One of the huge problems scientific career paths have is the fact that "corporate" work is much more profitable. Sure, there's tenured faculty positions and high-paid research jobs at drug companies and such, but it's hard to convince someone to go to grad school for 4+ years, do postdoc work and eventually get hired for permanent work only to find that their peers are making much more than they are with less work.
I pursued a science degree during my college education, and now I do IT work that's totally unrelated to it. One of the reasons was that I was good with computer stuff, and it paid much, much more than what a starting analytical chemist or other similar job would pay. On the plus side, science education really does help develop your logical thinking skills...I think scientists make the best sysadmins just because they actually plan things and can troubleshoot well.
Yup, lots of people don't realize that. Especially over the last two years, cable broadband has emerged from the Wild West period. Now providers are actually looking at what's going on in their networks, and going after people who are stealing service. Of course, they don't have time to crack down on everyone, but they can easily collect statistics from the routers.
The thing that stinks is that our provider is great. They block a few common ports inbound to prevent casual abuse, but that's about it; it's fast and stable! Uncappers may ruin it for the rest of us with this firmware mod.
The thing that will make a Linux desktop usable is the same thing that makes Windows usable...easy installation of software and hardware.
I've played with Linux on my home PCs, and it's a great OS. Application support is great (although there are WAY too many apps even in tightly controlled distributions...) and the system itself is stable. However, Joe User is never going to want to recompile the kernel to install a sound card, or figure out which module to load, and which configuration script to put the load line into.
One thing that I have seen an improvement on is user interfaces. Is it just me, or do the stock X bitmap fonts and standard desktop layouts look like they weren't designed for humans? Come on...no one wants to stare at a 6-point xterm all day long. Redhat and a bunch of the other distributions at least distribute a sane desktop config nowadays. I know KDE and Gnome are supposed to fix this stuff, but the user experience just doesn't seem as "fluid" as Mac OSX or Windows.
I think we'll definitely see Linux on corporate desktops in huge numbers by next year. Companies would love to have a desktop PC that they can lock down completely...Windows' group policy is a start, but it's cumbersome. IT departments are longing for the return to simpler times...mainframes minus the green screens. Home users will have to wait for One True GUI on Linux, as well as real plug-and-play hardware setup.
I think Microsoft has forgotten over the last few years that people still keep their old computers, and businesses don't like upgrading their operating systems every 18 months. Any reasonably large systems platform, be it Windows or Linux, requires huge amounts of effort to correctly integrate applications. And once you get it right, changing things is a very tough sell.
I've been a Windows admin for quite a while, and I've worked in some very complex environments. In some cases, we're talking about over 50 "supported" applications that the IT department has to ensure work with each other and the OS. The other end of the spectrum, of course, is small business and home users, who don't want to change until they absolutely have to.
The thing that has had me most upset with MS in the last 4 years or so (besides all the security holes and worms...) has been their assumption that everyone will instantly upgrade to the next version of the OS as soon as it comes out. Lots of places still use NT 4.0, both on the client and server side. Try getting support for it now...Microsoft couldn't be bothered. I know you can't extend support indefinitely, but Microsoft should at least acknowledge that there are thousands of copies of Win9x and WinNT still in production.
Seems like there's a lot of annoyance with H1-B visas and the abuses they invite. Here are my points:
It's capitalism. If someone is willing to work for a tenth of the salary that your current employer is, then what right-minded business owner would scoff at that chance? It's inevitable, and people are just going to have to adjust their thinking.
IT is different now. The scary mainframe guys in the machine room who know the accounting system back and forth are going away as off-the-shelf software replaces the homegrown stuff. It may suck, but all software sucks, and OTS packages can be tweaked to suck less cheaper than home-coded stuff.
Same with sysadmin work. Systems aren't "autonomic" yet, but even Windows boxes are developing real sysadmin tools (like scripting capability, fewer uptime disruptions for changes, and others). Results are lower number of staff needed, and lower salaries for those that stay.
Programming is also a commodity. If I (a sysadmin, and definitely a non-programmer) can whip up something quickly in a visual design environment, imagine what a "real" programmer could do. With the dearth of machine resources out there, doing it "small and fast" is no longer important...getting it to just work is, and there's no convincing CxOs otherwise anymore.
Given these facts, why is it a surprise that companies outsource most of their IT now, or send in lower-paid workers to do an equal job? If you want to stay in IT, you need to do one of two things. You can prove you're an added value to the business you work for, not the same as the security guard or night janitor. Or, you can work for an outsourcer. Believe me, that's no fun; I've done it. They work you like crazy for peanuts.
