And we thought only the programmers had to watch out for outsourcing

[brandonbull]

Companies are only looking at the upfront, salary difference. Outsourcing has many other hidden costs.

 

[EKKC]

Originally posted by: brandonbull
Companies are only looking at the upfront, salary difference. Outsourcing has many other hidden costs.

most people responsible for outsourcing are a-hole management types, these hidden costs are never shown on their fancy powerpoints, only the innitial bottom line savings are shown to the idiot execs who sign off on these things. by the time sh!t hit the fan and everything blows up and they need to point a finger at someone, well, guess what? he jumped to another company messing it up already!

 

[MiniDoom]

Originally posted by: Descartes

Originally posted by: ITJunkie

Originally posted by: rdubbz420
Yeah, but how are people in offices here going to backup terabytes of data from their workstations to servers in India?

Not too mention how is a person in India going to know whether a blue screen is caused by a hardware failure or something else. I just don't see how this can replace having a "man on the floor" but I suppose it could mean fewer "men on the floor".

There are remote management systems completely independent of any operating system on any of the servers. Companies like HP, IBM, etc. offer them along with dozens of others. It's nothing new. You could remote into the system, find out which machine blue screened, find out why, boot it, etc. etc. without stepping a foot into the office.

You never had to open up a server? change a fan, psu, memory module, disk in an array? add new hardware, fix backup drive?

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: ITJunkie

Originally posted by: rdubbz420
Yeah, but how are people in offices here going to backup terabytes of data from their workstations to servers in India?

Not too mention how is a person in India going to know whether a blue screen is caused by a hardware failure or something else. I just don't see how this can replace having a "man on the floor" but I suppose it could mean fewer "men on the floor".

In this day and age there isn't a reason for anybody to have to man a data center. It all can be controlled/managed remotely.

As far as opening up the server - that's what the manufacturer is for or somebody you've contracted maintenance with. Don't need to hire somebody to do break/fix.

 

[Descartes]

Originally posted by: rdubbz420

Originally posted by: Descartes

Originally posted by: ITJunkie

Originally posted by: rdubbz420
Yeah, but how are people in offices here going to backup terabytes of data from their workstations to servers in India?

Not too mention how is a person in India going to know whether a blue screen is caused by a hardware failure or something else. I just don't see how this can replace having a "man on the floor" but I suppose it could mean fewer "men on the floor".

There are remote management systems completely independent of any operating system on any of the servers. Companies like HP, IBM, etc. offer them along with dozens of others. It's nothing new. You could remote into the system, find out which machine blue screened, find out why, boot it, etc. etc. without stepping a foot into the office.

You never had to open up a server? change a fan, psu, memory module, disk in an array? add new hardware, fix backup drive?

Well, that's an entirely different argument than the one you presented. One obviously requires physical interaction with the server, another doesn't. Point being that a great majority of the administration of a small family of servers can be done remotely.

 

[MiniDoom]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: ITJunkie

Originally posted by: rdubbz420
Yeah, but how are people in offices here going to backup terabytes of data from their workstations to servers in India?

Not too mention how is a person in India going to know whether a blue screen is caused by a hardware failure or something else. I just don't see how this can replace having a "man on the floor" but I suppose it could mean fewer "men on the floor".

In this day and age there isn't a reason for anybody to have to man a data center. It all can be controlled/managed remotely.

As far as opening up the server - that's what the manufacturer is for or somebody you've contacted maintenance with. Don't need to hire somebody to do break/fix.

The techs for the manufacturers volunteer their services?

 

[cchen]

If you haven't learned this already, ingrain this into your brain: If you aren't making $$$ for the company, or aren't cutting costs, your job can be outsourced.

 

[Descartes]

Originally posted by: rdubbz420

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: ITJunkie

Originally posted by: rdubbz420
Yeah, but how are people in offices here going to backup terabytes of data from their workstations to servers in India?

Not too mention how is a person in India going to know whether a blue screen is caused by a hardware failure or something else. I just don't see how this can replace having a "man on the floor" but I suppose it could mean fewer "men on the floor".

In this day and age there isn't a reason for anybody to have to man a data center. It all can be controlled/managed remotely.

As far as opening up the server - that's what the manufacturer is for or somebody you've contacted maintenance with. Don't need to hire somebody to do break/fix.

