Slashdot Mirror


How Will IT Workers' Roles Change in the Next Five Years? (Video)

We asked Sarah Lahav this question. She's founder and CEO of service management and help desk software company SysAid, and a staunch supporter of Sysadmin Appreciation Day, so keeping an eye on the future of IT is essential for her company, her clients, and the friends she's made in her years as an IT person and -- later -- IT service company executive. As she says in the interview, "[Some] people say that the IT person will not exist because everything will go to the cloud. And the other half claims that people from the IT [department] will have new skills. It wouldn’t be the same IT person as we know him now, there will be focus more on firewalls than on fixing computers and stuff like that." Is she right? Is she wrong? Or will changes in IT people's roles be so different from company to company that there is no one right answer?

138 comments

  1. First Post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    More Data Science, 3d Printing, Augmented/Virtual Reality Hardware, and of course: mudkips. Duh. Got Battletoads?

    1. Re:First Post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Data Science? You mean the database work that we've been doing for 30 years, just with new marketing names?

      Every time I learn something "new", it's 90% of something I learned decades ago. Just with new flashy names for the same old things.

    2. Re:First Post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's BIG data now - two more columns on your excel spreadsheet!

    3. Re:First Post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It's been this way for almost 20 years. In grad school, my operating system's class professor used to say there hasn't been any true development since 1955 (virtual memory), everything else is either has been refinement and/or marketing. I've thought for a while now that once you know a sufficient amount about a sufficient amount of subjects, it all starts to look very similar.

    4. Re:First Post by lucm · · Score: 1

      Duh I've seen that kind of comment years ago

      --
      lucm, indeed.
  2. next 5 years for employees will be amazing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you just need not live anywhere in USA.

    1. Re:next 5 years for employees will be amazing by davester666 · · Score: 1

      New jobs for US IT workers as greeters for Walmart. "Yes, what you are looking for is in Aisle 32."

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
  3. That depends by NotDrWho · · Score: 2

    If (H1B == true) then great
        else bad

    --
    SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
    1. Re:That depends by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If (H1B == true) then great

          else bad

      Please to post code for H1B is just good.

    2. Re:That depends by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      !=

    3. Re:That depends by Killall+-9+Bash · · Score: 1

      #DEFINE IT_Manager "overpaid idiot"
      #DEFINE IT_Worker "underpaid genius"

      void main{
      if (occupation==IT_Manager){
      //WOOHOO!!!
      }
      else{
      //sucks to be you bro
      }
      return goFuckYourself
      }

      --
      "Prediction: within 10 years, Windows will be a Linux distribution." Me, 7-6-2016
    4. Re:That depends by lucm · · Score: 1

      Can't find that #DEFINE on my twitter

      --
      lucm, indeed.
  4. IT workers and the cloud by Dareth · · Score: 1

    There are many definitions of "the cloud". My personal favorites:
    cloud = server(s) managed by someone other than you in another location

    Other than some common generic services you still have to engineer solutions to fit your business needs. Anything you want to have you have to specify and pay for. The cloud does not magically/automatically provide backup/fail-over. You have to set these up and pay extra for them.

    IT can succeed or fail in the cloud just the same as it can in your own private data center. People who "know how it works", or IT people will still be needed regardless.

    --

    I only look human.
    My mother is a halfling and my dad is an ogre, so that makes me an Ogreling
    1. Re:IT workers and the cloud by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      there are multiple definitions of IT Worker... be it sysadmins or desktop support or middleware admins, email admins, network admins etc.

    2. Re:IT workers and the cloud by nine-times · · Score: 2

      I think the definition of "the cloud" that has emerged is "servers managed by someone other than you, managed to the extent that you are not aware of or concerned with the actual hardware."

      So the difference between having someone host your VM and having your VM hosted in "the cloud" is essentially just, "the way in which it's hosted makes it so I don't know, and it doesn't matter, which hardware it's running on." It's about the level of abstraction of management. If I have a couple of virtual hosts in my private datacenter where I'm manually spinning up VMs on particular hosts, that's just hosting VMs in my datacenter. If I have systems where I don't even specify where VMs are deployed or which resources they use, but just say, "Spin up a new VM" and the automated systems allocate appropriate resources on appropriate servers, then I have a "private cloud". It could be the same hardware in the same datacenter, but its "cloud"-iness is related to how abstract the hardware resource allocation has become for me.

      I'm not saying that this is my preferred definition. I'm saying that I believe this seems to be, in my experience, what people intend when using the term.

    3. Re:IT workers and the cloud by khasim · · Score: 2

      Other than some common generic services you still have to engineer solutions to fit your business needs.

      And even those generic services will still need someone to provide them. Whether that person is directly employed by your company or is an employee of the "cloud" company you're contracting with.

      People who "know how it works", or IT people will still be needed regardless.

      Most definitely. Particularly when there is a problem with your company's Internet link and everything "in the cloud" is unavailable.

      Or a problem with the "cloud" company's Internet link.

      In either case, you will be dealing with someone who will view you as just-another-client. It doesn't matter if you're not happy. Or if your business suffers. Because your payments will not make-or-break THEIR company.

    4. Re:IT workers and the cloud by war4peace · · Score: 1

      Here's a job that's IT-centered but doesn't give a fuck about cloud or non-cloud: Data analysis.
      Big Data (buzzword, yeah I hate that too) absolutely requires highly technical IT people who "get" (understand) data. Management and MBAs are just eyeballing some graphs but when deep dive analysis comes on, they're as lost as Hansel and Gretel in episode two of "let's take a walk in the park, kids".

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    5. Re:IT workers and the cloud by LessThanObvious · · Score: 1

      The Cloud is great. It allows regular people to describe a service without ever having to understand it and without ever being expected to define it. Managers love it, it's less expensive and you certainly couldn't be expected to be accountable for what happens in the Cloud. That's what in the Cloud means right? It's a service over which you need no knowledge or control.

      Then again you can be obtuse and call Cloud a Measured service with On-demand self-service, Broad network access, Resource pooling and Rapid elasticity, but who wants to think about all that.

