Discussion on:
Freeware (Open Source) and Nature of Business
Tags: it management, project management
View:
Show:
I have been in IT industry for only 9 years, started as System Engineer, Software Engineer and now working as an IT Support for over a year. When I joined this organization (non-profit) I was happy because my main target was met; using Server 2003 and Windows XP was all I needed as IT Support. We were only two in IT department, my and my IT Manager. IT Manager left the company and our Executive Director permanently hired a person while I was in vacation who will be my assistant. I got a big surprise when I came back from vacation, new server installed which is Linux (Ubuntu) and all staff convinced to use Thunderbird against Outlook. My main issue addressed to the big boss (who has no ideas about what's going on as far as information technology is concerned) was that, why we have to go through this way and actually hired a Linux experienced person (totally non Windows) while most of the software used by the organization are Windows based? Anyway, the answer was that this geek knows a lot especially open source (freeware) stuffs. Since then everything is unstable, staff keep complaining about all try and error applications used. We are only 20 staff and now we have 4 servers because some software need Windows. This costs more than what big boss expected. I believe I have learnt on making decision without gathering requirements and risks, just because software is free might cost you a lot.
even using freeware. Many of the problems are most likely user unfamiliarity with the SW. It would have been better to migrate a few key users to the new systems and work out any bugs/changes/training during a month or 2. Then migrate slowly, keeping up with problems/quirks found by the end users.
It is slower, but the entire company will not be affected all at once. Also, it would be a good idea to keep people on their regular setup while the training and initial tests are done.
It is slower, but the entire company will not be affected all at once. Also, it would be a good idea to keep people on their regular setup while the training and initial tests are done.
you got screwed. Manager bought into free as in beer, hires some clown who to be quite honest appears to know very little in the way of practical.
Ubuntu as a server??
It's not the technology, it's the technologist.
That aside, if I were you I'd be looking for another job. In fact I would have just said FU and exited stage left.
Ubuntu as a server??
It's not the technology, it's the technologist.
That aside, if I were you I'd be looking for another job. In fact I would have just said FU and exited stage left.
1: He uses Ubuntu as a server because..
2: He needs a GUI to configure it.
2: He needs a GUI to configure it.
I put my first lamp server together using the gui. When it didn't work exactly as planned, I had enough clues to ask the correct questions on google and sort it out.
That was Mandrake 9.0.
Seeing as Ubuntu is pretty much designed to eat into the MS desktop market, using it as a server is going to get you all sorts of bloat and cruft you don't need.
I did leave the GUI installed, but I learnt to do my stuff from the command line eventually. The next six I built never bothered with startX.
Guy must have bought into the linux is better scenario, without bothering about when and why it was better.
That was Mandrake 9.0.
Seeing as Ubuntu is pretty much designed to eat into the MS desktop market, using it as a server is going to get you all sorts of bloat and cruft you don't need.
I did leave the GUI installed, but I learnt to do my stuff from the command line eventually. The next six I built never bothered with startX.
Guy must have bought into the linux is better scenario, without bothering about when and why it was better.
- Keyboard Shortcuts:
- Prev
- Next
- Toggle
