the Windows virus dejure (at least on the desktop, network level mitigation can be fun).

If you need to cross skill pick up some background in J2EE containers, or Oracle DBA skills, or go pick up a CCIE and learn somethings about the network. Not only do those add more earning power than Windows skills, but they don't make you want to slit your wrists.

(Proud to have had almost know Windows expertise since 1993 :) ).

Yes to cross skilling....

[Chanc_Gorkon]

As much as I hate Windows, I have to know it. There are many add on and other related products out there that your companies non technical offices buy and you have to make it work. Knowing Windows in addition to UNIX is essential. Windows is not really all that different then UNIX to make ir difficult. In fact, some of Windows limitations make it easier to learn then Linux. Certifying in Both? Questionable. HR departments need to let the technical areas do the selecing and rely less on using certs to weed out people. I have found that certs DO help you, but only if you also KNOW the info. Wallpaper will only get you some interviews. Having a impressive resume in addition to know people in the industry helps alot.

... my experience ...

[ninjagin]

I was at a very small startup a year ago, and now I'm at a Fortune 15 company. At the startup, we supported one product on windows, SunOS and Linux. Here, we support dozens of products on windows, linux, AIX, HP and any number of handhelds, but our office is mainly a UNIX shop. My office machine is a winXP laptop, but the real technical work I do is all performed through xterms to the big UNIX servers in the data center. Being able to get around and do what you need to do on all platforms your company uses seems to be a thread I've recognized in my last three jobs.

Where I've found that I've been able to demonstrate the most value is in those situations where we need to get something done on a platform that nobody on the team has used before. I don't have a whole lot of fear of alternate platforms -- their really just new learning opportunities. Sure, I have assumptions and preferences about what one can do better than another, but these become more educated opinions the more I have to work in alternative platform contexts. For example, I have to drive a continuous integration project for some development teams that use C# and .Net, when most of my experience has been with Sun Java and Web Services. I recognize that I don't know diddly about how to do the job under the new conditions, but I'll have more value (I hope (crosses fingers)) when I get to the end because of what the challenge will force me to learn.

As a rule, I'd say that being adaptable, and willing to accept the challenge of learning new stuff has been more important to me (and how I think I'm being valued) than being (and staying) the uber-733+ lord of one platform or technology. Then again, I also have a lot more resources to draw upon at the current job. At the last one, I'd have to buy the necessary books and learn it all on my own. Were I still there, I might think differently.

Hope it helps,

Not true in small shops

[tentimestwenty]

In smaller businesses or development houses, it's simply a monetary issue. You want to hire one guy who can do it all, or at least do it all 90% of the time and find a creative solution the other 10%. You only have to pay one person as opposed to two. It's the same in creative houses. Nowadays if you want to be a web developer on your own or in a small house you have to be able to do everything from HTML to PHP to PERL to Flash/Actionscript and maybe even MySQL. Since the bottom fell out of the market, companies just can't afford to hire 5 experts where 1 guy with medium knowledge will suffice.

Re:Not true in small shops

[chris_mahan]

Yeah, well, they get what they pay for.

You hire an accountant and you hire a lawyer. If you hire one person to do both, eith the legal stuff will be done wrong, the accounting will be done wrong, or, most likely, both will be done wrong.

This is why they remain small businesses; because they can't rise above mediocrity.

Re:Not true in small shops

[tverbeek]

This is why they remain small businesses; because they can't rise above mediocrity.

Or maybe they just haven't fallen for the assumption that the only measure of success is size. Not every small business owner wants to become Rich DeVos (international MLM outfit) or Fred Meijer (regional grocery chain) or even Doug Kool (local car dealership). Some just want to be their own boss and provide a service to their customers. I wouldn't contemptuously dismiss that as "mediocrity"; I'd call it "perspective".

Re:Opposite

[binner1]

I hear god uses VMS!

-Ben

Sys admins not as appreciated anymore

[catmistake]

I'm pretty much against unions, but maybe sys admins should have one...

What I've noticed in the past 5 years or so is that the average starting salary for a UNIX admins (and other highly skilled computer jobs) has dropped considerably... its disturbing. It is a HIGHLY skilled job that the wigs in large or small corporations just don't understand. It's not as if the market is flooded with employable sys admins, either.