Also, a lot of people suggest unionizing. I'm from working-class stock, so I know how effective the unions can be in protecting basic workers' rights. They can also price themselves right out of the market.
The problem with outsourcing arrangements is that companies only see savings at the beginning of the arrangement. Sure, they get to fire their expensive permanent employees. But guess what happens when something breaks? You end up with people who don't know how that particular company does business. I've seen this happen in three places. Average problem resolution goes from hours to days as users and staff try to figure out which call center halfway across the country to address their problem to.
The mom-n-pop shops typically use Prometric or VUE testing environment. These tests are not being outsourced. The mom-n-pop shops simply own the testing centers, but all of the scheduling and proctoring is done at their parent companies.
While the tests themselves aren't being outsourced, the administration of them is, including proctoring, etc. Therefore, I see big security holes. Back in the paper administration days, ETS actually brought in their own proctors to handle security, etc. Now, you have two problems. The test is available whenever you want, and you can take it once a month, five times a year. This helps the braindump people. Second, the test center has a copy of the questions sitting on their super-secure file server, just waiting for an employee who wants a few extra bucks to pick them up.
Ever since testing switched to computer-based, there have been easier and easier ways to cheat devised. I took the GRE on paper 5 years ago, and they were just starting to roll out CBT for it (the GMAT was already at 50% computer-administered or so.) It was a seven-hour ordeal (general and Chemistry subject test) conducted in a secure auditorium. And unless a proctor snuck Kaplan TestPrep a copy of the test booklet or some student with a photographic memory barfed out the questions after the test, there was no way the test could be leaked.
Flash forward to now, where all the testing is outsourced to Prometric and other companies, who further outsource it to Mom 'N' Pop's MCSE Training School. Who's keeping them honest? The questions are downloaded right to their server; what's to stop them from selling them to whoever wants them?
The number one thing that killed the MCSE as a valid credential was the braindumpers who had access to the exam questions, or who could take the exams over and over again under the "old" retake policy. And given that Transcender makes tons of money selling practice tests, I'm sure they sent in a few test takers of their own. The same could be said for Kaplan.
Add this to the fact that many MCSE cheat schools have been busted for taking the exams for students, giving them help, etc. Makes you wonder how much is being leaked...
Granted, the general section of the GRE is an aptitude test. The only possible advantage you could have is access to the reading passages beforehand, or knowing what the logic questions looked like. But buying a test prep book gives you a general idea of what you see. However, the subject test is quite another story. That thing was a bear, and I was a good chemistry student. Several hours of random trivia questions, some in subjects we'd never even covered. There, access to the material beforehand would be a cheater's dream come true.
Look at all the molestation cases out there. The one common thread among them is that the children were stupid enough to give out contact information and talk to people they shouldn't be. Instead of filtering the entire Web into the "buy more toys/cereal/video games/other stuff".kids.us domain, parents should teach their children what's really going on out there.
It's time to stop sugar-coating reality for the kiddies. Tell 'em about real life early on, and they'll be more wary. They'll also be able to deal with all the information available on the web in the appropriate manner. Kids aren't as stupid as people like to think.
Remember back before Napster existed? Most people traded MP3s and movies on secret FTP sites. Napster's role in the file sharing market was to extend it out to the masses who couldn't figure out how FTP clients worked. Granted, they made it much easier to find music, but when the AOL crowd gets wind of something and tells their friends, and one of those friends is a reporter or an RIAA worker, then the whole house of cards comes down.
The legacy Napster did leave behind is the other filesharing networks (Kazaa, etc.) That's good. However, the genie's out of the bottle, and those services are next.
Time to fire up the ol' FTP client and Usenet reader...
Not all Unix sysadmins are afraid of soap and sunlight.;-) It is kind of wierd though...the MS guys tend to be more sociable, but I think that's mainly because a lot of them graduated from tech support (like me) and had to be nice to users to keep their jobs.
But, you can be the nicest guy in the world and also clueless as to how a server runs.
Don't forget last year, when MS sent out those "public service announcements" that touted the expiration date of NetWare! Novell was pissed about that, and got the ads pulled. (Rumor has it that NetWare 6 is the last one, but you didn't hear that from me.)
This ad campaign will probably backfire on them. Most smart IT people have had enough dealings with MS in the past to recognize marketing FUD when they see it.
I've adminned for several years in very diverse-OS environments (NT, 2000, NetWare, Unix, OS2, etc.) If (and only if) you truly know about the inner guts of NT/2000, you can build stable, secure environments with it. I've had uptimes of a year or so (not the norm, but it does happen!) Lots of "experts" think they're NT/2K wizards because it's got the same GUI that their desktop does. I've gone into environments with NT/2000 boxes several service packs out of date, missing all the security fixes, etc.