    6. Re:IT workers and the cloud by funwithBSD · · Score: 2

      I am a Cloud Architect.
      People ask me what Cloud is/means.

      "In a nutshell, the Cloud means You Don't Own It."

      If you outsource to IBM (and other physical plant providers as well) in a "traditional" datacenter, you the client actually own the hardware legally (in most cases). If you want, you can come lift and shift it out of the datacenter. In a cloud environment, you don't own it. Potentially not even the data you have stored in the cloud, as some people have found out.

      During my long 25 years as a Sysadmin, the complexity of systems continues to grow, and I continue to make my living solving problems created by that complexity.

      The difficulty I see is where will the next generation of BOFH's start out? The generalist is getting squeeze out of IT and replaced by more and more compartmentalized specialists.

      --
      Never answer an anonymous letter. - Yogi Berra
  5. Opinion from a former help desk person turned PHB? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Dredging deep here, Dice. But I guess she's female, so it's perfectly in keeping with your new tradition of a Friday fedora-tip to the SJW menace.

  6. More support roles by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Most software development is moving to cloud-centric. Look to see less application development and more add-o/plug-in roles. The days of inhouse apps are dwindling as pressure is being put on companies to run leaner. There will always be support roles, hardware issues to address and servers or networks to maintain though diminished. "Remember the good ole nineteen eighties" ELO.

    1. Re:More support roles by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most software development is moving to cloud-centric. Look to see less application development and more add-o/plug-in roles. The days of inhouse apps are dwindling as pressure is being put on companies to run leaner.

      Bwa ha ha!

      Companies have their way of doing things, and their business processes; very few businesses are willing to sacrifice their way of doing things because of a piece of software. And software like M3 and SAP are so generic that they can't really support any business out of the box.

      What the cloud means is that more businesses are going to want integration with business partners and other systems. Than means more middle-tier and back-end solutions will need to be written.

    2. Re:More support roles by Killall+-9+Bash · · Score: 1

      I don't really care much what they call it or where the server sits, but I'm fairly fucking disturbed by the trend of cloud service vendors making their services end-user-centric... by which I mean the services are meant to be purchased and administered by the people who will be using it, not by vendors.

      --
      "Prediction: within 10 years, Windows will be a Linux distribution." Me, 7-6-2016
    3. Re:More support roles by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The days of inhouse apps are dwindling as pressure is being put on companies to run leaner.

      I won't contest that that statement is right, but the people making it right have obviously never been around to see flocks of contractors strip an organization bare.

      It will boomerang eventually. Most such trends do.

  7. Hindi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'll need to become fluent in Hindi, since more IT jobs will be outsourced to India.

    1. Re:Hindi by war4peace · · Score: 1

      You mean Kannad, Telugu, Urdu, Tamil, Marathi, Hindi.
      Hindi and English are the official languages but in cities like Bangalore, Hyderabad and Mumbai, Hindi actually doesn't come on top.

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
  8. Already seeing it by rikkards · · Score: 2

    The level of complexity in an IT worker's job has dramatically changed easily in the last 10 if not the last 5 years).

    1. Re:Already seeing it by FranTaylor · · Score: 1

      The level of complexity in an IT worker's job has dramatically changed easily in the last 10 if not the last 5 years).

      Huh? Things are getting much simpler. Today you can code to web standards instead of having browser dependent code. Today you can run 20 servers in one box. Today you can safely assume that your clients have decent bandwidth. Less complexity on your job means that today you are getting a lot more done.

    2. Re:Already seeing it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      >> Today you can code to web standards instead of having browser dependent code. Today you can safely assume that your clients have decent bandwidth.

      Are you from the future? Because that's not the truth in 2015...

    3. Re:Already seeing it by FranTaylor · · Score: 1

      >> Today you can code to web standards instead of having browser dependent code. Today you can safely assume that your clients have decent bandwidth.

      Are you from the future? Because that's not the truth in 2015...

      That's pretty funny. Do you surf amazon.com? Or newegg.com? Or target.com? Or any other retail web site? Lots and lots of images on each page. Many many megabytes. They assume you have good bandwidth. They sure aren't losing customers because they require good bandwidth.

    4. Re:Already seeing it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Today you can code to web standards instead of having browser dependent code.

      Yes, much more complex code though.

      Today you can run 20 servers in one box.

      You forgot to mention how complex it can be to set up a proper VM installation. I have done it, its not always cake.

      Today you can safely assume that your clients have decent bandwidth.

      Lol not in my world I can't. T1s still rule with my customers.

    5. Re:Already seeing it by FranTaylor · · Score: 1

      Lol not in my world I can't. T1s still rule with my customers.

      10 years ago many of your customers probably had dialup

    6. Re:Already seeing it by FranTaylor · · Score: 1

      Yes, much more complex code though

      how is it more complex to have one set of browser code instead of three or four?

    7. Re:Already seeing it by blue9steel · · Score: 1

      Things are getting much simpler.

      Not from where I'm sitting. Instead, the complexity goes up every year as they keep trying to do more with less. I'm fine with that as means I get paid more since they still need someone who understands how it all works.

    8. Re:Already seeing it by FranTaylor · · Score: 1

      Not from where I'm sitting. Instead, the complexity goes up every year as they keep trying to do more with less. I'm fine with that as means I get paid more since they still need someone who understands how it all works.

      well then it IS simpler because you are getting more work done with the same amount of effort.

    9. Re:Already seeing it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That makes it more efficient, not simpler. It only doesn't speak to the idea that you burn people out.

    10. Re:Already seeing it by FranTaylor · · Score: 1

      working in the fields burns you out

      playing football burns you out

      this feature is not unique to the IT world

      the smart ones figure out how to climb out of their pits

    11. Re:Already seeing it by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      Except it isn't one set of browser code. You still have to account for platform differences. If you aren't aware of this, I really doubt that you are in this part of the business.

      Plus it's not just the new shiny shiny.

      You have to deal with everyone's past mistakes. This is especially true in non-consumer settings. There's probably even a lot of consumers stuck on older versions due to various motivations to not upgrade.

