Getting first W2K server

Getting first W2K server

Post by jnumme.. » Fri, 26 Jan 2001 10:31:47



Posting here because I believe anti-microsfts aremore here then in any
other newsgroup.

New CIO tell us we will convert one of present mission-critical systems
to Microsoft even though vendor doesn't care what we run still it has to
be only Oracle. We are IBM only shop today, having many AS/400 and
RS/6000 only. I and programming and admins are wondering what ugly
surprises is lurking for us in running W2K in this situation. What can
go wrong and what can add cost that we amy not getting told by vendor?

Please Microsoft advocates, please do not waste my time giving good news
as I have sit recently through 10 hours of vendor feelgood shit
presentation and I am not in a good mood.

Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/

 
 
 

Getting first W2K server

Post by J Sloa » Fri, 26 Jan 2001 11:13:50



> Posting here because I believe anti-microsfts aremore here then in any
> other newsgroup.

> New CIO tell us we will convert one of present mission-critical systems
> to Microsoft even though vendor doesn't care what we run still it has to
> be only Oracle. We are IBM only shop today, having many AS/400 and
> RS/6000 only. I and programming and admins are wondering what ugly
> surprises is lurking for us in running W2K in this situation. What can
> go wrong and what can add cost that we amy not getting told by vendor?

All sorts of things can and will go wrong - sorry to
have to confirm your fears, but it sounds like your
CIO has been bought off. Probably time to look for
a new job, it's probably going to get worse.

Windows 2000 seems to be more stable than 95/98,
but if you are coming from a Unix background, w2k
will likely still seem flaky and unstable.

On the bright side, however, the Unix job market is
in very good shape these days.

jjs

 
 
 

Getting first W2K server

Post by pac4.. » Fri, 26 Jan 2001 11:48:30


Where is good sight to post CV? I have IBM certifications, published
author, and the like.

This deciding of buyiong W2K was made by CIO out of town, with none from
technical group specially not invited, is this regular for Microsoft
sellers to do this sneak attack?

Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/

 
 
 

Getting first W2K server

Post by yt.. » Fri, 26 Jan 2001 13:28:12



> Where is good sight to post CV? I have IBM certifications, published
> author, and the like.
> This deciding of buyiong W2K was made by CIO out of town, with none from
> technical group specially not invited, is this regular for Microsoft
> sellers to do this sneak attack?

This sort of thing indeed has happened.

Funny how microsoft sales droids dont like to talk to technical people.

-----.

 
 
 

Getting first W2K server

Post by Bobby D. Bryan » Fri, 26 Jan 2001 14:42:39



> This deciding of buyiong W2K was made by CIO out of town, with none from
> technical group specially not invited, is this regular for Microsoft
> sellers to do this sneak attack?

It's not just Microsoft.  I spent a while in IT at a big corporation, and
technical decisions were usually made by clueless middle managers after
being wined and dined (and probably other things) by salesmen.  Technically
competent people were never consulted, because they couldn't be relied on
to give the "right" answer.

About the only time a salesman wasn't in the decision loop is when the
decision was handed down by a higher-level manager waging a career-building
turf battle.  Of course, those decisions weren't made for technical reasons
either.

Bobby Bryant
Austin, Texas

 
 
 

Getting first W2K server

Post by Bobby D. Bryan » Fri, 26 Jan 2001 14:52:04



> Funny how microsoft sales droids dont like to talk to technical people.

I should have also said in my other post ("not just Microsoft"), that if your
company buys the wrong thing and it doesn't work as advertised, standard
practice is to blame the technical staff for sabotaging it.

I was in the political hot seat over this once.  The company made a really
stupid purchasing decision, and the product absolutely would not work as
promised.  Two people before me had tried to make it work, and failed, and
were being accused of not wanting it to work.  When the hot potato fell into
my lap, I followed the vendor's instructions and also discovered that it
would not work as promised.  Not being one to play the fall guy, I ran a
suite of systematic tests and plotted the results vs. parameter settings.
When I plotted the a graph I got a sawtooth pattern that strongly suggested
that some integer variable was wrapping around because it did not have enough
bits.  That was enough to convince my boss to demand a conference call with
the product's maintainer.  He was *really* annoyed to be bothered by a
customer, and let slip that the system was experimental and was never
intended to be used as the salesman had promised.

The fallout?  None at all.  Corporations are accustomed to letting lying
salesmen make their decisions for them, and then ordering IT to "make it
work".

Bobby Bryant
Austin, Texas

 
 
 

Getting first W2K server

Post by Lloyd Llewelly » Fri, 26 Jan 2001 21:45:40


Quote:>I and
> programming and admins are wondering what ugly surprises is lurking for us in
> running W2K in this situation.

Well, we just moved a system from AIX to Win2K two days ago.  Worked fine under
AIX, but now print jobs max out the CPU (like, 100%) when printing to a text
printer on a local LPT port.  Easily enough solved by putting the printer on
its own box, but why is that an issue in Windows?  It shouldn't be.
 
 
 

Getting first W2K server

Post by Lloyd Llewelly » Fri, 26 Jan 2001 21:47:53


Quote:> I ran a suite of systematic tests and plotted the results vs. parameter
> settings. When I plotted the a graph I got a sawtooth pattern that strongly
> suggested that some integer variable was wrapping around because it did not
> have enough bits.

I must say, sounds pretty ingenious.
 