MS's ads state that Unix vendors lock you in. They do, but they're at least a little more reasonable than they have been in the past. Windows' main strength in this regard is that if you hate your server vendor, you can fire him and get a new server. Sun makes you buy Sun hardware. So does HP. Linux and freeBSD are some of the only remaining Intel choices, and most businesses aren't ready to give up tech support and easy availability of consulting help yet. MS also mentions expensive experts. Yes, Unix admins are expensive, but MS is probably assuming that its half-a-million MCSEs are all experts. As a holder of that certification, I can tell you that this is a falsehood. Even the MCSE/2K exams were easier than I had hoped they would be. You get what you pay for, as always!
When I was in college, I started out in an engineering program, simply because I wanted something challenging. However, I've always been terrible at math (don't ask why; I understand concepts just fine, but when it comes to performing computations I'm useless without Maple.) So when it was apparent that I wouldn't get good grades continuing as a chemical engineering major, I switched to chemistry. I finished my degree, and enjoyed it immensely. And I even learned thermodynamics after the third exposure to it in three separate classes.:)
About the same time, I got a part-time job as a tech support monkey. I had been messing with computers since I was 7 or so, just as a hobby. CompSci was never a thought of mine, since I sucked at math the whole way through school. But the tech support job really turned me on to the whole networking/IT field. By the end of school, I had given up on the idea of being a chemist and spent most of my free time working and looking for an IT job.
When it came time to interview, most employers were quite impressed that I had obtained a degree in a tough science. (unless you had a good high school chem teacher, you'll never enjoy it.) In my experience, having a degree in something is good. Having a degree in something hard is better. But either one gets you in the door.
So do what you want in college. It'll be the last time you can easily do that.
Great posts so far! Lots of different experiences. Here's mine. I'm 26. I have worked in "old-school" companies since graduating. Banking, insurance, and the like are where you'd find me. I'm a network/sysadmin, they guy who keeps the trains running, so I'm not really a true coding geek. I'm happily married, no kids, just cats.
Everywhere I've worked, I've been the youngest staffer by at least 10 years. Not kidding. My next youngest co-worker is 37. Oh, I know I'll catch up eventually, but the social situation isn't the greatest. All they ever do is bitch about work, their wife, their kids, their child support, winterizing their boats, etc. And when we do hang out, it's tough being "the kid." Plus, you've got to worry about office politics. It sounds paranoid, but I know people who have been run into the ground for saying something they shouldn't have in a social setting.
My wife, OTOH, works as a retail manager (very different from a PHB...they actually work!), mostly with people close to her age, or maybe just not as bitter. We have a grand old time with them. I wish that would translate over to my workplaces a little.
When I was doing helpdesk work in college, our group also had a good social interaction thing going on. Maybe that was school-related, but it was fun.
My story: I graduated in '97 with a chemistry degree. I had done help desk work all though school instead of working at Starbucks [1]. I decided I really liked computers more than organic reactions, so I hooked up with a contracting firm, who gave me help desk work for a bank. As I went on, I got a desktop tech job, then an NT admin job for a huge insurance company. I now have a full time job doing NT and unix engineering work for an airline IT company. (We test, integrate and design stuff for airport networks.)
You may be thinking that these are boring places to work. And you're right, the culture isn't Nerf toys and Quake deathmatches. It's corporate. So how can I be having fun?
Fun isn't all silliness. Fun for me is learning. I work very hard to keep my skills current, simply because I enjoy the challenge. Everyone I know from college who got on the entry-level corporate track is stapling TPS reports for a living, or going to 40 hours of meetings. I have plenty of that work too, but I also have the opportunity to do new things and actually affect the business. This month, I decided to learn Windows Scripting Host by writing a script that automatically installs NT Worksations and Servers. That's what's fun in IT...watching people use something you did.
Work is work. You just have to adjust your definition of fun. I like learning, and going home to my wife and cats after it's over. I'm just down the road from the HQ of Computer Associates...those guys know how to keep employees chained to their desk. Everything's provided for them...meals, a gym, a concierge service, you name it. This makes them not feel like they're giving their life to the company. But at a startup, you're most likely getting paid less, working a ton of hours, and never know whether you'll be employed or not next week.
Take my advice; rethink work. Be happy you're not a PHB.:)
[1] Ever notice how Starbucks employees are interchangeable? You can go into a Starbucks in NYC, or LA, or London, and the same request/response sequence is used. Your drink order is hashed into the same shortened form for delivery to the server. I call this the SCOTP (Starbucks Coffee Order Transport Protocol.) My RFC will be out soon.
