Sometimes outsourcing isn't about cost savings. Sometimes it's about unloading the burden of responsibility of getting skilled workers to perform within reasonable time frames.
In many companies (no percentages quoted - I haven't performed any scientific studies to back this data up outside of my own personal experiences), IT departments slow down as more technologies are introduced. There isn't enough time to become an expert before the next big thing comes down the pipe. As technologies become intrinsic to business functions, management becomes unwilling to allow experimentation (including upgrades, maintenance, patching, etc.) without assurances that things won't go south.
Outsourcing makes sense in some cases. For instance, I work in the IT department for a large oil & gas company here in Calgary. My entire team (UNIX) works alongside o&g employees, yet we work for a different company. Our skills are outside those required for getting gas out of the ground. The company that I work for provides training, career planning (in IT), mentorship, etc. They ensure that there are people on my team (or in the case of succession planning, ready to join the team) with the skills required to hit the ground running. The client does not need to worry about how to gear someone new up for a project, or train someone in a new technology. It works well for them, it works well for us.
The client provides us with goals and objectives, and we decide on the best way to meet those goals and objectives. We are challenged to perform as efficiently and effectively as possible - helping them to go from seismic data to well in the ground to gas coming out of it. While it's true that they could do it cheaper in the short term, they wouldn't be able to retain skilled workers without sacrificing a cetain amount of flexibility.
As for change control - effective change control systems work. There are 5000 employees at this company. 350 *NIX servers (Solaris, AIX, HP, RedHat), and a plethora of Wintel servers. We have one change night each week. It's this way across the entire company. We manage to identify issues, schedule the fix, get parts or software required for maintenance or upgrades, as well as do the work in a one week time frame. Sure there are some problems that require a larger period of time to resolve, and there are also emergency outages that will not wait for a change window, but ALL changes utilize the change control methodology. How else do you keep track of recurring problems across a large team in a large environment?
Interestingly enough, you'd spend more on your electrical bill over the course of 2-3 months than you've "saved" by not buying some new gear. You do get an alternate heating source out of the bargain...
Did you read my post? At what point did I indicate that it had been completely eradicated?
Now when you consider that the bulk of the telecom infrastructure has been unchanged for the past 20 years, it is not surprising that your local telco hasn't converted yet.
There are a number of slashdot visitors that do actually care about server room issues. The fact that you don't understand the need does not negate it's importance.
Large organizations rely on server rooms for their computing environment. Having a cobbled environment where the file server is on the 3rd floor, and the application server is in the janitor's closet, etc. is a recipe for disaster. Troubleshooting connectivity issues (among others) can end up costing more than the apparent simplicity of such a design.
Understanding ways to better cool the space that our servers occupy is important. And being able to do so in a cost effective manner is also important. The organization that I work in has one in-house server room (containing 60 racks of servers), and one 'co-located' server room (containing 72 racks of servers). Heat and power are the two killers. If we experience a 50% power loss (assume that one power grid is knocked out), do we have enough power to run AND cool the server room? If not, what percentage of my gear do I need to shut down in order to prevent overheating, without impacting critical business systems (like payroll).
If we can find a cheaper / better / more cost effective method for cooling that utilizes less power, or find a way to use the cooling systems that we have in a more efficient manner, is that not worth an article on slashdot?
My use of the word monopoly merely indicates a throwback to my old schooling. Just posting a clarification of the legal ramifications (stolen blatantly from wikipedia) of anti-competitive behaviour:
- paraphrased from wikipedia - In 1890, Congress passed the Sherman Anti-trust law. It was the first United States federal government action to limit the monopolies which trust companies held over the economy. It made illegal any form of contract or combination between entities with regard to trade and commerce that would have the effect of restraining trade. And it also put responsibility on government attorneys and district courts to pursue and investigate trusts.
It was used to divide the Northern Securities Company. It was used to divide the American Tobacco Company It was used to divide the Standard Oil trust.
