Discussion on:

Microsoft and enterprises in a love-hate relationship

Our company doesn't have the $$ to continually by new hardware, new software, new operating systems every couple of years. We also do not have a reson to move to a wireless solution as we don't have 100s of administrative people roaming around the company with their laptops.

What our IT department sees is hype and sales ploys that tug on competitiveness with pitches that play the "keeping up with the Jones next door" game or "your a loser if you don't have the latest and greatest".

Simply put those that sell IT stuff is a business. Those of use who use it, its just a tool. We simply don't have the $$ to continually buy new, very expensive, hip tools when the old ones work just fine for us.

A little story about IT tools, and why newer isn't necessarily better:

At the last company I worked for, in the late 90s, they were using a 20-year old legacy MRP system. Unix-based, never fell over, used dumb terminals that had been around since the start of the television age.

The only reason they got rid of it was that it wasn't Y2K compliant. They replaced it with a JD Edwards system. That couldn't handle the way the company worked so JDE spent a year customising it (at great expense). The dumb terminals had to go, as JDE ran via a GUI on Windows. Also, all the hundreds of PCs in the offices, which had quite happily run the old system using terminal emulators, had to be upgraded as well, as they weren't powerful enough. Total cost of new PCs was over $1 million.

The best bit was that when I left in early 1999 the system was running like a dog, possibly requiring a network upgrade. The old system had run quite happily on the network for years.

The new system had lots of bells and whistles but I wonder if it was really worth all those millions they must have paid for the system, given that the old system was doing an adequate job (apart, obviously, from not being Y2K compliant).

Convenience is the factor where I'm at.
The corporation is more than willing to baby the heck out of the end-users in our department just to keep them happy.
$1,400 a license? buy 35.
How much to have wireless access points installed in all of the conference rooms?
Do it.
17" flatpanel monitors? Yeah, everyone should have those. Except for the people who want the 19" ones instead.
USB Keys, DVD burners, External laptop batteries, Three types of VPN access, all new hardware every 24 months, you name it.

I realize this is not the norm, but about 200 of our users get to be EXTREMELY productive whenever and wherever they want.

The latest and greatest is good, it just can't be applied to everyone.
Keeping this one department constantly up to speed keeps the company as a whole functioning VERY smoothly.

Our company is set up to retire hardware in 4 year cycles. The demands of the pc depends on the department. The new stuff goes into the graphics dept and eventually finds their way out into the warehouse where little is asked of the machine. Is it cheap? Not at first glance, but the big difference that I notice is that we don't have any of the issues that seem to plague others that I've read here. We've seen the complaints of the guy who spends every waking moment nursing his tired [outdated] network. Our network is for the most part hands off. A new workstation comes in, it is configured for the role and I typically don't have to touch it agin until it changes departments. As for bells and whistles, sometimes they aren't that valuable but I've found that if I spend some time investigating the bells, I can find a way to exploit the feature to benefit the company in directions previously not considered.

I'd have to compare this to an old car I had in the 80's. A lot of companies look at the cost of a new car and think that it is too expensive. So they continue to put money into the old car. A new water pump this month, a new radiator, fuel pump, suspension, transmission. This only compunds the problem because you now feel that to get the value out of the money spent on the repairs, you need to hang on longer. Still you are afraid to take the car any farther than you are willing to walk back from and you've spent almost as much in repairs per year as car payments on that new car.

The bottom line is that keeping up with the latest and greatest has left my network with almost 0% downtime in 5 years and a 7-4, M-F job for me.

Most of my customers have a regular 3 year refresh cycle for the desktop. They don't really care what the new platform is they just refresh 1/3 of their fleet every year as part of a larger contract. That makes sense for the business from a depreciation point of view and saves them a lot of time on unnecessary decision making. This addresses about 80% of the businesses needs real needs and takes about 20% of the IT departments time. That's a good performance ratio for a cost centre like IT, but it generates little customer sat, even if the refresh goes off without a hitch. People expect that kind of thing to be 100% efficient, which might not be fair but that's the wau of the world.

There are always requirements from special projects or new applications that see some new kit being evaluated and some new technology being deployed. That takes care of about another 10 - 15% of the business, but takes IT about 50% of their time. That's a big hit for a cost centre but if you get it right then your customer sat pay back is very important. The whole IT departments (or consultants) credibility can hinge on your success with this 10 - 15% of the business.

The the last 5 - 10% is the real toys for the boys stuff. Broadband mobile data networks delivering video on demand to PDA smart phones across IPSec VPNs, that kind of thing. The cost of the system is very high and the return to the business is virtually zero. Politically you have to do it because the CEO / CIO want the new toy. By the same token the CFO hates the waste and thinks IT is a bunch of cowboys for delivering it. This kind of thing takes the last 30% of your time and the customer sat payback is doubtful, because there is always a better toy around the corner you know the customer will never be satisfied. And you are burning bridges with the bean counters who know projects like this are frivolous.

Just a few things you note such as flatpanel monitors and new hardware every 24 months show that your company is not as profitable or efficient as it should be. those items have nothing to do with productivity, they are because you IT director is a toy hound. I can see no reason to justify the type of expenses you indicate unless it is to gratify someones ego. It seems the IT department is running the company. IT is an expense center, not a profit center. Most IT guys and girls never get that. The latest and greatest should NEVER be applied to ANYONE unless it PAYS for itself in a reasonable period of time.