I've never had a problem with NT... I think it is a fine server... but... (I don't know) is it still even being supported? Can you even buy NT anymore? Does it run on new servers? As far as what you said about the split between Windows and UNIX admins, that is my experience, too, only... if you have UNIX servers, why bother with windows? The windows admins are there for the user boxes at the desks... and most UNIX admins I know don't like to travel far from their desks and espescially not to interact with the (yuk!) user... if the UNIX admin is doing his job well, he never has to interface with the user. I look at Windows admins like I look at sales people... they know how to get along with people... they are more socially adept... and good for them, because I don't want to do that.

There was an ad in the paper for a job that I laughed at... it was for a Windows administrator, and they REQUIRED a Computer Science bachelors degree, and it started at 21K. WTF!! CS grads used to be able to start out doing, well, computer science at 65K fresh out of school... and now they have to shlub along as a windows admin for peanuts? This trend in the economy of devaluing high tech jobs is getting ridiculous... I don't care how many Indians can dance on the head of a pin for half as much, that work isn't easy, and it isn't cheap to get that education... my God, holding a figgin' stop/slow sign at a road work site pays better!

so, personally speaking, I think UNIX admins should bond together to prevent such a bullying from employers and industry, get their old starting salaries back (say, those of 5-8 years ago), and stop this UNIX/Windows admin BS. Windows admins would benefit too...

It is indeed a very simplistic view

[apankrat]

Almost everything boils down to a matter of syntax

In case of Windows it actually boils down to being ready for most bizzare sh*t you cant even imagine.

Like installing buggy USB driver f*cking up DHCP client's ability to renew IP address. Or installing desktop skinning software causing Windows to start failing installation of virtual network adapters. Or that disabling (certain) personal firewall software actually not having a full effect on a traffic until the next reboot.

Truly entertaining stuff. Far more lively than just mastering command syntax :)

Re:.::. Build a Linux server @ Home .::.

[Nasarius]

use a tool like webmin to administrate it

I'd strongly recommend against that. Webmin is okay for certain things, but it's horribly broken on many distros. The bigger distros (SuSE, Mandrake, Red Hat/Fedora) provide their own tools for administration; use them. Otherwise, you're best off doing it manually if you actually want to learn how things work.

Also

[Sycraft-fu]

Even if your gorinization is big enough to have seperate techs, never say that you'll never have to work on the other side. I mean say you are the UNIX guy for a company, all you do is mind the UNIX servers and write programs for them and so on. Windows is handled by a team of Windows guys. Then, one day, all but one of your Windows guys isn't there. They are sick, or on vaction, whatever, it's just one guy and something major happens. A virus starts making the rounds as the CEO has a big presentation to give.

Well, if you say "I don't do Windoze that's not my job, go away," you won't be very popular. Sure you aren't a Windows guy, however users don't really understand that. You are a computer guy, why won't you come fix their computer? If, however, you know enough about Windows to do basic systems tasks, you can help the Windows guy, go get the CEO setup with Powerpoint and such, and come out looking like a hero because you were able to fix things not directly your responsiblity.

I know if I were in a technical management position, I'd much prefer those with some skill, and more importantly willingness to work with all our various platforms. I'd rather not have a Linux guy that will only do Linux because if time comes I need 110% out of the crew I have for a problem on a different platform, he's not going to be any help.

certifications are a waste of money

[abandonment]

All certifications are is a way for companies to bilk a lot of yearly money out of people looking for jobs...you go through all of the 10,000 dollars it takes for your win2k certs and then suddenly ms releases their winxp certs, which means you have to start from scratch, etc...

if you are working for a company worth working for, they will realize that certs are a never-ending 'upgrade path' that forces the company & potential employees to pay endless amounts of money for information that is non-hands on, not useful in the actual day to day working environment.

doesn't matter if it's an msce, redhat, solaris, oracle or (insert your favorite cert here) certification - if your employer wants you to have the skills in that particular application / platform / etc then they will be willing to pay for it as well.

if not and they insist that it's a requirement, then you probably want to get a different job with a company that actually respects on the job training and 'realworld' skills.

I am (as an employer looking to hire) less interested in certs than I am in quantifiable skills working with and/or shipping products for the platforms in particular.

Re:certifications are a waste of money

[bonehead]

One company I worked for, which was mainly a Novell joint at the time, would actually automatically trash any resume that came in with certifications on it.

Sure, we probably missed some good candidates here and there, but the CIO passed down the mandate when he came on board as a result of his prior company being staffed by "paper" CNEs who had never actually laid hands on a Netware server before walking in the door.