I now work for a major international company that no one's ever heard of, but we design systems for airports/airlines. We're budgeted for $5K per year of formal training. Plus, our department gets enough of a budget so that we can write off books and other materials as a miscellaneous expense.
There are formal justification processes, and you are most likely to get approval if it's relevant to a current or future project. But if you're persuasive enough, it can be done. This is in stark contrast to my former employer (ironically, a contract IT provider) who basically gave us CBTs and refused any requests for books, training, etc.
How badly are YOU being treated?
on
IT Unions?
·
· Score: 1
Unions protect factory workers and other "skilled" individuals. Most of these people are total 100's...right in the center of the IQ scale. They'd rather watch football and drink beer than learn something new. That's the appeal. I don't know about you, but I like working hard, learning new things and getting paid based on my talent. I don't mind pulling a few long weeks as long as I'm doing something that requires thought.
Does anyone else feel that way?
Re:IT Union men... true story
on
IT Unions?
·
· Score: 1
Sure, IT people get a lot of work and abuse. I know programmers who work 60 hours a week just to keep up with the load of stuff they have to do. However, investment bankers routinely put in 100 hour weeks. Junior lawyers do the same when preparing for trials, etc.
I can see unions being good for maintaining MINIMUM standards. However, trade unions exist so you get a UNIFORM talent pool. One electrician is as good as another, and one ditchdigger is as good as the next. You just don't see that in IT. IT people have a wide range of experience, and it's up to the market to weed out the idiots.
The other problem is inertia. Think about how hard it is to fire a union guy. Now think about how hard they work. Gee, are the two related? And why would I be inclined to learn SomeWierdSystem if it's not a requirement to keep my nice cushy union job? IT requires constant change and innovation. After you get a core grounding in general technology, you constantly have to upgrade your brain, unless you want to be a desktop tech the rest of your life.
NO UNIONS! I would much rather fight for my OWN rights and keep my paycheck.
I agree. I did tech support for four years, and boy does it make you hate the world! There are people who are Ph.D's in another field, but put them in front of a computer and their brain resets itself. (I know; I did university tech support, and helped a lot of my chemistry professors on the side.)
I'm now a network and systems engineer for a company that does IT for airports and designs things like check-in systems. When they switched workstations to NT, agents had serious trouble with the "Press Ctrl+Alt+Del to log on" message. I'm not kidding...they actually asked us to take it off. "Um, no. You can't start NT any other way."
Now, we're tempted to say "You idiot!", BUT veryone starts somewhere. Some of us are a bit more in tune with the analogies that a GUI makes you figure out the first time, but we all had to learn it once. I learned how to use computers originally by playing with a so-called portable computer my dad brought home from work; this was 1982! I credit narfing around with computers for helping me develop logical thinking, which as we all know is what really makes a good network geek.
Now Joey Bagadonuts gets a computer because he wants to check out websites. And that's fine. For those who absolutely don't want to learn anything new, there's AOL to guide them to everything. If he's remotely curious, he can always play around with something. I think one of the reasons people aren't as tech-savvy as we geeks are is that they're afraid of screwing something up (and that's a real possibility if you get too curious with Windows, especially 9x.)
Technology is evolving. Windows 2000 and later has system file protection, so you can't mess anything up (well, almost.) Windows XP's new interface (which I hate...) simplifies procedures even more. As the computer evolves from data processing workhorse into a smart terminal, things will become easier.
Don't call 'em idiots. Some people just want to get their work done. My mom bought herself a computer three years ago, and I can't believe how proficient she is at most tasks. Now this is a person I thought would be using a paper and pencil forever, and she just finished setting up their finances in Quicken.
Give people a little direction, and they can surprise you.
Disclaimer: I hate PDF software documentation. I know that it's cheaper for manufacturers to include the manual on the CD, but there's something about being able to pick up the book and read it when you're looking something up. I actually sprang for the Windows 2000 Server Resource Kit because of that. Sure, it may be free with TechNet, but it would take me reams of paper and a few toner cartridges to print the whole thing.
If the technology ever gets good enough, we'd never have to worry about books becoming obsolete again. The problem is screen resolution. MS Reader's ClearType is pretty decent, but until someone comes up with a screen that won't hurt your eyes after a few hours, there'll always be a market for books.
Yup! (See my other post below for my history.) One of the things I've noticed about the few network people my age is that a good number of them don't understand the fundamental difference between a production NOC and their home LAN. Major changes and even minor ones have to be planned. I'm very careful now because of a few lessons learned early on. Whether you're accepted at a young age depends on whether the older people can count on you to do your job correctly.
Document, test, experiment, and most importantly LEARN from your peers.