      Then there are your mobile devices (with their own quirks and way of doing things) and mobile networks (with all of their limitations).

      Again. I don't think you are in any part of the business.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    12. Re:Already seeing it by netsavior · · Score: 1

      you can code to web standards unless you have customers. If you have customers, you have to code to whatever craptastic version of Internet Explorer or Firefox they have locked themselves into.

    13. Re:Already seeing it by FranTaylor · · Score: 1

      If you have customers, you have to code to whatever craptastic version of Internet Explorer or Firefox they have locked themselves into.

      Really? You "have" to? No, you don't. You put up a message and you tell your customers to upgrade their browser. Compromising your security to deal with customers who refuse to upgrade is not in anyone's best interest.

    14. Re:Already seeing it by FranTaylor · · Score: 1

      Except it isn't one set of browser code. You still have to account for platform differences. If you aren't aware of this, I really doubt that you are in this part of the business.

      I am aware of this, the difference now is that the differences between the platforms are bugs instead of outright feature differences. Different browsers have different bugs but at least today they are all reading from the same specifications. Your client code doesn't need to be recoded from scratch for each browser. Today you just have to be aware of the platform specific bugs and work around them

    15. Re:Already seeing it by blue9steel · · Score: 1

      It's more productive, that's not the same thing as simpler.

    16. Re:Already seeing it by FranTaylor · · Score: 1

      if the same amount of work gets you more results, then the things you are doing are simpler, because you are doing more of them with the same effort.

    17. Re:Already seeing it by netsavior · · Score: 1

      "Sorry boss, you have to forego this $300,000 a month in income because some guy on the internet said we don't have to support IE7" - unemployed web developer

    18. Re:Already seeing it by blue9steel · · Score: 2

      Logging in to 500 servers and making a small settings change using a text editor is simple, but not very productive. Setting up then using a configuration management system to script an update to do the same task is more complex but a lot less total work. Productive != Simple.

    19. Re:Already seeing it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a zero sum game. The smart ones figure out that they're either food or a cannibal. The ruthless ones are nothing more than the ones willing to do what is necessary to win.

    20. Re:Already seeing it by funwithBSD · · Score: 1

      The web is not all of IT.

      There are backend/backoffice functions that keep getting more and more complex. SAP comes to mind, and while Hadoop and it's relatives are cool, they are more complex to deploy than a single big Data Warehouse.

      Getting all the moving pieces to play nice is a full time job, at least for me. I have found that the more power you get the more the apps need it. It is a continual arms race of capacity and complexity against demand and utility.

      --
      Never answer an anonymous letter. - Yogi Berra
    21. Re:Already seeing it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Configuration management is a beautiful thing -- but let's make sure nobody thinks this is actually a NEW invention.

      Ansible, Puppet, Chef....
      Capistrano, Fabric, Rex...
      Zookeeper...

      I was managing every host I ran automatically via a fucking cron job and CVS back in 2000. When SSH was more prevalent this was even better because I could do it via push and pull configuration. I met a guy who managed a cluster of HPUX machines before the 90's using RCS and rsync.

      People insist their new whatever is better -- I've used lots of them. Some of them do some things better or need me to write less code. Some of them ship changes faster. Some of them centralize or decentralize control better. A few of them produce better logs. Lots of them have some sort of poorly conceived plugin infrastructure their advocates say is the best thing since sliced bread.

      At the end of the day, your example of making a small settings change with a text editor rings of is the core of the issue. To anybody that doesn't understand their available tools and infrastructure, "500 servers" looks like a problem. To anybody that can code and chose reasonable applications that are actually ... configurable, it's another boring routine chunk of work that has been solved a thosand times over by any competent sysadmin or developer.

      And to a sysadmin or developer with a legacy application that was chosen or engineered poorly -- it's a nightmare if there's no ini/conf file, database entry, service endpoint, environment variable or whatever to make the change.

      Write your tool, write your standard unit of change management, add a change request and check it into source control, schedule an update. The complexity usually isn't the tool -- it's the poor management of the tool, the lack of planning, and organizational standards that pile technical debt and complexity with bespoke requirements.

  9. Re:An Oxymoron? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    IT Worker

    Ha hahahahahahahahaha ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahah hahahahaha ah ahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!

  10. Not much by XxtraLarGe · · Score: 1

    Having about 20 years of experience in IT, it hasn't changed much. Sure, there's the World Wide Web, but before that we had FTP, Gopher, Telnet, and LANs. Cloud storage isn't really any different than network home drives. The tech will change (cheaper, faster, slightly easier for the end user), but at the end of the day, you're still installing software, answering end-user questions, adding servers to the network, maybe repairing hardware, etc.

    --
    Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
    1. Re:Not much by FranTaylor · · Score: 1

      Sure, there's the World Wide Web, but before that we had FTP, Gopher, Telnet, and LANs.

      None of those old things were frameworks for client/server application development. You could hire a team to write a networked app in C or C++ and it took months and months. With modern web tools you can get an application up and running in a few minutes.

      Cloud storage isn't really any different than network home drives. The tech will change (cheaper, faster, slightly easier for the end user), but at the end of the day, you're still installing software, answering end-user questions, adding servers to the network, maybe repairing hardware, etc.

      Um, if you are doing things in the cloud, you're not adding servers to your network and you're not repairing hardware.

    2. Re: Not much by cyber-vandal · · Score: 1

      Are there cloud tools that write your business logic for you? That's the time consuming part, not the scaffolding. A few minutes might give you a bare bones website but it won't build your complex website and database or automatically connect to all the other systems it might need.

    3. Re:Not much by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Very few shops of any size have all of their resources in the cloud. You will still want onsite DNS/DHCP/AD/SSL VPN/RDS/whole host of other services the maintain control over the corporate environment.

    4. Re: Not much by FranTaylor · · Score: 1

      Are there cloud tools that write your business logic for you? That's the time consuming part, not the scaffolding.

      yes, there are. if you have a warehouse full of parts or a doctor's office or an online store, there are plenty of tools available that you can use.