The Act was aimed at regulating the businesses of the time, but it was not specific (It did not specifically refer to a monopoly, instead prohibiting unlawful business combinations). It was used for many years as an anti-union tool, until that use was finally revoked in 1914 by the Clayton Antitrust Act, which contained the word monopoly.
The United States Supreme Court has deemed three types of conduct so lacking in economic justification as to be "per se" illegal. The "per se" violations include price fixing, bid rigging, and market allocation schemes, and are generally prosecuted criminally by the Antitrust Division of the United States Department of Justice.
1. The majority of lawmakers utilize the internet at home. Many of whom pay attention to the bills they pay at home, even if they are willing to spend 40k on a toilet seat at the office. Most adults do not allow their child to *call* overseas, but would think nothing about allowing them to visit an overseas website. If there were suddenly surcharges for every node hit along the way, the internets usefulness for the majority would suddenly decrease dramatically.
2. The US is not the only country that provides access to (or content on) the internet. Lobbying the US govt. for the right to bill website owners will not fly. If the EEU says "No, we don't agree", what would the US government do in retaliation? Fortunately, congress does not have the power to legislate communication billing methods for the globe.
3. Connection fees are already paid by parties at each end of any transmission. So, technically, there is already a double billing going on. What they are looking for is a third (and fourth and fifth...) helping.
4. Monopolies are illegal in the US (and Canada, and probably most of the other big trade countries. Haven't checked tho). "Ma Bell" will never again be a monopoly. The law isn't the only reason, either. People are more informed today about the impact that monopolies have on prices and availability of service. We expect choice, and will not tolerate a single vendor option.
I'm a dad, and I firmly believe that it is my duty to scarf as much chocolateBBBBDAsacrifice myself for the well being of my son. I happend to likeBidisA candy. And beside I deserve my 'vig' for hustling the little hoodlum from house to house... (JUST KIDDING - he's not *that* little)
All typed with tongue firmly embedded in cheek (yes, mine).
Seems to me that the bill in question would have been a lot easier to police (and would make a lot more sense) if it had banned the sale of ALL video games to minors. I'm not suggesting that kids shouldn't be allowed to play Super Julio Bro's, but that little Timmy should have to take "Dad" to the store with him if he wants the new release of "Patricide II - Daddy's Back".
I'm not a proponent of censorship in general. I just happen to think that there's nothing wrong with preventing children from having access to gruesome violent content *on demand*.
This I know. The Grandparent suggested that there are other operating systems that provided this feature before the Macintosh. I've asked him to identify one, as I can't think of any.
Some potential titles for the afore mentioned 80's movie: "Remix Of The Killer Tomatoes" "Return Of The Password Snatchers" "They Listened from Within" "Buffy The Keystroke Logger" (not quite on-topic) "I Know What You Typed Last Summer" "Eavesdropper" "The Computers Have Ears"
The unrelated horror film we're most likely to see? "The Blog" - with Steve McQueen re-animated to reprise his role as "Steve Andrews" Genre: Horror / Sci-Fi / Comedy Tagline: Indescribable... Indestructible! Nothing Can Stop It! Plot Outline: An inane personal web log consumes all bandwidth in its path as it grows and grows.
I was using alliteration as a tool to provoke a thought. Maybe "promulgators" was a bit of a stretch, but it sounded more interesting than perpetrators. I would have used perpetuators, but alas, that word escaped my grasp while drafting my note.
Nobody ever said that the Canadian government suffered from common sense or good judgement, and they are certainly not known for consistancy in any event. Today they vote yes, tomorrow they vote no.
I've never claimed that my government was a bastion of faith, but I wouldn't say that they are the root of all evil. They are more like nodules on the root of all evil;)
That's our Canadian government - always looking out for the little guys. Those much maligned mega marketers, the poorly pictured political parties and poll promulgators, the little lobbyests languishing in the face of previously proposed changes to our country's telecommunications laws.
What ever were we thinking in our attempts to wrest the right to remain "unlisted" and "untapped"? How dare we expect to have the right to not be disturbed in the midst of our daily ablutions by the ring-ring-ringing of the telephone?