Now, I don't necessarily agree with that policy, but I bring it up for a couple of reasons. First, just to point out that such things DO happen. Second, and more importantly, because even with that restriction (or because of it???) we were staffed with some absolutely top notch people, none of whom held a single certification, but who are still the very first people I call if I need a pointer in their particular area of expertise.

Another little anecdote: Several years back a friend of mine took some classes and got his MCSE (Win2K days). Passed the tests with flying colors. A few weeks later I had to go install a network card for him because he had no clue how to do it. (Not a dumb guy by any means, but he was definitely better off staying in marketing.)

In my current role I take sort of a middle of the road approach. I won't automatically disqualify a resume because it lists certs, but I do ignore them. It's evidence of being able to get things done in the real world that I look for.

Re:certifications are a waste of money

[Anonymous Luddite]

>> I am (as an employer looking to hire) less interested in certs than I am in quantifiable skills

You, Sir are in the minority.

Most large companies have HR staff that think Excel is a programming language and that MCSE means something. (I work with many MCSEs - you need to force an admission out of the competent ones, but the useless ones all put it in their .sig file - but I digress.) Most businesses large enough to pay well for a skilled professional also have hiring processes that hinder selection of real talent.

If I sound bitter, I am. Not cuz I'm looking for work, but because I have to work with the results of a broken hiring process...

Re:Specializing yourself out of a job...

[King_TJ]

There's two sides to every coin. Even though I've been in I.T. for over 12 years myself, I can't ever seem to land a better-paying job as an actual sysadmin. Why? Not because I don't know the material. I've been asked to build departmental servers while working in "support specialist" roles for years, as well as maintaining Citrix Metaframe boxes, configuring and maintaining Exchange servers, setting up user accounts, and directory/file permissions for everyone in companies, and more.

But they always look at my resume and see "Jack of all trades." in big, bold "between the lines" print. They'd rather have the more steerotypical systems administrator type with the MCSE, maybe a Cisco cert. for good measure, and a job title of sysadmin for a company or two.

Honestly, if I had worked for a larger firm that forced me to be "pigeonholed" in one area (and paid for related training and certs. for that area) - I'd be making a lot more money than I do now. Instead, I've always opted to work for the start-up companies, the mom-and-pop operations that set up entire networks for other small businesses, and a mid-sized company that made me wear a lot of hats while refusing to change my official title from one that made me sound like I was just a glorified help-desk guy.

I really do understand the other argument too ... that you limit your usefulness when you specialize. But it's so tough to find good jobs in today's marketplace, I don't tihnk it's really THAT much easier for the people with a broad array of skills. (People like me who've worked with a lot of random technologies and even do Linux and Mac as well as PC/Windows are best working for themselves in consulting roles of some sort.) If you want a steady, corporate job with the benefits and good pay that can come with it - I think you may as well keep up a job search for the extra 3-6 months it might take to find a match for your specialty.

Opportunity Cost

[Synn]

The problem with spending time learning A, is that you miss out on learning B. So while you're cross skilling and learning Windows, you won't be studying perl, python, kernel hacking, C or one of any other of the thousands of things that would make you a better Unix admin.

Re:Deserves To Lose

[xiphos]

Yeah, that's a pretty nice delusion you've got going there.

Dale Carnegie & Open Standards Interface Model

[VoidEngineer]

So, I'm a systems admin taking care of a high-performance Windows/Linux/Solaris/VVMS/Cisco imaging network at a major hospital in New York City. Magnetic resonance imagers, ultrasound scanners, digital flouroscope rooms, fiber obtic backbone, terrabyte array storage archives, etc. etc. We interface with GE, Philips, Cerner, Dell, Microsoft, Cisco, etc. etc.

That being said, there are a couple of key cross-platform skill sets that are invaluable in these types of heterogenous environments. The first and foremost skill set is people skills, of course. Being able to manage vendor call centers, sales personel, field service engineers, and so forth. Also, you gotta be able to deal with people, especially end users who you support. Unless you're in the IT industry and are writing code or maintaining trunk lines for a telcom, you're probably supporting the IT needs of some other industry, and therefore have end users. Those people are the ones who are going to make or break your career. If your end users love you, word will spread and you won't have any problems with your career. If not, look for another job. So, people skills are the number one skillset that can be taken from one operating system to another. I'd also recomend Dale Carnegie's "How to Win Friends and Influence People" as a good introductory book on how to handle people. Even if you think you're good with people, you might be surprised at some of the nuggets of wisdom that are hidden in there. (And for those of you with the typical knee-jerk response, the book is about overcoming manipulation, false pretences, and shallowness. It advocates sincere interest in other people, which you can't get from reading a book one time. So, do yourself a favor, and ignore the title. It's a somewhat unfortunate title for a fantastic book.)