      A few minutes might give you a bare bones website

      we are talking about full integrated application suites here, not textbook examples. If you look in your industry you will probably find 10 providers that have canned applications that they are selling to your competitors. Do you have a grocery warehouse? A hospital? Do you rent cars? What about an apartment complex? I could go on and on... If you need software for one of these applications, you have no business rolling your own. You go out and get a full-on software suite that takes care of it all. You can either buy it outright or you can pay for it as a service, your choice.

    5. Re: Not much by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just for god sakes make sure it isn't made by everest.

    6. Re:Not much by FranTaylor · · Score: 1

      Very few shops of any size have all of their resources in the cloud.

      straw man alert, nobody says that

      you put your forward facing web services in the cloud and keep the data secure in your own data center

    7. Re: Not much by RabidReindeer · · Score: 1

      we are talking about full integrated application suites here, not textbook examples. If you look in your industry you will probably find 10 providers that have canned applications that they are selling to your competitors. Do you have a grocery warehouse? A hospital? Do you rent cars? What about an apartment complex? I could go on and on... If you need software for one of these applications, you have no business rolling your own. You go out and get a full-on software suite that takes care of it all. You can either buy it outright or you can pay for it as a service, your choice.

      And the first thing the users will tell you is "That's great! But can you make it do this one simple thing?"

    8. Re: Not much by FranTaylor · · Score: 1

      And the first thing the users will tell you is "That's great! But can you make it do this one simple thing?"

      Do you even work in the IT field? This is what we call a "revenue opportunity". If they really want it, they will pay you for it.

    9. Re: Not much by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh great, another asshole who's afraid to let programmers do any programming because some useless generic widget might exist somewhere on sourceforge.

    10. Re: Not much by cyber-vandal · · Score: 1

      Yeah we have plenty of them. We also have unique requirements too and old systems that won't go away. I've worked in IT for 20 years and managers have always been buying packages that then need to be heavily customised because they believed the salesman. Every business is different and generic systems aren't always the answer.

    11. Re: Not much by RabidReindeer · · Score: 1

      And the first thing the users will tell you is "That's great! But can you make it do this one simple thing?"

      Do you even work in the IT field? This is what we call a "revenue opportunity". If they really want it, they will pay you for it.

      I can tell that you don't, if you think that people want to pay for anything in IT. After all, there's millions of people in Southeast Asia who'd be glad to do the job. For wages that would starve anyone in the First World.

      Oh yes, and it has to be delivered in 3 days. Because All Yo Have To Do Is...

  11. The IT person won't exist? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's crazy talk. There are a lot of problems you can't talk someone through on the phone. Especially when that user has no idea that computers use electricity. Sometimes you need to physically be there to hold hands and whisper reassuring nothings into your users' ears.

    For example, one lady's monitor wasn't powering on. Old monitor; whatever - things break, it happens. While I'm replacing it, she's asking me what the problem with it is. I explain the situation to her. She comes up with a solution. "Why don't we just refill the WiFi for it?" Pause. (Oh wait, you're serious, let me laugh harder.) Unfortunately, I didn't have any 55 gallon drums of WiFi sitting around. There are plenty of people who need (a lot) more than remote tech support. I'm going to recommend the next guy we hire be a clinical psychologist.

    1. Re:The IT person won't exist? by xenotransplant · · Score: 1

      Can't you just refuckulate the transglobiflier?

    2. Re:The IT person won't exist? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No ma'am. You see the valve on the internet pump is work out...

  12. My own experience has been... by roc97007 · · Score: 2

    ...that the company will buy IT as a service from the most cost-effective supplier, most current IT personnel will be laid off (a few will be repurposed), and then users will discover shortly after cutover that calling the (now overseas) helpdesk has suddenly become an exercise in frustration, because of the language barrier and because the helpdesk person often knows less about computers and about the environment than the customer, because the business model dictates that you can pull people off the street, hand them a stack of procedures, and they become IT personnel. (This works as well as you imagine.)

    Management and team leaders will beg the remaining IT management not to make their users call the helpdesk, in vain.

    Due to lack of effective IT services and the necessity to actually get work done, little pools of IT start to pop up around the company. It starts as a file share on someone's PC, and then an off-the-books PC becoming a dedicated resource (there's a rogue EXSi server not three feet from me) and developers start to remember old admin and dba skills. After awhile, the company IT infrastructure is still used for no-brainer stuff like mail and large storage appliances and relatively static work like billing is still done on big, enterprise-class machines, but more and more anything that needs to be flexible, or resources that need to respond rapidly to user needs, are done surreptitiously, under the table, with the funds being disguised as other thing.

    Then, when development itself is outsourced, it's left to the "development managers" and "offshore interface personnel" to maintain the still-used local resources, plus, usually, additional personnel to try to find some use for the code produced by those offshore resources, who have no real context of what the code is being used for.

    (Parenthetically, the problem is not confined to IT. A company of which I have experience who has outsourced their accounting, still doesn't realize that after three years the offshore accountants still don't know the difference between California and Canada, and think the transaction must be correct if they don't get an error when they hit "return". The remaining 10% of retained accountants are kept busy correcting mistakes and doing the work over again.)

    Anyway, the point being, some IT people don't choose to fade away, they go underground. They find that users can be very thankful of a helpful person who can communicate well and has knowledge of the company and what the user is trying to accomplish. Who isn't following a script but genuinely trying to help, with the expertise to do so. I have a title that sounds like a different job, but I'm still doing admin and customer support. When I'm not at my regular job, I have a side business providing home support for people who are tired of "I am being here for helping you turn it off and back on again".

    So yeah, I guess IT has changed.

    --
    Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
    1. Re:My own experience has been... by RabidReindeer · · Score: 1

      ...that the company will buy IT as a service from the most cost-effectiveXXXXXXXXX cheapest supplier,

      FTFY.

      And you forgot about the part where your company shows up on the evening news because all of your most critical data has been leaked to former Soviet-block countries. After a mysterious 6-hour service outage.

      But it's "cost effective", right?

      For the guys who collected the bonuses and bailed, anyway.

