More than a third of Euro IT pros worry about keeping server lights on Half of senior IT bods across Europe agree that their departments are struggling to cope with new tech while keeping core gear running, according a recent survey. IT is being set up to fail because it has to serve competing demands without enough resources to effectively support the organisation... The wave of "innovation" …
Experience ruining a small group of VPS server for eCommerce website as a web developer, I can tell you that they always go down when its the weekend and you have to restart them on your own time.
Seriously just let some one else who is actually a full time server engineer worry about upgrades and keeping lights on.
they always go down when its the weekend and you have to restart them on your own time.
And that is why the problem exists.
If you tell your bosses that you don't have enough resources, and yet still manage to keep things running because you beg/steal/borrow resources and time from somewhere else, your bosses will never believe you.
Of couse while "going that extra mile" to recover from some occasional disaster is part of the job, there's nothing heroic about doing it regularly. That just sets you up to fail.
If you don't have resources to run some new service, and the boss insists on it anyway, then get your objections down in writing and let, say, the monthly billing cycle fail due to overload. Anything else is simply demonstrating that you do actually have the resources, even if they are overworked and unpaid ones.
Cloud firm says clouds are good, and anybody who is anybody should have their heads in the clouds? No thanks, I'll pass. At least when I roll out hardware myself, I know exactly who to blame when it goes TITSUP ... and if I should ever lose data (when, not if!) I'll be happy to take the blame. Hasn't happened yet, though. Properly installed systems don't lose data. Clouds? Not all that good a record, from what my newer clients are telling me ...
A survey from a cloud company, where the questions were probably distorted to lead people to generally agree, then by the power of statistics try and prove that everyone wants their product.
However, if that were true, then they would not need to be doing a survey, since everyone would be working flat out deploying cloudy things and they would have no spare time to waste on performing a survey, let alone servicing customer needs from those that decide to give it a try.
My observations of cloud to date :
1. Sticking the word cloud in front of a product doesn't make it any better than the same product without the word cloud in front of it. Mostly its just a marketing term.
2. There is a small set of vendors who are truly cloudy and a large number of vendors who are also-rans aiming for a slice of that pie.
3. Taking a legacy application that has no concept of scalability and resilience and dumping it into the cloud doesn't make it magically evolve into a fully resilient app.
4. The operational support impacts of not knowing when X will be fixed in the cloud makes support and workarounds far harder to perform than with on-site services. Yes, you can design around this with fully resilient and scalable applications, but many applications simply weren't designed to work like that.
5. The impact of communication costs, latency on applications and user experience, plus all the security impacts of cloud are generally not thought through before jumping into the cloud.
6. Mis-configuration in on-premise platforms will in most cases result in lower security risk than on cloudy platforms where one bad mouse click results in your storage being world readable all of a sudden, or some server having external Internet access without the appropriate controls.
7. When people transition to cloud, its not long till they have the sharp intake of breath about the real run cost and realise what they actually had.
I wonder what a survey would say about people who have already migrated and their perception on reliability, true cost and other business impacts in areas like legacy applications ?
Funny, the title says "Euro IT Pros" but reading the article it sounds like they actually asked IT managers...
I find the two very different things, to me IT Pros would mean someone with technical knowledge not an in house Politician.
Oh and to finish my rant...Ive heard the "Outsource so you guys can get on with new interesting stuff" a lot, but In my experience the stuff that is outsourced is usually the new interesting stuff, so that the in house staff are left to deal with the boring bau problems... sorry its still early in the morning...are the pubs open yet??
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
