|
AlternateAccount posted:
I feel like they also assume you're not keeping around the people you used to have on staff to maintain that infrastructure.
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 16:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 18:36 |
|
|
xsf421 posted:I feel like they also assume you're not keeping around the people you used to have on staff to maintain that infrastructure. ding ding ding ding
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 16:53
|
|
|
AlternateAccount posted:I am not sure Microsoft has EVER put out something that is so universally useful. It's so good. Yeah, PowerShell is extremely awesome.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 16:54
|
|
|
xsf421 posted:I feel like they also assume you're not keeping around the people you used to have on staff to maintain that infrastructure. Bingo! The big spreadsheet of shame has a line for "FTE saved" at some "all in" rate. The only FTE you save are the physical server touchers who swap the ram.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 17:21
|
|
|
Any example given anywhere about cost savings in IT starts off with a hilarious figure for what your current costs are, almost on the scale of Creative Labs’ “experience” graph.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 17:52
|
|
|
I have yet to see anything other than a service you can buy be fiscally better running in the cloud. The only project I've even seen break even was a build process in AWS that our engineers want to do where it's almost dead even in costs vs us just buying a shitload of blade servers.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 18:58
|
|
|
One of our engineering groups is actually moving out of AWS and back to physical servers due to cost. They build a software product that needs to load test millions of connections. The lab manager told me it runs about 7K an hour when they spin up the dozens and dozens of instances in AWS for their testing, and they test builds twice a day. For about a couple months AWS billing they're installing 120 supermicro physical servers and moving testing to those. I'm not sure on what platform their doing all the automation or using for a hypervisor and all that.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 19:12
|
|
|
xsf421 posted:I feel like they also assume you're not keeping around the people you used to have on staff to maintain that infrastructure.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 20:17
|
|
|
xsf421 posted:AWS sold my company on this, and when our architects did the math, they forgot to include having things in multiple AZ/regions, so we're already 1.5-2x what was projected. Curious: did you have a global infrastructure footprint before moving to AWS? AlternateAccount posted:Microsoft/AWS/Vendors sell the SAVINGGGSS!!! Strangely, I know no one who does this. While cost is certainly a factor, the main points that we talk about with potential customers are flexibility and lack of commitment to any architecture. From the brief anecdotes given above, I see examples of workloads that involve fixed encumbrance of compute at scale - one of the worst use-cases for cloud computing. The best use cases for cloud computing are retail organizations with large swings in workload demand and tech companies who are not afraid to fail fast and iterate quickly. Between the extremes of large, fixed workloads and workloads with dynamic architecture and/or traffic most organizations fall and those organizations need to do their due diligence with appropriate test cases and modelling. Agrikk fucked around with this message at 20:47 on Oct 19, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 20:31
|
|
|
I think with cloud the biggest and most consistent thread I see is people massively underestimate the professional cost in building an on-prem solution that provides feature-parity with AWS/Azure/etc. If you're not out to do that, then it makes a lot of sense to run on-prem.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 00:10
|
|
|
abigserve posted:In my experience there is a lot of creative accounting that goes into the "cloud is too expensive" calculations. They generally omit the facts that: Vulture Culture posted:Or using them to add value instead of limit cost (We are a software development shop, so I'm posting through that lens) I see you've met my former boss. He was vehemently anti-cloud, and would present the most disingenuous reports to upper management about why we couldn't possibly move our services into AWS. Modeled as a total lift and shift, no effort to optimize anything whatsoever for the cloud. Like not even reserved instances or moving data into S3/Glacier. All high IOPS EBS volumes in this quote, baby. Meanwhile the on-prem numbers look great because we were running ancient, depreciated, off-support hardware so there's no capex and he's not counting all the time engineers making 6 figures spend telling remote hands to go swap a dead hard drive. He became obsessed with running the lowest cost data center possible, and optimized every choice for that, despite the execs telling him that was not their goal at all. ...he somehow parlayed this into a high-paying job managing teams at Facebook and left (so maybe jokes's on us?). We immediately began moving the company into AWS, because we were below the "economies of scale" size once you run an honest analysis, and it makes more sense to put smart people to work adding value. I agree you don't go to the cloud to save money. But it can be a good option when you're in that small to medium tier where you don't really have room to pay dedicated data center people and also dedicated SRE people. The less time I'm spending trying to eBay replacement parts, the more time I can spend improving monitoring of our Kubernetes cluster, or whatever.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 01:43
|
|
|
I can't speak for every company but last year Adobe and Microsoft both signed Multi-Million Dollar deals with Azure. General Electric spends tens of millions a year with AWS. I don't know if small-medium businesses are the target of the cloud but I don't believe these companies are just throwing away money either.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 01:45
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:I can't speak for every company but last year Adobe and Microsoft both signed Multi-Million Dollar deals with Azure. Does Microsoft really need to make deals with themselves to use their own cloud servers?
