Re: Real World News.."And so it goes"

[Linux Idiot <esoteric@atlnet.com>]

Norm wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 15 Apr 1998 09:08:46 -0400 (EDT), Linux Idiot wrote:
> 
> >AT&T is doing much the same thing.  Replacing, of all things Sun
> >workstations with Windows 95 PCs.  To show you just how much corporate
> >management is clueless, my last assignment was a completely UNIX based
> >environment.  They replaced Sun workstations with Wintel (95).  The
> >whole environment was X based, so then they go and buy Hummingbird to
> >emulate X on win95.  Absolutely no sense.  Windows for the sake of
> >Windows.
> 
>      Are we talking about Intel based boxes running the x86 version of
> Solaris or are they actually replacing SPARC Stations for Wintel
> boxes??  Switching to win95 on x86 boxes is bad enough, but if it's the
> latter it should actually be fun to watch...their users are in for a
> big surprise :-D.

They are mothballing the Sparc stations and replacing them with brand
new Wintel hardware.  And all along, we're talking about saving money???

> 
> >
> >Although not all of AT&T has gone the way of Wintel, I find all kinds of
> >internal documents on the Intranet that are Word. The top level of
> >management actually put out a word based doc that all employees should
> >have had access to.
> >
> >A lot of it is educational issues.  I'm responsible for a segment of the
> >AT&T HR Intranet development.  When I suggested to one person that they
> >should quite sending word document versions of their newsletter via
> >email and publish it on the Intranet, she said that there would be
> >people who could not access it.  Think about it.  We're talking about
> >people who obviously have email and MS word.  I'm still fighting this
> >one.
> 
>      This is a prime of example of the level of knowledge you're
> dealing with.  What does she think, that users can access word docs but
> somehow can't deal with plain text???  Geezzzz...good luck fighting
> them, it's like they're talking a different language (she's definitely
> speaking 'clueless').

It's unfortunate.  When I took this assignment, the web server was set
up on an NT box, sharing the box with other services.  I suggested we
needed a separate box for the web server as a physical barrier between
these services.  I got it, but when I suggested a UNIX based solution, I
was told no by the tech support manager.  The reason?  
"I don't have any people with UNIX experience/knowledge."  My answer:
"If you have a team of carpenters, and you toilet is clogged, you hire a
plumber or train one of your carpenters to be a plumber."  As far as I'm
concerned, using NT as a webserver is like hammering a nail with a
screwdriver...  I've lost that battle, but the war is about to rage. 
I've put in for a new box, faster processor, more memory.  It's not been
approved, but once it is, then I'm going to have a discussion with the
tech manager and her boss (who is my boss as well).  The good thing
about my boss is she respects my experience and knowledge.  She also
expects you to back up what you say with factual info.  I've already
offered to administer the box myself, remotely.  We'll see how it goes. 
It's gotten to the point where I'm considering leaving AT&T (20 years)
because of their whole hog move to MS products.  I want the right
solutions for the right reasons.

> 
>  ...Cheers,
> 
>  ...Norm
> 
> ***********************************************
> * Brought to you by OS/2 Warp v4.0 and PMMail *
> * For a copy of my PGP key send me a message  *
> * with "send pub_key" in the subject          *
> ***********************************************

-- 
Until later: Geoffrey		esoteric@atlnet.com

NT is secure.... as long as you don't remove the shrink wrap.
Want to speed up your NT box real cheap?  Replace NT with Linux...