I am (almost) at a loss for words, but I'm certain that if I wait a bit, someone new will call me and try to sell me their own.
Sadly it appears that my government is no longer similar to the American's "of the people, by the people, for the people", but "to the people".
Ask everyone in the group to imagine a simple piece of paper. Ask them:
What would use a blank sheet of paper for?
What do you know about where the paper was manufactured?
What do you know about the inventor of paper?
There are few simple alternatives to paper. Sure there are whiteboards / chalkboards / computers / sheets of mylar, etc., but each has limitations that are not inherent to paper.
Ask them how they would feel if it suddenly cost $300.00 to purchase each sheet of paper simply because the biggest vendor decided that that was what they wanted to charge. What would they do to get around this barrier to their productivity. The alternatives aren't very convenient for most people. Would they look into making their own paper?
Then tell them that there is a community that is offering other ways to manufacture paper that drastically decreased the cost - back down to the previous rate - how would they feel about that.
Better still, what if that community were all volunteers, whose goal is to make access to this type of information / service / activity available to as many people as possible?
This is rather simplistic, and doesn't address a lot of what OSS/FOSS is about, but it is a simple way to introduce the subject.
It wouldn't hurt if you could download an Open Source paper airplane design so that they can build $300.00 paper airplanes at the end of your chat.
Slashdot Mirror
Sometimes outsourcing isn't about cost savings. Sometimes it's about unloading the burden of responsibility of getting skilled workers to perform within reasonable time frames.
In many companies (no percentages quoted - I haven't performed any scientific studies to back this data up outside of my own personal experiences), IT departments slow down as more technologies are introduced. There isn't enough time to become an expert before the next big thing comes down the pipe. As technologies become intrinsic to business functions, management becomes unwilling to allow experimentation (including upgrades, maintenance, patching, etc.) without assurances that things won't go south.
Outsourcing makes sense in some cases. For instance, I work in the IT department for a large oil & gas company here in Calgary. My entire team (UNIX) works alongside o&g employees, yet we work for a different company. Our skills are outside those required for getting gas out of the ground. The company that I work for provides training, career planning (in IT), mentorship, etc. They ensure that there are people on my team (or in the case of succession planning, ready to join the team) with the skills required to hit the ground running. The client does not need to worry about how to gear someone new up for a project, or train someone in a new technology. It works well for them, it works well for us.
The client provides us with goals and objectives, and we decide on the best way to meet those goals and objectives. We are challenged to perform as efficiently and effectively as possible - helping them to go from seismic data to well in the ground to gas coming out of it. While it's true that they could do it cheaper in the short term, they wouldn't be able to retain skilled workers without sacrificing a cetain amount of flexibility.
As for change control - effective change control systems work. There are 5000 employees at this company. 350 *NIX servers (Solaris, AIX, HP, RedHat), and a plethora of Wintel servers. We have one change night each week. It's this way across the entire company. We manage to identify issues, schedule the fix, get parts or software required for maintenance or upgrades, as well as do the work in a one week time frame. Sure there are some problems that require a larger period of time to resolve, and there are also emergency outages that will not wait for a change window, but ALL changes utilize the change control methodology. How else do you keep track of recurring problems across a large team in a large environment?
Just miscellaneous ramblings before coffee...
- Avron
Interestingly enough, you'd spend more on your electrical bill over the course of 2-3 months than you've "saved" by not buying some new gear. You do get an alternate heating source out of the bargain...
I think that I still prefer to bake my chips, but if you're one of the deep-fry set, then this sounds like just the thing! ;)
Probably the best movie of all time... and only a little off-topic!
Did you read my post? At what point did I indicate that it had been completely eradicated? Now when you consider that the bulk of the telecom infrastructure has been unchanged for the past 20 years, it is not surprising that your local telco hasn't converted yet.
Halon has been removed from most server rooms here in Canada. It has been largely replaced be FM-200.
There are a number of slashdot visitors that do actually care about server room issues. The fact that you don't understand the need does not negate it's importance.