    2. Re:My own experience has been... by roc97007 · · Score: 2

      Yes. I wrote "cheapest" first, and then changed it to the more ...shall we say "businessly correct", "cost-effective".

      In our case, it's more likely that the data will be leaked to our competitors. Which raises a different question -- a *lot* of our company confidential data is now going through or being stored on "cloud" services. In some cases, those services are supplying both us and our largest competitors. At what point does it become, um, cost-effective to discretely sell a company's data to a competitor? I mean, it's all there, on the same server pool.

      --
      Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
  13. Printer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Someone is still going to have to fix the printer.

    1. Re:Printer by FranTaylor · · Score: 1

      what's a printer?

    2. Re:Printer by roc97007 · · Score: 1

      Good point. Locals are still going to be necessary.

      --
      Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
    3. Re:Printer by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      My boss threw me under the bus by assigning me to a special project to manually create 1,000 printer queues because the server team blotched the printer migration from WS2003 to WS2012. What a PITA!

    4. Re:Printer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      what's a printer?

      Its what you use to construct firearms, and occasionally table top miniatures.

    5. Re:Printer by FranTaylor · · Score: 1

      Its what you use to construct firearms, and occasionally table top miniatures.

      even more useless than I thought

    6. Re:Printer by roc97007 · · Score: 1

      Yes. Outsourced IT services is a double edged sword. On the one hand, a botched assignment can provide business possibilities for people who can do a better job. (Or, at very least, communicate better.) On the other hand, the botched work can instead be handed off to already snowed-under local personnel.

      --
      Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
    7. Re:Printer by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      Actually, the blotched work was local. The person on the server team responsible for the printer migration waited until the deadline to run the migration script. After the script blew up and he sent an email out, he went on vacation. Waiting until he gets back in two weeks wasn't an option.

    8. Re:Printer by roc97007 · · Score: 1

      Hm. That sounds like grounds to find a new server team.

      --
      Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
    9. Re:Printer by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      Probably from an Outsourced IT outfit from India.

    10. Re:Printer by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 1

      The botched work is also often blamed on the previous engineer, who may have been presented by policy or resource management or "there's not a business case for it" from doing a more effective, more thorough job.

  14. Re:Opinion from a former help desk person turned P by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What kind of crack are you smoking?

  15. I would like to know by koan · · Score: 1

    How many people have used the "cloud" and then moved away from it.

    --
    "If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
    1. Re:I would like to know by FranTaylor · · Score: 1

      How many people have used the "cloud" and then moved away from it.

      how do you "move away" from the "cloud"? do you get a different address in cyberspace? do you have to give up on online shopping?

    2. Re:I would like to know by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      You bring outsourced services back in house and run your own servers on your own network rather than paying someone else in Timbuktu to do it for you.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    3. Re:I would like to know by FranTaylor · · Score: 1

      You bring outsourced services back in house and run your own servers on your own network rather than paying someone else in Timbuktu to do it for you.

      your joke detector is badly broken

    4. Re:I would like to know by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      how do you "move away" from the "cloud"?

      I stopped using DropBox (cloud) and started using a file server (local). More storage space and less risk of being compromised by hackers.

    5. Re:I would like to know by FranTaylor · · Score: 1

      I stopped using DropBox (cloud) and started using a file server (local). More storage space and less risk of being compromised by hackers.

      yeah those encrypted backup files magically get more secure when you copy them onto your own computer.

    6. Re:I would like to know by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      Much more accessible if your Internet connection goes down for an extended period of time when you really need to get work done.

    7. Re:I would like to know by cornjones · · Score: 1

      Much more accessible if your Internet connection goes down for an extended period of time when you really need to get work done.

      Depends on which side of the link you are on...

    8. Re:I would like to know by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      The down side. No one complains about the up side unless it's too slow. ;)

  16. A video for this?, really? by hyperar · · Score: 1

    What would change?, hopefully there wouldn't be a video for asking stupid questions.

  17. A swing back to the glass house, perhaps? by mlts · · Score: 1

    I wonder if we will see a swing from cloud computing back to a central managed system, similar to the mainframe concept (first go around), XStations (second go around), JavaSations (third go around), except using VDI and a remote desktop protocol, where the computer on the desk mainly is there to run remote apps, and instead of the apps being on the cloud, they would be moved back to the central datacenter for security reasons.

    I have a feeling we will be seeing some major breaches, perhaps a cloud provider getting nailed, divulging a lot of personal and private info. Because of this, I wouldn't be surprised to see a return to having a core data center and all assets going behind the glass walls, especially if insurance companies start dropping coverage if a company doesn't toe the line on regulations, or regulators start doing more than slap-on-the-wrist fines.

    Will a move back to keeping the data in one place, and using the next generation of terminals be a mainstay in IT? Not 100%, but a possibility.

    1. Re:A swing back to the glass house, perhaps? by FranTaylor · · Score: 1

      a return to having a core data center

      Really, you assume that individual companies can roll their own security better? You're dreaming. Look at target, home depot, hannafords, etc.

    2. Re:A swing back to the glass house, perhaps? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In all cases you describe they didn't roll their own security. They outsourced development and surprise surprise. Amazon did role their own. When were they last breached? On the Amazon cloud side of the fence people lose access to their accounts all the time. There are cases of hijackings of accounts and much lost data but that is not a fault of security in the system. It is the fault of the person relying on Amazon or Azure, or VMware to inherently make their environment secure when the only thing they actually do is make physical access secure. A bad design will lead to breaches whether the server is in a cloud or private data center.

      You would not believe the number of clients I encounter that port forward SQL from their VMs hosted in various cloud platforms. They take no measures to require certificates to authenticate. The brain drain in the local IT department is only going to make these breaches worse as unskilled people can get the services up and running without going through safeguards that typical IT people put all services through.

    3. Re:A swing back to the glass house, perhaps? by FranTaylor · · Score: 1

      In all cases you describe they didn't roll their own security. They outsourced development and surprise surprise.

      guess what? you can't outsource responsibility. they are still responsible whether they outsourced the work or not.

      you are right, amazon has not been hacked, more companies should take a lesson from them. they don't outsource responsibility, they own it.