Never thought this topic would come up, and I thought I was nuts. I think I entered the IT field at the wrong point. I did help desk work through college, and got a job as a combination help desk monkey/network admin at 23. I've worked in three places now (I'm 25) and have noticed that (1) I'm at least 10 years younger than the next youngest person on staff, and (2) Age only matters in some cases.
Let me further explain that I work for decidedly old-school companies (a bank, an insurance company and most recently in the air transport IT industry [which is a great change!!].) I never worked for a dot-com company, where even the CEO's 23. My expertise is in the networking world, specifically getting wierd legacy systems to talk to one another and to NT, Unix, or anything else current. Therefore, I'm constantly reading, busting my butt and learning everything I can. Luckily, it's added up to some excellent job opportunities.
It always takes a little time, but in all three places I've worked, once the older people realize that I know about something, I'm at least somewhat accepted. It seems like the youngest workers are all developers, and the older "veterans" are entrusted with keeping the network and servers running. Seriously, did I skip a grade, or am I just working in strange fields??
The strange thing is not having a group of peers at work. Sure everyone's an IT wizard, but they're all talking about their three children and the retirement plan, and I just got married a year ago!
Anyone else witness this?
Anyone remember Packard Bell? (hundreds of tech support people raise their hands) Their entire manufacturing strategy seemed to be "Build it, don't test it, let the consumer figure it out." As a result, it wss very difficult to get PB's proprietary sound/radio/video capture/speakerphone/modem card to work with any ISP's service. Drivers existed that worked in ssome cases, but of course it was frustrating to support anyone with a Packard Bell. Also, during a brief stint selling computers (blech!) it was always the PBs that would come back, nearly 25% of the time in our store. Why? Because in an age where the average PC hovered around $2000, PB was pumping out PCs for $900-1300 on the low end. Skimp on quality and get burned (they no longer sell in the US, and I remember a million "Packard Bell Sucks" web pages.)
Planned obsolescence is here to sray...it's obvious that computer manufacturers don't make 'em like they used to. Some of the mainframe hardware I've seen at work has been running for 20+ years, with minimal service. Your average desktop PC is a cheap piece of junk in comparison. Why? Because the manufacturer knows that you'll outgrow the machine just slightly after the warranty period ends in most cases. Companies are on two and three year replacement cycles now, so that's how good they have to make them.
Do I agree with this? Yes and no. Hardware manufacturers shouldn't knowingly release junk, especially heavily advertised junk. That's no way to keep customers, and no way for newbies to start out in the computer world. However, manufacturers do realize that most people upgrade or trash their PCs frequently, so it's natural for them to want to skimp a little.
Slashdot Mirror
One of the huge problems scientific career paths have is the fact that "corporate" work is much more profitable. Sure, there's tenured faculty positions and high-paid research jobs at drug companies and such, but it's hard to convince someone to go to grad school for 4+ years, do postdoc work and eventually get hired for permanent work only to find that their peers are making much more than they are with less work.
I pursued a science degree during my college education, and now I do IT work that's totally unrelated to it. One of the reasons was that I was good with computer stuff, and it paid much, much more than what a starting analytical chemist or other similar job would pay. On the plus side, science education really does help develop your logical thinking skills...I think scientists make the best sysadmins just because they actually plan things and can troubleshoot well.
The thing that stinks is that our provider is great. They block a few common ports inbound to prevent casual abuse, but that's about it; it's fast and stable! Uncappers may ruin it for the rest of us with this firmware mod.
The thing that will make a Linux desktop usable is the same thing that makes Windows usable...easy installation of software and hardware.
I've played with Linux on my home PCs, and it's a great OS. Application support is great (although there are WAY too many apps even in tightly controlled distributions...) and the system itself is stable. However, Joe User is never going to want to recompile the kernel to install a sound card, or figure out which module to load, and which configuration script to put the load line into.
One thing that I have seen an improvement on is user interfaces. Is it just me, or do the stock X bitmap fonts and standard desktop layouts look like they weren't designed for humans? Come on...no one wants to stare at a 6-point xterm all day long. Redhat and a bunch of the other distributions at least distribute a sane desktop config nowadays. I know KDE and Gnome are supposed to fix this stuff, but the user experience just doesn't seem as "fluid" as Mac OSX or Windows.
I think we'll definitely see Linux on corporate desktops in huge numbers by next year. Companies would love to have a desktop PC that they can lock down completely...Windows' group policy is a start, but it's cumbersome. IT departments are longing for the return to simpler times...mainframes minus the green screens. Home users will have to wait for One True GUI on Linux, as well as real plug-and-play hardware setup.