Large organizations rely on server rooms for their computing environment. Having a cobbled environment where the file server is on the 3rd floor, and the application server is in the janitor's closet, etc. is a recipe for disaster. Troubleshooting connectivity issues (among others) can end up costing more than the apparent simplicity of such a design.
Understanding ways to better cool the space that our servers occupy is important. And being able to do so in a cost effective manner is also important. The organization that I work in has one in-house server room (containing 60 racks of servers), and one 'co-located' server room (containing 72 racks of servers). Heat and power are the two killers. If we experience a 50% power loss (assume that one power grid is knocked out), do we have enough power to run AND cool the server room? If not, what percentage of my gear do I need to shut down in order to prevent overheating, without impacting critical business systems (like payroll).
If we can find a cheaper / better / more cost effective method for cooling that utilizes less power, or find a way to use the cooling systems that we have in a more efficient manner, is that not worth an article on slashdot?
IMHO, This is a valid topic.
I stand corrected.
My use of the word monopoly merely indicates a throwback to my old schooling. Just posting a clarification of the legal ramifications (stolen blatantly from wikipedia) of anti-competitive behaviour:
- paraphrased from wikipedia -
In 1890, Congress passed the Sherman Anti-trust law. It was the first United States federal government action to limit the monopolies which trust companies held over the economy. It made illegal any form of contract or combination between entities with regard to trade and commerce that would have the effect of restraining trade. And it also put responsibility on government attorneys and district courts to pursue and investigate trusts.
It was used to divide the Northern Securities Company.
It was used to divide the American Tobacco Company
It was used to divide the Standard Oil trust.
The Act was aimed at regulating the businesses of the time, but it was not specific (It did not specifically refer to a monopoly, instead prohibiting unlawful business combinations). It was used for many years as an anti-union tool, until that use was finally revoked in 1914 by the Clayton Antitrust Act, which contained the word monopoly.
The United States Supreme Court has deemed three types of conduct so lacking in economic justification as to be "per se" illegal. The "per se" violations include price fixing, bid rigging, and market allocation schemes, and are generally prosecuted criminally by the Antitrust Division of the United States Department of Justice.
- Cheers
1. The majority of lawmakers utilize the internet at home. Many of whom pay attention to the bills they pay at home, even if they are willing to spend 40k on a toilet seat at the office. Most adults do not allow their child to *call* overseas, but would think nothing about allowing them to visit an overseas website. If there were suddenly surcharges for every node hit along the way, the internets usefulness for the majority would suddenly decrease dramatically.
2. The US is not the only country that provides access to (or content on) the internet. Lobbying the US govt. for the right to bill website owners will not fly. If the EEU says "No, we don't agree", what would the US government do in retaliation? Fortunately, congress does not have the power to legislate communication billing methods for the globe.
3. Connection fees are already paid by parties at each end of any transmission. So, technically, there is already a double billing going on. What they are looking for is a third (and fourth and fifth...) helping.
4. Monopolies are illegal in the US (and Canada, and probably most of the other big trade countries. Haven't checked tho). "Ma Bell" will never again be a monopoly. The law isn't the only reason, either. People are more informed today about the impact that monopolies have on prices and availability of service. We expect choice, and will not tolerate a single vendor option.
Gravity is a myth - the earth sucks!
I'm a dad, and I firmly believe that it is my duty to scarf as much chocolateBBBBDAsacrifice myself for the well being of my son. I happend to likeBidisA candy. And beside I deserve my 'vig' for hustling the little hoodlum from house to house... (JUST KIDDING - he's not *that* little)
All typed with tongue firmly embedded in cheek (yes, mine).
(please excuse the vi editing codes...)
I suddenly feel an overwhelming urge to explore, conquer and colonize! Woohoo! Well, that was fun, now back to work...
Seems to me that the bill in question would have been a lot easier to police (and would make a lot more sense) if it had banned the sale of ALL video games to minors. I'm not suggesting that kids shouldn't be allowed to play Super Julio Bro's, but that little Timmy should have to take "Dad" to the store with him if he wants the new release of "Patricide II - Daddy's Back".