    4. Re:A swing back to the glass house, perhaps? by mlts · · Score: 1

      It can be done. For every firm that hits the news, there are plenty that thwart attacks, but attacks repelled don't make the news.

      Take one large, recent breach as an example. If they had any type of lockout or alerting protection on their Active Directory service accounts, the brute force on their AD accounts would have been stopped in its tracks. In fact, the AD default is a 20 minute lockout every few bad guesses.

      Target and others would have the attacks stopped cold by an IDS/IPS. No, these are not cheap, but neither are losses due to stolen credit cards, and an IDS/IPS is part of the PCI-DSS3 spec, so not having one can get a business's merchant account yanked. This is the cost of doing business.

      Security isn't rocket science. Physical security is well tested and does a decent job from all but armed robbers, and it just takes the same mindset of setting the alarm to go off when the last authorized employee leaves the store at night, having this apply to network protection.

      There are also advances in the server room which can make it attractive to focus on moving data in-house. Denser blade/enclosure chassis come to mind. I won't be surprised to see variants on HP's Moonshot with 45 blades in a 5U chassis, future models perhaps sporting liquid cooling, with a dedicated radiator/fan/heat exchanger. Even though Moore's Law has slowed, it still is going fairly strong, and the computers that we will be stuffing in racks in five years will have at least 4-8 times the transistors as the ones we have now.

      VDI and remote access isn't standing still either. By allowing for -access- to the data via an application, but blocking access to the machines, this creates another security barrier. Again, not a 100% thing, but it is significant enough to reduce attacks, since sensitive data would be fenced in.

      Cloud computing isn't going to disappear. It has its place. However, a business pays for servers, either by buying the physical machines and stuffing them in the data center, or renting usage via a cloud provider. Another downside is that cloud computing (or more specifically cloud storage) requires high bandwidth WAN connections, which can get expensive. A data center can rely mainly on LAN bandwidth which can be a lot cheaper. Smaller businesses can be better off with cloud solutions, but larger businesses may benefit by keeping everything in-house.

      [1]: Going on the security tangent, I will toss one thing out that just might help security in general which might be added on in the next few years: Add a time value. A restaurant doesn't need the same physical protection at 12:00 noon as they do at 12:00 AM when nobody is in the store. Same with stores and businesses and their network connections. If a store is closed for the night, their subnets should be isolated from the Internet for everything but security patches, alarms/traps, and other essential communication.

      Take a law firm. Unless there is an exception, their individual partner offices, floor, and entire building is locked at night. This should be the same with networks. If nobody is needing access, and exceptions are in place for remote use, then why should there be any Internet access (in/out) when nobody is there? Assuming the blackhats are attacking evenly 24/7, by cutting network access to say, 0700 to 1900, it means that half the attacks mounted against the network would fail.

    5. Re:A swing back to the glass house, perhaps? by FranTaylor · · Score: 1

      their subnets should be isolated from the Internet for everything but security patches, alarms/traps, and other essential communication.

      in other words, leave lots of possible security holes

      Take a law firm. Unless there is an exception, their individual partner offices, floor, and entire building is locked at night.

      by cutting network access to say, 0700 to 1900

      Really? What a convenient reality you have. Most lawyers work 50 to 80 hours a week.

      it means that half the attacks mounted against the network would fail.

      this is a pretty pathetic way to avoid a network attack, assuming that it won't happen during business hours. it's like saying you don't have to worry about shoplifters because we lock the doors at night.

    6. Re:A swing back to the glass house, perhaps? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Random AC here: The above poster seems to have forgotten that not every security measure is a hundred percent fix. If this were the case, then why have security in the first place? Locks can be picked, locks can be ignored for a smash and grab, guards can be shot, etc.

      I worked for a startup that actually went one further than that. Part of arming the burglar alarm system was a mechanism that actually went in and changed the ACLs on the core/edge routers. The machines on the subnets still got security patches via mirrors or WSUS, but no communication was allowed in/out unless it was someone doing remote work via a VPN.

      This also made sense when someone dropped in a rogue wireless access point after hours, and it wasn't able to traverse far, due to the core fabric being down for the night.

  18. Cloud or no cloud, you still need smart people by ErichTheRed · · Score: 1

    I've been doing systems work for quite a while, and The Cloud isn't making things easier for IT workers -- it's making them more complex as there are now more moving parts you don't control to consider. Our company is still mainly an on-premises shop because we deploy stuff in areas where The Cloud can't be accessed at a reasonable speed for a reasonable price. But, I would say that virtualization in general has made things a lot more...fluid...than before. What's needed now is more people who know integration and the end-to-end nature of a system. I'm not talking about master black belt CCIE MCSE RHCE whatever savant experts...just people who have the ability to break a problem up into parts, troubleshoot what they can, and know who can help with what they can't.

    In previous days, you had the Storage Guys (or Girls) that would do the magical incantations to convince a SAN to provision a LUN to your machine, the Server Guys who would manage the operating system, the Application Guys who would manage the program running on the server, the Network Guys who did all the connectivity magic, and the Data Center Guys who would install and fix physical equipment. Each one of those was a specialty, and still is to some extent. But, as more and more small VMs can be squeezed onto fewer and fewer boxes, there's less of a need for an infrastructure guy. As storage gets more virtual and easier to self-provision, the storage guys become more of a commodity. And if your company goes AWS, Azure or similar, all those Guys get replaced with a web interface and it becomes someone else's problem. I'm still totally amazed how many machines fit on a single HP DL380p physical server compared to what was possible even 5 years ago. And the public cloud services are even more interesting -- multi-football field size isolated rural data centers with thousands of machines and 4 employees to swap parts/install more nodes.

    I think the future in IT is going to be less on the front lines and more cross-specialty, regardless of whether your data is onsite or offsite. In house coders are probably going to have problems because every single company is being sold the cloudy Salesforce or other ERP system as the cure for all its ills, so dev jobs are going to shift more towards software companies. Infrastructure guys will still be needed, but they'll be working at a higher level doing design/architecture rather than physical server management. There will still be analyst and project manager jobs, but I think those will be even less technical than they are now. Analysts will solely be an interface between "the business" and "the cloud guys". PMs will be secretaries who beg people to get things done. Add in the constant threat of offshoring, and salaries are definitely going to drop. I think they're probably going to go bimodal -- even lower pay for basic tasks, but similar or maybe even more pay for engineers/designers/architects who can successfully make the transition.