From a tech perspective, you want to look at internetworking concepts. Specifically, the Open Standards Interface (OSI) Internetworking Model. Learn it and love it. It's the single most useful tool I've come across in understanding, implementing, and maintaining enterprise wide network-enabled applications (e.g. teleradiology, radiographic archiving & retrieval, electronic medical records, etc). It's good for everything from hospital systems, to grocery stores, to small offices, to factories, to anything else I can think of. If you learn the OSI Internetworking model, you can go just about anywhere. And yes, I'm talking about the 7 layer OSI model: Physical, Data, Network, Transportation, Session, Presentation, Application. Also, I would note that the OSI model can be used for much more than just ethernet and configuring network cards. The OSI model can also be used on sneakernet and be used to model physical sneakernet devices, such as video monitors, printers, scanners, speakers, and any other device that is connected to a bus and has some type of physical interface that is used to communicate information (e.g. audio waves, printed paper, video images, motion sensors, etc)... A true grasp of the OSI model can allow you to be troubleshooting Cisco switches in the morning, nuclear MRI scanners in the afternoon, and HDTV/THX home entertainment systems in the evening.

Anyhow, those two items, Dale's Book and the OSI Model, however, can provide you the cross-platform people skills and technical skills to work in nearly any environment you want.

No freakin kidding!

[argoff]

I would stay "away" from windows "skills" at great effort, it will only devalue your skill set and force you to spend time with technology that will become obsolete along with your skills.

One time I worked for a large enterprise, and they had these windows servers running transactions for all their customers. And (supprise) the servers would lock up under high load nearly every other day, which was extremely expensive because it could cause lines to back up in over 1000 stores and the company would be loosing something to the tune of a million dollars per hour.

Needless to say, the company spent tons of money souping up the servers with the best hardware money could buy and even custom rewriting the tcp/ip stack to get the results they needed. They flew in experts from all over the world to find out what the problem was, and the experts eventually came back and said that it was a failure in the NT kernel.

The company then went to Microsoft and demanded a fix, and Microsoft in not so many words told them to go to hell. After that, they spent another few million dollars migrating their system over to Solaris (this was in 98, so they probably couldn't have gotten away with Linux) and I slowly but sorely started removing my Microsoft skills from my resume and beefing up big time on my Linux skills and haven't regretted it a day since.

Later on I got killed in the dot-com crash, and it was hard, but because of my Linux skills I eventually recovered and am now in demand more than I ever was. My friends who stayed with MS skills simply haven't fared too well at all and many were forced to get new carrers outside of IT.

XP Paladin?

[sharkey]

Lawful Evil?

Re:I know what you are talking about

[VoidEngineer]

I wonder if you have the right kind of persective on this stuff. To use an analogy which another poster used in this thread, it seems as though you're looking at the job with the eyes of a carpenter, rather than with the eyes of an architect. Take a look of that list of skills you listed for the 'web developer' position. Now, consider if you were to look at a similar job posting for a 'carpenter'. The skillset of a 'carpenter' might be "NAILS, PowerSaw, Router, HAMMER, LEVEL, TableSaw, JigSaw, MeasurTAPE, SANDER".

Now, if I posted such a job description, because I needed the floors and doorframes in my house redone, you can bet your bottom dollar that I wouldn't give the job to somebody who applied for the job with a resume listing "PAINTBUCKET, BRUSH, SprayGun, Plaster, PaintThinner, Stiring Stick".

And you know what? If I wanted to build a house, the skillset of things I'd want would be a half mile long, and include an architect who is familiar with carpentry, masonry, electricity, plumbing, and more. Then I'd want an engineer to be a project manager, who has all those skills, and who can supervise the other workers. And it's really not all that tough to find people out there with all that experience.

What you may be forgetting is that there are people out there who have photographic and videographic memories, who happen to be attracted to jobs involving digital photography, video editing, 3D design, and networking. There are lots of people out there who, for a school project, teach themselves how to build an entire website or film a movie short, and come away with that entire list of skills you just mentioned, plus tons more.

In my opinion, your perspective isn't wide enough and isn't giving due consideration to people who make home movies, run ezines or blogs just for the heck of it, or a zillion other hobbies which teach them those skills. Nor are you giving due consideration to any number of traits which are commonly found in geeks, ranging from obsessive compulsiveness, to perfectionism. Yes, there are people out there that have mad skills in all those areas that you listed. And those people often just run a weblog. Their real job might be to light stageshows or to teach highschool or whatever.