I think Microsoft has forgotten over the last few years that people still keep their old computers, and businesses don't like upgrading their operating systems every 18 months. Any reasonably large systems platform, be it Windows or Linux, requires huge amounts of effort to correctly integrate applications. And once you get it right, changing things is a very tough sell.
I've been a Windows admin for quite a while, and I've worked in some very complex environments. In some cases, we're talking about over 50 "supported" applications that the IT department has to ensure work with each other and the OS. The other end of the spectrum, of course, is small business and home users, who don't want to change until they absolutely have to.
The thing that has had me most upset with MS in the last 4 years or so (besides all the security holes and worms...) has been their assumption that everyone will instantly upgrade to the next version of the OS as soon as it comes out. Lots of places still use NT 4.0, both on the client and server side. Try getting support for it now...Microsoft couldn't be bothered. I know you can't extend support indefinitely, but Microsoft should at least acknowledge that there are thousands of copies of Win9x and WinNT still in production.
Given these facts, why is it a surprise that companies outsource most of their IT now, or send in lower-paid workers to do an equal job? If you want to stay in IT, you need to do one of two things. You can prove you're an added value to the business you work for, not the same as the security guard or night janitor. Or, you can work for an outsourcer. Believe me, that's no fun; I've done it. They work you like crazy for peanuts.
Also, a lot of people suggest unionizing. I'm from working-class stock, so I know how effective the unions can be in protecting basic workers' rights. They can also price themselves right out of the market.
The problem with outsourcing arrangements is that companies only see savings at the beginning of the arrangement. Sure, they get to fire their expensive permanent employees. But guess what happens when something breaks? You end up with people who don't know how that particular company does business. I've seen this happen in three places. Average problem resolution goes from hours to days as users and staff try to figure out which call center halfway across the country to address their problem to.
While the tests themselves aren't being outsourced, the administration of them is, including proctoring, etc. Therefore, I see big security holes. Back in the paper administration days, ETS actually brought in their own proctors to handle security, etc. Now, you have two problems. The test is available whenever you want, and you can take it once a month, five times a year. This helps the braindump people. Second, the test center has a copy of the questions sitting on their super-secure file server, just waiting for an employee who wants a few extra bucks to pick them up.
Flash forward to now, where all the testing is outsourced to Prometric and other companies, who further outsource it to Mom 'N' Pop's MCSE Training School. Who's keeping them honest? The questions are downloaded right to their server; what's to stop them from selling them to whoever wants them?
The number one thing that killed the MCSE as a valid credential was the braindumpers who had access to the exam questions, or who could take the exams over and over again under the "old" retake policy. And given that Transcender makes tons of money selling practice tests, I'm sure they sent in a few test takers of their own. The same could be said for Kaplan.
Add this to the fact that many MCSE cheat schools have been busted for taking the exams for students, giving them help, etc. Makes you wonder how much is being leaked...
Granted, the general section of the GRE is an aptitude test. The only possible advantage you could have is access to the reading passages beforehand, or knowing what the logic questions looked like. But buying a test prep book gives you a general idea of what you see. However, the subject test is quite another story. That thing was a bear, and I was a good chemistry student. Several hours of random trivia questions, some in subjects we'd never even covered. There, access to the material beforehand would be a cheater's dream come true.
Look at all the molestation cases out there. The one common thread among them is that the children were stupid enough to give out contact information and talk to people they shouldn't be. Instead of filtering the entire Web into the "buy more toys/cereal/video games/other stuff" .kids.us domain, parents should teach their children what's really going on out there.
It's time to stop sugar-coating reality for the kiddies. Tell 'em about real life early on, and they'll be more wary. They'll also be able to deal with all the information available on the web in the appropriate manner. Kids aren't as stupid as people like to think.
The legacy Napster did leave behind is the other filesharing networks (Kazaa, etc.) That's good. However, the genie's out of the bottle, and those services are next.
Time to fire up the ol' FTP client and Usenet reader...
But, you can be the nicest guy in the world and also clueless as to how a server runs.
Don't forget last year, when MS sent out those "public service announcements" that touted the expiration date of NetWare! Novell was pissed about that, and got the ads pulled. (Rumor has it that NetWare 6 is the last one, but you didn't hear that from me.)
This ad campaign will probably backfire on them. Most smart IT people have had enough dealings with MS in the past to recognize marketing FUD when they see it.
I've adminned for several years in very diverse-OS environments (NT, 2000, NetWare, Unix, OS2, etc.) If (and only if) you truly know about the inner guts of NT/2000, you can build stable, secure environments with it. I've had uptimes of a year or so (not the norm, but it does happen!) Lots of "experts" think they're NT/2K wizards because it's got the same GUI that their desktop does. I've gone into environments with NT/2000 boxes several service packs out of date, missing all the security fixes, etc.