    No one is capable of stopping The Cloud. The vendors will continue to sell companies on how wonderful it is, and the companies will find out after a while that it costs too much to get their data back and rebuild their own capacity on-site. I'm just hoping that good people will be allowed to work remotely so there won't be some massive migration that IT guys need to do to survive.

    1. Re:Cloud or no cloud, you still need smart people by FranTaylor · · Score: 1

      the companies will find out after a while that it costs too much to get their data back and rebuild their own capacity on-site.

      huh? all they have to do is make their own internal cloud and migrate onto it.

    2. Re:Cloud or no cloud, you still need smart people by ErichTheRed · · Score: 1

      Sure, but this would be after getting rid of 90% of their IT department, selling the data center, and realizing they have to pay Amazon or Microsoft a not-insignificant sum to move petabytes of data/VMs back out. Data transfer to the cloud is free, transfers out cost a lot of money.

      I have been through a couple of offshoring exercises. What usually happens is the company is sold a dream, the reality fails to materialize, and the company needs to just wait out the contract because they no longer have the expertise to run everything in house. They'll never admit that things failed - they'll just quietly rebuild things while the contract is running and try to mitigate damage. This is why offshore providers are still able to sell crappy service, no one who's been burned wants to talk about it. CIOs and other execs just see the lower number on the spreadsheet, say to themselves "Gsrtner thinks they're wonderful, so they must be!" and sign the contract.

    3. Re:Cloud or no cloud, you still need smart people by FranTaylor · · Score: 1

      Data transfer to the cloud is free, transfers out cost a lot of money.

      are you saying there is some sort of premium charge if I run a SQL SELECT query from my own IP address?

  19. LOL! by Type44Q · · Score: 1

    We asked Sarah Lahav this question. She's founder and CEO of service management and help desk software company SysAid

    If you're not asking Gartner Group, I'm not interested - the answers simply won't have as much comedic value. ;)

  20. Simple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As Alec Hardison always said, "Age of the geek, baby!"

  21. Completely off topic. . . by DancesWithRobots · · Score: 1

    I absolutely HATE the way you can't adjust the volume on the opening advertisement. It was enough to make me click away before the show started. Now I remember why I never watch these things.

    1. Re:Completely off topic. . . by FranTaylor · · Score: 1

      what's an advertisement?

    2. Re:Completely off topic. . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      what's an advertisement?

      We don't call them advertisements around here, we like to call them stories; or occasionally slasvertisements.

    3. Re:Completely off topic. . . by FranTaylor · · Score: 1

      We don't call them advertisements around here, we like to call them stories; or occasionally slasvertisements.

      what's this "we" business?

  22. Go from Train your H1B replacement to the welfare by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Go from Train your H1B replacement to the welfare line and with the GOP get's back in power dashes of jail / prison to see a doctor till your 65 (we hope)

  23. I didn't even watch the video because of this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "It wouldn’t be the same IT person as we know him now, there will be focus more on firewalls than on fixing computers and stuff like that."

    Really???

    I don't know what planet she is from but the hackers aren't going to try an hack a firewall, they are going to send an email that makes you feel warm and fuzzy to open up that attachment.

    Endpoint security is #1 priority. Not a dumb firewall.

    People like this are the reason companies like Life Lock exist.

  24. In the future... by Overzeetop · · Score: 1

    Once we've really gotten to the future, there will be speech to text - or at least editors that know how to type up an interview - so that we don't have to site through video interviews.

    --
    Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
  25. To quote an infamous poster on the old Dice forum: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Your best bet is to abandon IT. Best of luck.

  26. Women in IT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Are good for workplace bj's in the server room

  27. Since hypothetical situations are news stories... by xenotransplant · · Score: 1

    What would it be like if IT geeks went on strike?
    Business and consumer technologies are usually hidden under SEP field generators. And without us geeks to unplug the AC adapter from your router, or to read the instructions on your screen and click the corresponding icon for you, the vast majority of idiot morons on computers would be fucked. Unless the general public decides that they need to actually understand the tools they use on a daily basis, and educate themselves accordingly, IT work will ALWAYS exist in some form.

  28. Re:Since hypothetical situations are news stories. by FranTaylor · · Score: 1

    What would it be like if (choose occupation here) went on strike?

    Don't feel so special, the world falls apart when the garbage men go on strike.

  29. Re:I didn't even watch the video because of this.. by FranTaylor · · Score: 1

    the hackers aren't going to try an hack a firewall, they are going to send an email that makes you feel warm and fuzzy to open up that attachment.

    if they have any kind of security, they won't be able to download the attachment unless you've hacked their router first

  30. Asking a consultant group is a bad idea. by sethstorm · · Score: 1

    They just want to see things as less permanent, which means more easily managed people. In turn, that means people are worse off overall for lack of access to opportunities that go a more conventional route.

    --
    Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
  31. Outsourcing multiplies the problem. by sethstorm · · Score: 1

    ...which will be worse than the local team.

    --
    Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
  32. Re:Since hypothetical situations are news stories. by Zenjamin · · Score: 1

    Cool. Global garbage service disruption depending on the IT union.

  33. Slashdot Video by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What's this video shit?

  34. Everything will go to the cloud .. by nickweller · · Score: 1

    Greetings Sarah Lahav,

    Seriously though, whenever addressing a techie crowd, never use the ' cloud ' word. What people unskilled in the art don't realize is that a virtual machine in 'the cloud' is virtually (sic) the same as a rack mounted PC. You still need someone to install and configure your business systems and no one is going to do that for free, certainly not your cloud provider. As for the effectiveness or ineffectiveness of the firewall, someone else more advanced in the arts once put it better. The Six Dumbest Ideas in Computer Security. For instance RPC over HTTP, specifically designed to bypass the firewall. ref

  35. oh boy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    75/75 fios here and yet I'm getting between 800kb - 1.6Mb DOWN/1.8Mb - 2.8Mb UP per second morning, afternoon, evening, passed midnight. I doubt that cloud will take over the IT world and home. U.S internet just sucks fucking shit no matter what ISP you are using.