Anyhow, the point is, those skills listed for 'web developer' position are roughly on the same difficulty level as the skills needed to use a powersaw, or a torque wrench, or a welding torch, or a multimeter.

Being cross-skilled is essential

[Savage-Rabbit]

...whereas a lot of Windows admins I meet are "Next, OK, Apply, Cancel" kind of guys. Plus Windows is becoming more command line oriented (Thank God!).

I agree, I went from UNIX/LINUX only to woking with Windows servers as well and I must say I'm rather glad of it. Expanding into Windows has made me more employable and having started out in the UNIX world made me a better professional than I would have been if I had taken the Microsoft certification route and then moved into UNIX. Having worked mostly with Win 2003 rather than Win 2000 Server (thank god because the latter really sucks) I am constantly amazed by how the WinOnly admins worship the graphical tools. The first thing I did to my Win 2003 boxen was installing some of the Gnu tools and Gvim (hint: if you really want to have some fun introduce a freshly hatched MCSE to vim). Since then I have written several command line utilities in C#, which is not really all that hard if you know a little Java or C++, just to fill in some of the blanks in the Windows command line toolbox. I can now administrate those Win 2003 boxes completely from the command line which surprises many (though by no means all) Windows admins. The concept of solving time consumig tasks with custom scripts and programs seems to be alien to many Window guys whereas it is commonplace in the UNIX community.

What do you you want to do?

[demi]

I've been working in IT, running big websites and webhosting for 11 years. I have also intereviewed dozens of candidates for various junior-, mid- and senior-level positions.

I've been a system administrator, programmer/analyst, tools developer, database administrator and senior-level security engineer. Soon I'll switch jobs again to application development (with some web stuff and operations thrown in). The fact is, what I've done has been driven by what I wanted to do--when you like doing something, you acquire deep and useful skills in it; if you acquire skills merely because you think they make you more valuable--well, hell, why do you want that job anyway?

I've never had an interest in working with Windows--the last time I used Windows was in 3.11 days. If I got myself a bunch of NT skills and some certifications, where's that going to get me? A job where I administer Windows? Write some Visual Basic scripts? No thanks.

There's a few things I hate when interviewing people for jobs, and people who have "checkbox" skills in subjects that don't interest them are one of them. You can always tell--they have experience or certifications working with a certain technology but no understanding of it--they can't "geek out" about it and learn intricacies if necessary.

Networking (the social kind, I mean) is huge, especially among people that can grasp your skill. All but one of my jobs have come from people I know (often former bosses) approaching me. When you work with stuff that you really like, that you can really understand deeply and use to deliver excellent work, you will shine like a star; and that star-power is what will get you jobs.

If you want to learn about and use Windows, then by all means do; and while you're at it, pick up a couple of certifications why not. But if you don't, no power in the world is going to make you good at it, or enjoy it; so the only consequence is possibly finding work that you're not good at and don't enjoy. Blech.

Cross Skilling imporves both skills.

[jellomizer]

Lets say you are a Windows Administrator and then you learn the Unix way of doing things. Now that you learn the Unix way you end up being a better windows administrator because some of the things you learned in Unix can transfer to windows side. Like if you were trapped to the Windows GUI after learning unix you may feel a little more comfortable writing windows scripts and depending less on prepackaged programs. Also If you Unix administrator and you learn Windows administration you can improve you Unix stills by making more use of the newer GUI unix admin tools that are available where you were bone dry on the old commands you may find some of the newer graphical admin tools in Unix have considerable ability to improve certon areas.

I wish cross-platform was enough!

[Deagol]

Damn, I'd have it made!

I grew up with PCs, did 6 years in college which was heavy on UNIX, supporting WfW 3.11 labs, Sun Workstations, and dumb terminals connecting to UNIX mainframes (as a lab support guy). Did a 6-month internship supporting WfWG and NT 3.5 at a *huge* industrial site. Worked 3 years supporting Win95/NT4 workstations and NT Server, SCO Server, and AIX at a shop of 50, where I got certified an MCSE in NT4. Worked five years at a large University, supporting primarily Redhat and Solaris at the senior-admin level, though a fair bit of AIX and IRIX, too.

You'd think I'd be able to name my price, but it ain't so! In *addition* to all this crap, companinies want all of the above, plus, an experienced DBA and a developer who speaks Java, SQL, and C++. Oh, and they want someone who's an expert in networking hardware.