I'm not a proponent of censorship in general. I just happen to think that there's nothing wrong with preventing children from having access to gruesome violent content *on demand*.
This I know. The Grandparent suggested that there are other operating systems that provided this feature before the Macintosh. I've asked him to identify one, as I can't think of any.
And I've used my fair share of OS's...
Please feel free to identify which OS's used these keyboard combinations. I am curious (not baiting you), as I've used many in the past
Some potential titles for the afore mentioned 80's movie:
"Remix Of The Killer Tomatoes"
"Return Of The Password Snatchers"
"They Listened from Within"
"Buffy The Keystroke Logger" (not quite on-topic)
"I Know What You Typed Last Summer"
"Eavesdropper"
"The Computers Have Ears"
The unrelated horror film we're most likely to see?
"The Blog" - with Steve McQueen re-animated to reprise his role as "Steve Andrews"
Genre: Horror / Sci-Fi / Comedy
Tagline: Indescribable... Indestructible! Nothing Can Stop It!
Plot Outline: An inane personal web log consumes all bandwidth in its path as it grows and grows.
Abuse?!
:)
I was using alliteration as a tool to provoke a thought. Maybe "promulgators" was a bit of a stretch, but it sounded more interesting than perpetrators. I would have used perpetuators, but alas, that word escaped my grasp while drafting my note.
It was fun to write, just the same
"Cleanliness is next to Godliness" (an old proverb, but not actually *from* Proverbs)
Ablutions also refer to the daily habiitual cleaning of oneself, in an effort to prepare to meet the day.
It sounds much nicer than some of the alternatives often used to describe this process.
Nobody ever said that the Canadian government suffered from common sense or good judgement, and they are certainly not known for consistancy in any event. Today they vote yes, tomorrow they vote no.
;)
I've never claimed that my government was a bastion of faith, but I wouldn't say that they are the root of all evil. They are more like nodules on the root of all evil
Where's the "mom" in the mom-n-pop? If it's just you 4 guys and the dog...
That's our Canadian government - always looking out for the little guys. Those much maligned mega marketers, the poorly pictured political parties and poll promulgators, the little lobbyests languishing in the face of previously proposed changes to our country's telecommunications laws.
What ever were we thinking in our attempts to wrest the right to remain "unlisted" and "untapped"?
How dare we expect to have the right to not be disturbed in the midst of our daily ablutions by the ring-ring-ringing of the telephone?
I am (almost) at a loss for words, but I'm certain that if I wait a bit, someone new will call me and try to sell me their own.
Sadly it appears that my government is no longer similar to the American's "of the people, by the people, for the people", but "to the people".
Ooooo - burn!
I chose a dollar amount as it is the easiest barrier for a diverse group of people to accept.
It could just as easily been "now assume that the technology has been lost..." or some other crisis based issue.
I don't believe that money should be a driving factor. It just seemed to be the easiest method to introduce a concept.
Good idea. In my defence, I'm operating on 0 sleep and 0 coffee...
Ask everyone in the group to imagine a simple piece of paper.
Ask them:
What would use a blank sheet of paper for?
What do you know about where the paper was manufactured?
What do you know about the inventor of paper?
There are few simple alternatives to paper. Sure there are whiteboards / chalkboards / computers / sheets of mylar, etc., but each has limitations that are not inherent to paper.
Ask them how they would feel if it suddenly cost $300.00 to purchase each sheet of paper simply because the biggest vendor decided that that was what they wanted to charge. What would they do to get around this barrier to their productivity. The alternatives aren't very convenient for most people. Would they look into making their own paper?
Then tell them that there is a community that is offering other ways to manufacture paper that drastically decreased the cost - back down to the previous rate - how would they feel about that.
Better still, what if that community were all volunteers, whose goal is to make access to this type of information / service / activity available to as many people as possible?
This is rather simplistic, and doesn't address a lot of what OSS/FOSS is about, but it is a simple way to introduce the subject.
It wouldn't hurt if you could download an Open Source paper airplane design so that they can build $300.00 paper airplanes at the end of your chat.
- A