  36. SJW Conspiracy by lucm · · Score: 1

    I don't think he smokes crack, I think he's a SJW injecting the SJW acronym as often as possible in SJW off-topic comments so SJW becomes a cliche.

    --
    lucm, indeed.
  37. How will executives roles change by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In reality, all jobs are being replaced as technology advances. The few careers I can imagine surviving the next 20 years without significant unemployment are things like lawyers, and surgeons. What will the people who are managers do when Amazon replaces most management with streamlined tech processes, and pushes most competitors out of the market, eliminating even more management jobs?

    We obviously need to think about these things soon. IT will be one of the last things replaced, since there's always another set of jobs to try to replace with automated processes and multiple companies will spring up to race to do that. Once say 95% of teachers have been replaced, 95% of managers, 95% of general physicians, etc, what happens then? Sure IT workers will probably be fighting for scraps, but what have the other people who we've automated out of jobs 5-10 years ago been up to?

  38. IT Workers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    IT Workers meaning as a synonymous for General Help Desk, will continue existing while there are new complex software that has not enough education resources to handle it in an autonomous way (the help wizard), a feature which belongs to software quality. But will keep moving on as anything else.

  39. I hope by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    maybe in 5 years people will stop bugging me asking me to predict the future

  40. Self-inflicted by anyaristow · · Score: 1

    Most of it is self-inflicted. In fact, most of it is eagerly, self-congratulatorily self-inflicted.

  41. "The Cloud" within five years?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The idea of everything moving to outside servers is too hilarious. Ok, maybe it could happen, but in 2015 that is orders of magnitude TOO FUCKING SLOW. Even if you solve all the other problems of your data being on someone else's servers, I still haven't seen the magic announcement of SATA-speed fiber being rolled out every-fucking-where.

  42. Same shit different smell.. by elmer+at+web-axis · · Score: 1

    It doesn't matter if a webserver is hosted in a private data centre or 'the cloud' a company still requires someone to configure and tweak it. Most IT work isn't fixing faulty servers as it is tweaking them to complete business workloads. Cloud isn't going to change any of that. Outsourcing on the otherhand means goodbye to entry level positions. But can't touch high complex positions

  43. Re:Since hypothetical situations are news stories. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't feel so special, the world falls apart when the garbage men go on strike.

    Way to miss the point. I've worked places where IT is treated worse than the garbage men.

  44. Outsourcing by mrflash818 · · Score: 1

    The company where I work has gone the Outsourcing route for their data centers.

    When I started at the Company, ten years ago, Data Center employees were FTEs (Full Time Employees) that worked for the Company.

    Then there was a change of CTO, and during that CTOs reign the Company FTE Data Center staff were aggressively and mostly eliminated, then replaced with Outsource IBM service staff. Additionally many IT EDI staff became Outsourced.

    Ten years ago, I worked with none (maybe one?) Outsourced IT staffer. Many of the IT staff I now work with are Outsourced staff. There remains a core of Company staff in IT, that act as team leads to the Outsourced staff (for now?).

    A specific example. A Lead in EDI that I work with, now works with a staff of six Outsourced staff (international names, strong accents).

    Of course, that CTO then got promoted to SVP. But is service better than ten years ago? Nope. Are there communication challenges for work orders and non-cookie cutter problem solving when collaborating with Outsourced personnel? Yep. Do all the Outsourced staff have full medical/dental/retirement benefits? (we're not allowed to ask) Did the Company save millions of dollars? I will assume so.

    --
    Uh, Linux geek since 1999.
  45. So, The Cloud == Outsourced, right? by mrflash818 · · Score: 1

    So then, having a company say their stuff "is in The Cloud", really means they Outsourced it, right?

    --
    Uh, Linux geek since 1999.
    1. Re:So, The Cloud == Outsourced, right? by nine-times · · Score: 1

      Not necessarily, not if it's a "private cloud" that you've set up. But if it's a public cloud or a hosted private cloud, then yes, in much the same way that any hosted server is "outsourced".

  46. the smart ones figure out how to climb out by mrflash818 · · Score: 2

    I keep looking for greener grass. It's hard find US$100+k/year jobs that are not in the pit.

    For those who've climbed out, what was the greener grass that you found and now live in?

    --
    Uh, Linux geek since 1999.
  47. Unionization by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hopefully, IT workers will realize they need to unionize before they find themselves on the welfare line.

  48. MickyMouse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    #MickyMouse
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oPnduFgC7i0

  49. Cloud - LOL!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Most people who design 'cloud' services have never actually sat down with an end user. Just because everyone seems to own a smartphone these days, the 'cloud' service provider thinks end users are now technical. The cloud dream is that you can replace internal IT with 'cloud' services and apps on smartphones and save money.

    The reality is that users are as stupid as they ever have been, which is why most IT Departments are as big as they are. That not putting paper in a printer means it won't print, however IT needs to fix the 'printing problem'.

    99% of problems on our helpdesk are between the keyboard and the chair. Our internal infrastructure (sorry internal cloud) is as reliable as any public cloud, and when the FD asks what an upgrade will cost, he gets an honest answer.

    The 'cloud' is the latest attempt by IT Services Providers to provide fixed cost IT Services. The Holy Grail of IT since all this started way back when. One day the finance bod wakes up and understands that the small print in the contract they signed, doesn't quite live up to things. What they thought was a standard service is for 'Cloud Platinum' customers and you sir are 'Cloud Silver.'

    The answer to most businesses IT problems is not the cloud. The answer is to invite IT to the top table and trust and value their opinions at board level.

  50. In 5 years.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You will be required to have you own tablet. You will be responsible for maintaining it. There will be no IT infrastructure or employees. The company's "Paperwork" will all be browser based and stored in the cloud. The end.