I don't mind being a jack of all trades type of admin, but isn't there a point where one can be *too* diluted with skills?

I'm a "systems guy" through and through -- and a pretty damned good one, if I do say so myself. I *can* bang together the occasional bash/perl/sed/awk script to automate *systems* administration, but I'm no code jockey (and I really don't want to be one). I know enough about TCP/IP and routing to help dedicated network staff trouble-shoot network problems by way of ping, traceroute, and packet dumps, but I'm noenterprise-level network guru (and I don't want to be one).

I feel this person's pain, as I've been in the job market for a while. It seems comapanies -- of a surprisingly wide range of sizes -- want people that can do it all. AND... they don't seem to want to pay what just the senior-level admin skills in one platform alone are worth, never mind the programming and hardware networking expertise.

I mean, how many contractors expect people who are experts in plumbing, electrical, *and* HVAC to be the same person for hire? It's getting silly out there.

Cross Platform skills are king

[KenFury]

I work in a 11 man IT shop and most people are in a niche. IT is mostly windows with a bit of HP-UX and AIX thrown in. I am one of two people who have cross platform skills. When our HP-UX admin got fired I took over the hardware and OS (not application) duties on that. Nothing much to learn other than HP-UX is not BSD. I got a 6k raise. When we needed an actual cisco guy instead of contractors and freely avalible configs they called on me. I recieved a 5k raise. I also picked up another 4k at my yearly review.

So now I am Jr. Windows Admin/Network Admin/HP-UX admin making good money and more importantly enjoying what I do. Most importantly for the company I can talk Windows, network and big iron. I get a view of the whole IS infrastructure and have valuable input. I am also very hard to replace as they would need two or three people to do what I do.

The enterprise ain't the norm...

[Leomania]

However, after coming from large enterprise environments, where the UNIX boys do the UNIX stuff and the NT guys do the Windows stuff [snip]

After watching friends in the IT industry deal with difficult employment situations in Silicon Vally, I have to say that cross-functionality is a must. One friend in particular has been forced to accept positions at relatively small companies, and the people that run these places just don't understand, well, much of anything about computer infrastructure. One choice quote: "If the CEO isn't having any problems, he thinks that no one else is either." The same guy that thinks a four-hour per week IT consultant can keep their systems, network infrastructure and Windows boxen all running happily. Decisions are made more through egotistical and micromanagerial mechanisms rather than entrusting the computing environment to the ones knowledgeable enough to make those decisions.

So while the enterprise may have more vertical job functions, the smaller shops have a variety of needs dictated more by the (lack of) knowledge of the management than the real needs of the computing infrastructure. You should probably increase your employability by getting your MCSE, but at the same time be wary of those smaller shops. Without wanting to be a pessimist, I'd assume the worst if you're going to be the sole IT guy/gal, or even part of a team of three or less.

Re:Cross skill HR requirments == economic drain

[1lus10n]

Two words:
Google.
Safari.

If you know how to maximize them and you can do IT in general you are all set.

What managers look for...

[jbburks]

It boils down to this: do you want to be the world's greatest Unix admin, or do you want to be extremely employable at a good salary in a place that's not a sweatshop?

I've been a Unix sysadmin/engineer. I've managed the Windows/email group in a large corporation. I manage the network architecture group in another large corporation.

I look for demonstrated technical ability (expertise). I also value cross plaform ability. I also look for someone with a open mind, who can work well with others.

Someone who comes in and says 'there's no way a corporation can run Windows systems and survive' doesn't last through the interview - even for the Unix group. The answer I'm looking for is: UNIX is more securable in an Internet-facing environment. If you have to run Windows (even IIS) for business reasons, you will have to patch more often. You may get rooted more often. You may have to look harder for Windows admins who can properly secure the environment, but we can do that, if it's imperative.

The Windows groups also need people who understand scripting, remote shell and managing fleets of servers through systems rather than putting a CD in each box and running setup. Gee.

Small shops also have a lot of crossover between Unix, Windows and network groups.

If you want to be the most employable person, learn some of all of these. You will be more valuable to more organizations.

Certifications are also useful. I get ten resumes on my desk, all from people who *say* they are great admins. I only have time to interview in person 3-4 of these. If one has taken the time to get Red Hat (or Sun) certified, that may mean he considers himself a professional, and wants to do more. It may also mean he's a paper RHSE, but the interview will pick that up. He/she is more likely to make the short list. And, if he/she has an MCSE as well, it makes it even more likely.