[TriLUG] How not to run a network

[sholton at mindspring.com]

Marc M <linuxr at gmail.com> writes:

> Well I agree with a lot you guys are saying, but I am speaking
> globally here.  I am astounded that SO many people, are able to make
> SO many decisions that are SO bad, and SO consistently, seemingly
> without repercussion.  You simply shouldn't be able to claim that
> 'Linux spreads viruses' (overtly or covertly), without having to back
> it up.  I consider it 'technological slander'.  Same goes for
> unscientific TCO studies but that's a slightly differrent matter...

Don't make me bore you with my discussion of the meaning
of the English word "should". ;-)
   http://m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=should

If the system is not acting in a way which is reasonable to you,
there are two possibilities: either the system is faulty (broken)
or your comprehension of the system is faulty (broken).
As crazy as it might seem, the system _is_ the system: it is
therefore _not_ faulty.

> Microsoft and some other vendors require zero actual engineering-level
> knowledge of what is going on, physically, as long as you are
> promoting their product.

IMHO one of the keys to Microsoft's success is that their products
are so bad. Bad products require more on-site support, which 
gives Microsoft advocates for their product inside their customers'
organization.  It's a great model; they have their customers pay 
for their product, then have them pay for on-site support for their
product, and the on-site support people become advocates to 
recomend the customer pay for their product fixes. One of the
big headaches they have right now is that companies like 
Symantec are mitigating the viruses as fast as the virus creators
can create them.It's getting out of control: this will not do.

> What bothers me is the organizational intertia that I described 
> earlier -- just put out fires, keep the viruses running, and tell 
> everyone how busy and important you are.

You've shown an above-average understanding of the problem, but I'll
agree there's still work to be done for formulating a solution.

> Something needs to be done to make the 'powers that be' know
> that they are making foolish decisions.

The 'powers that be' seldom make "foolish" decisions. If their 
decision appears foolish, then you haven't understood their
decision. If a PHB sees a solution which requires 10 people, 
and a second which can be done by one, he'd be a fool to 
decimate his own organization by selecting the smaller set
of underlings.If a PHB has to choose between two candidates,
one with experience deploying a M$ web solution for $1 million,
and the other with experience deploying an Apache web solution
for $10 thousand, he'll choose the one with experience handling
bigger budgets.

Free Software can't win that battle; it's foolish to try.  Instead, we
should be focused of providing the best solutions possible. The 
'clued' organizations will adopt the superior solution, and will
outperform the ones which do not.  That means the ones which
don't will travel a painful route, but neither you nor I seem to be
able to dissuade them from it.

-- 
"Convenience causes blindness. Think about it."


-- 
"Convenience causes blindness. Think about it."

Steve Holton
sholton at mindspring.com