MS's ads state that Unix vendors lock you in. They do, but they're at least a little more reasonable than they have been in the past. Windows' main strength in this regard is that if you hate your server vendor, you can fire him and get a new server. Sun makes you buy Sun hardware. So does HP. Linux and freeBSD are some of the only remaining Intel choices, and most businesses aren't ready to give up tech support and easy availability of consulting help yet. MS also mentions expensive experts. Yes, Unix admins are expensive, but MS is probably assuming that its half-a-million MCSEs are all experts. As a holder of that certification, I can tell you that this is a falsehood. Even the MCSE/2K exams were easier than I had hoped they would be. You get what you pay for, as always!
When I was in college, I started out in an engineering program, simply because I wanted something challenging. However, I've always been terrible at math (don't ask why; I understand concepts just fine, but when it comes to performing computations I'm useless without Maple.) So when it was apparent that I wouldn't get good grades continuing as a chemical engineering major, I switched to chemistry. I finished my degree, and enjoyed it immensely. And I even learned thermodynamics after the third exposure to it in three separate classes. :)
About the same time, I got a part-time job as a tech support monkey. I had been messing with computers since I was 7 or so, just as a hobby. CompSci was never a thought of mine, since I sucked at math the whole way through school. But the tech support job really turned me on to the whole networking/IT field. By the end of school, I had given up on the idea of being a chemist and spent most of my free time working and looking for an IT job.
When it came time to interview, most employers were quite impressed that I had obtained a degree in a tough science. (unless you had a good high school chem teacher, you'll never enjoy it.) In my experience, having a degree in something is good. Having a degree in something hard is better. But either one gets you in the door.
So do what you want in college. It'll be the last time you can easily do that.
Great posts so far! Lots of different experiences. Here's mine. I'm 26. I have worked in "old-school" companies since graduating. Banking, insurance, and the like are where you'd find me. I'm a network/sysadmin, they guy who keeps the trains running, so I'm not really a true coding geek. I'm happily married, no kids, just cats.
Everywhere I've worked, I've been the youngest staffer by at least 10 years. Not kidding. My next youngest co-worker is 37. Oh, I know I'll catch up eventually, but the social situation isn't the greatest. All they ever do is bitch about work, their wife, their kids, their child support, winterizing their boats, etc. And when we do hang out, it's tough being "the kid." Plus, you've got to worry about office politics. It sounds paranoid, but I know people who have been run into the ground for saying something they shouldn't have in a social setting.
My wife, OTOH, works as a retail manager (very different from a PHB...they actually work!), mostly with people close to her age, or maybe just not as bitter. We have a grand old time with them. I wish that would translate over to my workplaces a little.
When I was doing helpdesk work in college, our group also had a good social interaction thing going on. Maybe that was school-related, but it was fun.
You may be thinking that these are boring places to work. And you're right, the culture isn't Nerf toys and Quake deathmatches. It's corporate. So how can I be having fun?
Fun isn't all silliness. Fun for me is learning. I work very hard to keep my skills current, simply because I enjoy the challenge. Everyone I know from college who got on the entry-level corporate track is stapling TPS reports for a living, or going to 40 hours of meetings. I have plenty of that work too, but I also have the opportunity to do new things and actually affect the business. This month, I decided to learn Windows Scripting Host by writing a script that automatically installs NT Worksations and Servers. That's what's fun in IT...watching people use something you did.
Work is work. You just have to adjust your definition of fun. I like learning, and going home to my wife and cats after it's over. I'm just down the road from the HQ of Computer Associates...those guys know how to keep employees chained to their desk. Everything's provided for them...meals, a gym, a concierge service, you name it. This makes them not feel like they're giving their life to the company. But at a startup, you're most likely getting paid less, working a ton of hours, and never know whether you'll be employed or not next week.
Take my advice; rethink work. Be happy you're not a PHB. :)
[1] Ever notice how Starbucks employees are interchangeable? You can go into a Starbucks in NYC, or LA, or London, and the same request/response sequence is used. Your drink order is hashed into the same shortened form for delivery to the server. I call this the SCOTP (Starbucks Coffee Order Transport Protocol.) My RFC will be out soon.
http://www.suffusions.net/~eric
There are formal justification processes, and you are most likely to get approval if it's relevant to a current or future project. But if you're persuasive enough, it can be done. This is in stark contrast to my former employer (ironically, a contract IT provider) who basically gave us CBTs and refused any requests for books, training, etc.
Does anyone else feel that way?
Inertia...the enemy of IT.
Why doesn't anyone want to work hard anymore?