 
 

Getting first W2K server

Post by Erik Funkenbusc » Sat, 27 Jan 2001 03:38:17



Quote:> >I and
> > programming and admins are wondering what ugly surprises is lurking for
us in
> > running W2K in this situation.

> Well, we just moved a system from AIX to Win2K two days ago.  Worked fine
under
> AIX, but now print jobs max out the CPU (like, 100%) when printing to a
text
> printer on a local LPT port.  Easily enough solved by putting the printer
on
> its own box, but why is that an issue in Windows?  It shouldn't be.

What are you talking about?  Printing does not take 100% of the CPU, not
even in Windows 3.1.
 
 
 

Getting first W2K server

Post by Bobby D. Bryan » Sat, 27 Jan 2001 04:13:05



> Forget that.  You'll be coming into work at all hours of the day, now.

MCSEs on a four-hour minimum for callouts say that's what they like best
about Windows shops.  Salaried employees, or employees that like to have a
life outside working hours, aren't nearly so fond of it.

Bobby Bryant
Austin, Texas

 
 
 

Getting first W2K server

Post by Aaron R. Kulki » Sat, 27 Jan 2001 04:18:30




> > Funny how microsoft sales droids dont like to talk to technical people.

> I should have also said in my other post ("not just Microsoft"), that if your
> company buys the wrong thing and it doesn't work as advertised, standard
> practice is to blame the technical staff for sabotaging it.

> I was in the political hot seat over this once.  The company made a really
> stupid purchasing decision, and the product absolutely would not work as
> promised.  Two people before me had tried to make it work, and failed, and
> were being accused of not wanting it to work.  When the hot potato fell into
> my lap, I followed the vendor's instructions and also discovered that it
> would not work as promised.  Not being one to play the fall guy, I ran a
> suite of systematic tests and plotted the results vs. parameter settings.
> When I plotted the a graph I got a sawtooth pattern that strongly suggested
> that some integer variable was wrapping around because it did not have enough
> bits.  That was enough to convince my boss to demand a conference call with
> the product's maintainer.  He was *really* annoyed to be bothered by a
> customer, and let slip that the system was experimental and was never
> intended to be used as the salesman had promised.

Which, of course, is grounds for a fraud suit.

Quote:> The fallout?  None at all.  Corporations are accustomed to letting lying
> salesmen make their decisions for them, and then ordering IT to "make it
> work".

> Bobby Bryant
> Austin, Texas

--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642

H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
    premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
    you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
    you are lazy, stupid people"

I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
   challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
   between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
   Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole

J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
   The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
   also known as old hags who've hit the wall....

A:  The wise man is mocked by fools.

B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
   method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
   direction that she doesn't like.

C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.

D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
   ...despite (C) above.

E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
   her behavior improves.

F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
   *ery while concurrently committing *ery with Tammy Hahn.

G:  Knackos...you're a retard.

 
 
 

Getting first W2K server

Post by Aaron R. Kulki » Sat, 27 Jan 2001 05:12:59



> >I and
> > programming and admins are wondering what ugly surprises is lurking for us in
> > running W2K in this situation.

> Well, we just moved a system from AIX to Win2K two days ago.  Worked fine under
> AIX, but now print jobs max out the CPU (like, 100%) when printing to a text
> printer on a local LPT port.  Easily enough solved by putting the printer on
> its own box, but why is that an issue in Windows?  It shouldn't be.

Considering that this is a task which, at MAXIMUM should only take a few
kHz of  CPU bandwidth, this is *ing PATHETIC.

--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642

H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
    premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
    you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
    you are lazy, stupid people"

I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
   challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
   between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
   Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole

J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
   The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
   also known as old hags who've hit the wall....

A:  The wise man is mocked by fools.

B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
   method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
   direction that she doesn't like.

C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.

D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
   ...despite (C) above.

E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
   her behavior improves.

F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
   *ery while concurrently committing *ery with Tammy Hahn.

G:  Knackos...you're a retard.

 
 
 

Getting first W2K server

Post by Pete Goodwi » Sat, 27 Jan 2001 06:09:09



> New CIO tell us we will convert one of present mission-critical systems
> to Microsoft even though vendor doesn't care what we run still it has to
> be only Oracle. We are IBM only shop today, having many AS/400 and
> RS/6000 only. I and programming and admins are wondering what ugly
> surprises is lurking for us in running W2K in this situation. What can
> go wrong and what can add cost that we amy not getting told by vendor?

Strange way of doing things.

Why didn't your CIO get the vendor to do the installation and set up a test
system, then evaluate the result? That's what I've observed most
corporations do - they don't just dive in like yours appears to be doing?

What was the rationale of switching from AS/400 and RS/6000? They work
don't they? (When I worked for Digital, I could never really say that!).

"If it ain't broke, then don't fix it".

--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2

 
 
 

Getting first W2K server

Post by Joseph T. Adam » Sat, 27 Jan 2001 06:41:28



:> This deciding of buyiong W2K was made by CIO out of town, with none from
:> technical group specially not invited, is this regular for Microsoft
:> sellers to do this sneak attack?

: It's not just Microsoft.  I spent a while in IT at a big corporation, and
: technical decisions were usually made by clueless middle managers after
: being wined and dined (and probably other things) by salesmen.  Technically
: competent people were never consulted, because they couldn't be relied on
: to give the "right" answer.

Purchasing in general tends to be like that in the large companies
I've worked for or with.  :(

Joe