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 01:57
|
|
|
internal chargeback systems are CTO erection factories
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 02:07
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:I don't know if small-medium businesses are the target of the cloud but I don't believe these companies are just throwing away money either.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 02:08
|
|
|
fishmech posted:Does Microsoft really need to make deals with themselves to use their own cloud servers? You'd be surprised. My significant other works for IBM and she has to charge other departments at IBM for all sorts of poo poo and it hits her project budget. It's crazy.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 02:09
|
|
|
We've done the same sort of analysis and reached the same conclusions. Taking our existing environment full of legacy applications and running it in the cloud would make no sense at all. When we look at transforming some of those apps to take more advantage of scalable capacity, hosted container offerings, etc, then it's a whole different conversation. Then again, time spent doing that application work is time taken away from other development priorities. My current goal is to stay current enough that I'm worth paying whatever platform we end up on.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 02:18
|
|
|
2012 DC refresh is finally happening  4 HPE Proliants, 84TB Nimble and a brand new VMware installation, gonna be nice! gently caress the buttThe administration is also looking at outsourcing networking entirely, roughly half of my team's job. I got pricing the other day and I could afford another 3 FTEs plus regular equipment replacement on what they'd charge each year, so I hope that isn't happening.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 03:14
|
|
|
CloFan posted:2012 DC refresh is finally happening Cloud to butt continues to deliver in new and wonderful ways
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 03:30
|
|
Cat Army
|
The Iron Rose posted:Cloud to butt continues to deliver in new and wonderful ways Seems to have put butt there himself.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 03:58
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 04:02
|
|
|
Docjowles posted:...he somehow parlayed this into a high-paying job managing teams at Facebook and left (so maybe jokes's on us?). PBS posted:Seems to have put butt there himself.
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2018 12:21
|
|
|
7 hour conference call. It was DNS.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2018 05:46
|
|
|
Vulture Culture posted:The part of this that really gets me is that Facebook almost never hires managers from outside the organization into management positions inside the organization without making them do IC work for a year first. It was technically Instagram (post acquisition) if it matters. But yeah, I have no idea how he landed this gig because he was an objectively horrendous people manager and didn't have impressive IC credentials, either. He tries to poach us all from time to time and literally no one has bitten, which really says it all.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2018 05:56
|
|
|
An Enormous Boner posted:What's bothering people about managing Macs? All of ours stay onsite and don't have any especially crazy software requirements, which is probably coloring my senses. Configuration profiles, DeployStudio and munki plus related tools make most things straightforward. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2018 07:26
|
|
|
If any of you Microsoft shop/ITSM/Support guys want to make a switch to a vendor, my company is recruiting in Boston (Customer Success Management, Professional Services and Technical Account Managers). We're a relatively small company planning to IPO in 2020, but we've got very good growth and from my experience salaries are good. Hit me up on PMs if interested for more information.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2018 13:26
|
|
|
I was out shopping at a major national store and overheard a problem where handheld scanners weren't connecting via Bluetooth to their zebra printers for clearance labels or whatever. The friendly helpful person in me wanted to help, but I though of this thread and said to myself, "gently caress printers." Thanks thread. Thread
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2018 19:09
|
|
|
how do y'all quantify stuff for your resume that is more technical in nature? I am updating my resume and I have some great projects that I can be like "Implemented and deployed mobile weight tracking for pallets, saving the company over 250k/yr in freight costs" but also stuff like "Oversaw migration of 30 servers from Windows Server 2003 to Windows Server 2016" which doesn't have quite as quantifiable a value. I know having numbers on my resume is great but I am struggling how to tie numbers into things like that. Is it useful to even tie numbers to that?
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 18:33
|
|
|
If the server number is low, you could put the number of users that were affected by the upgrade instead. It's kind of a grey area, because how can you tie a server upgrade to a dollar amount or hours gained in productivity? Oh I know, mention that the server upgrades were under budget or finished early. That really ties into project management acumen.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 18:42
|
|
|
Did you do anything special in that process? Ensure zero application downtime through failover, improve the process and save x fte-hours, anything like that? If you did anything more than follow a standard upgrade process that someone else gave you, try to quantify the way your specific work helped the company.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 18:58
|
|
|
Price difference between a support contract for Server 2003 and Server 2016 is a pretty easy way to quantify that. IIRC, Server 2003 support requires a custom support contract, which is roughly $Alaska.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 19:05
|
|
|
DelphiAegis posted:I was out shopping at a major national store and overheard a problem where handheld scanners weren't connecting via Bluetooth to their zebra printers for clearance labels or whatever. And of all printers, Zebra label printers are the worst. They have almost literally no competition in their usage space, so they just keep making the same poo poo printer with the same poo poo firmware forever.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 20:31
|
|
|
Darchangel posted:And of all printers, Zebra label printers are the worst. They have almost literally no competition in their usage space, so they just keep making the same poo poo printer with the same poo poo firmware forever. We pay $10/mo per zebra printer for maintenance. They come out once a month for a cleaning and if one breaks, they come out for free and repair it for free. Best drat money ever spent.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 20:33
|
|
|
Darchangel posted:And of all printers, Zebra label printers are the worst. They have almost literally no competition in their usage space, so they just keep making the same poo poo printer with the same poo poo firmware forever. Good lord I hated having to lug out a 50 pound ZM400 replacement across half the plant floor. You'd think the printers would get smaller over time but they still produce these big, heavy boat anchors.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 21:15
|
|
|
The best part about Zebra printers is how the Seagull driver is way better than the one Zebra makes themselves
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 21:16
|
|
|
uhhhhahhhhohahhh posted:The best part about Zebra printers is how the Seagull driver is way better than the one Zebra makes themselves That's specifically why we use Bartender as our labeling program.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 21:20
|
|
|
I have some label printing horror stories if anybody is interested. It mostly involves a system held together with tape and popsicle sticks.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 21:25
|
|
|
We had a Zebra at a coffee factory I used to work at, back in the late 90's. That bastard was a tank, especially considering how super-fine dust was being generated in that place more or less constantly. It was like 20 years ago but I bet that label station is still there and probably still running Windows 95. Also, I bet my old boss is probably still drunk
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 21:58
|
|
|
Thanks but there has been enough chat about Zebra, Seagull, and BarTender to keep me up the rest of the week
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 21:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 18:36 |
|
|
Kashuno posted:Thanks but there has been enough chat about Zebra, Seagull, and BarTender to keep me up the rest of the week
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2018 22:11
|
|