Sure, IT people get a lot of work and abuse. I know programmers who work 60 hours a week just to keep up with the load of stuff they have to do. However, investment bankers routinely put in 100 hour weeks. Junior lawyers do the same when preparing for trials, etc. I can see unions being good for maintaining MINIMUM standards. However, trade unions exist so you get a UNIFORM talent pool. One electrician is as good as another, and one ditchdigger is as good as the next. You just don't see that in IT. IT people have a wide range of experience, and it's up to the market to weed out the idiots. The other problem is inertia. Think about how hard it is to fire a union guy. Now think about how hard they work. Gee, are the two related? And why would I be inclined to learn SomeWierdSystem if it's not a requirement to keep my nice cushy union job? IT requires constant change and innovation. After you get a core grounding in general technology, you constantly have to upgrade your brain, unless you want to be a desktop tech the rest of your life. NO UNIONS! I would much rather fight for my OWN rights and keep my paycheck.
I'm now a network and systems engineer for a company that does IT for airports and designs things like check-in systems. When they switched workstations to NT, agents had serious trouble with the "Press Ctrl+Alt+Del to log on" message. I'm not kidding...they actually asked us to take it off. "Um, no. You can't start NT any other way."
Now, we're tempted to say "You idiot!", BUT veryone starts somewhere. Some of us are a bit more in tune with the analogies that a GUI makes you figure out the first time, but we all had to learn it once. I learned how to use computers originally by playing with a so-called portable computer my dad brought home from work; this was 1982! I credit narfing around with computers for helping me develop logical thinking, which as we all know is what really makes a good network geek.
Now Joey Bagadonuts gets a computer because he wants to check out websites. And that's fine. For those who absolutely don't want to learn anything new, there's AOL to guide them to everything. If he's remotely curious, he can always play around with something. I think one of the reasons people aren't as tech-savvy as we geeks are is that they're afraid of screwing something up (and that's a real possibility if you get too curious with Windows, especially 9x.)
Technology is evolving. Windows 2000 and later has system file protection, so you can't mess anything up (well, almost.) Windows XP's new interface (which I hate...) simplifies procedures even more. As the computer evolves from data processing workhorse into a smart terminal, things will become easier.
Don't call 'em idiots. Some people just want to get their work done. My mom bought herself a computer three years ago, and I can't believe how proficient she is at most tasks. Now this is a person I thought would be using a paper and pencil forever, and she just finished setting up their finances in Quicken.
Give people a little direction, and they can surprise you.
If the technology ever gets good enough, we'd never have to worry about books becoming obsolete again. The problem is screen resolution. MS Reader's ClearType is pretty decent, but until someone comes up with a screen that won't hurt your eyes after a few hours, there'll always be a market for books.
Document, test, experiment, and most importantly LEARN from your peers.
Never thought this topic would come up, and I thought I was nuts. I think I entered the IT field at the wrong point. I did help desk work through college, and got a job as a combination help desk monkey/network admin at 23. I've worked in three places now (I'm 25) and have noticed that (1) I'm at least 10 years younger than the next youngest person on staff, and (2) Age only matters in some cases. Let me further explain that I work for decidedly old-school companies (a bank, an insurance company and most recently in the air transport IT industry [which is a great change!!].) I never worked for a dot-com company, where even the CEO's 23. My expertise is in the networking world, specifically getting wierd legacy systems to talk to one another and to NT, Unix, or anything else current. Therefore, I'm constantly reading, busting my butt and learning everything I can. Luckily, it's added up to some excellent job opportunities. It always takes a little time, but in all three places I've worked, once the older people realize that I know about something, I'm at least somewhat accepted. It seems like the youngest workers are all developers, and the older "veterans" are entrusted with keeping the network and servers running. Seriously, did I skip a grade, or am I just working in strange fields?? The strange thing is not having a group of peers at work. Sure everyone's an IT wizard, but they're all talking about their three children and the retirement plan, and I just got married a year ago! Anyone else witness this?
Planned obsolescence is here to sray...it's obvious that computer manufacturers don't make 'em like they used to. Some of the mainframe hardware I've seen at work has been running for 20+ years, with minimal service. Your average desktop PC is a cheap piece of junk in comparison. Why? Because the manufacturer knows that you'll outgrow the machine just slightly after the warranty period ends in most cases. Companies are on two and three year replacement cycles now, so that's how good they have to make them.
Do I agree with this? Yes and no. Hardware manufacturers shouldn't knowingly release junk, especially heavily advertised junk. That's no way to keep customers, and no way for newbies to start out in the computer world. However, manufacturers do realize that most people upgrade or trash their PCs frequently, so it's natural for them to want to skimp a little.