The techs for the manufacturers volunteer their services?

What's with the odd arguments and the rhetorical questions? No one said that.

 

[MiniDoom]

Originally posted by: Descartes

Originally posted by: rdubbz420

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: ITJunkie

Originally posted by: rdubbz420
Yeah, but how are people in offices here going to backup terabytes of data from their workstations to servers in India?

Not too mention how is a person in India going to know whether a blue screen is caused by a hardware failure or something else. I just don't see how this can replace having a "man on the floor" but I suppose it could mean fewer "men on the floor".

In this day and age there isn't a reason for anybody to have to man a data center. It all can be controlled/managed remotely.

As far as opening up the server - that's what the manufacturer is for or somebody you've contacted maintenance with. Don't need to hire somebody to do break/fix.

The techs for the manufacturers volunteer their services?

What's with the odd arguments and the rhetorical questions? No one said that.

I not saying you guys are wrong, just that there will still be a need for techs, just not nearly as many.

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: rdubbz420

The techs for the manufacturers volunteer their services?

It's normally part of maintenance. something breaks, they fix. The manufacturer normally subcontracts out their techs. But this way just a few techs can cover an entire city instead of a company hiring some.

 

[Descartes]

Originally posted by: rdubbz420

Originally posted by: Descartes

Originally posted by: rdubbz420

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: ITJunkie

Originally posted by: rdubbz420
Yeah, but how are people in offices here going to backup terabytes of data from their workstations to servers in India?

Not too mention how is a person in India going to know whether a blue screen is caused by a hardware failure or something else. I just don't see how this can replace having a "man on the floor" but I suppose it could mean fewer "men on the floor".

In this day and age there isn't a reason for anybody to have to man a data center. It all can be controlled/managed remotely.

As far as opening up the server - that's what the manufacturer is for or somebody you've contacted maintenance with. Don't need to hire somebody to do break/fix.

The techs for the manufacturers volunteer their services?

What's with the odd arguments and the rhetorical questions? No one said that.

I not saying you guys are wrong, just that there will still be a need for techs, just not nearly as many.

And I agree, but people like to get all histrionic about outsourcing. All it's really done is make the industry more competitive, and all that's done is reduce the bloat that we saw for a decade or more in this industry (I'm simplifying things a bit, I know).

I actually consider it a positive transition as it adds credibility to those that remain. The perception is more that of professionalism rather than the almost amateur status so many in IT had in the 90s. I used to be able to spot someone in IT because they looked like they crawled out of a hole somewhere, but now you can't tell the difference between a superstar developer and a salesman in many cases. This position of relative equality has further reduced the divide between business and technical and gives way for more opportunities for the professionals.

imo.

 

[BrunoPuntzJones]

Originally posted by: rdubbz420

Originally posted by: Descartes

Originally posted by: ITJunkie

Originally posted by: rdubbz420
Yeah, but how are people in offices here going to backup terabytes of data from their workstations to servers in India?

Not too mention how is a person in India going to know whether a blue screen is caused by a hardware failure or something else. I just don't see how this can replace having a "man on the floor" but I suppose it could mean fewer "men on the floor".

There are remote management systems completely independent of any operating system on any of the servers. Companies like HP, IBM, etc. offer them along with dozens of others. It's nothing new. You could remote into the system, find out which machine blue screened, find out why, boot it, etc. etc. without stepping a foot into the office.

You never had to open up a server? change a fan, psu, memory module, disk in an array? add new hardware, fix backup drive?

True, but those aren't "tech" oriented, they are blue collar. Anyone with minimal mechanical skills can carry out such things. Just follow a manual step-by-step.

Dell has the guides on their site. Someone just prints them out, goes to the client, follows the pictures. No education needed for that.

And I guess you could just have terminals everywhere with the server in India. Minimize the components the terminals need, less support needed.

 

[AmigaMan]

Originally posted by: Descartes
I actually consider it a positive transition as it adds credibility to those that remain. The perception is more that of professionalism rather than the almost amateur status so many in IT had in the 90s. I used to be able to spot someone in IT because they looked like they crawled out of a hole somewhere, but now you can't tell the difference between a superstar developer and a salesman in many cases. This position of relative equality has further reduced the divide between business and technical and gives way for more opportunities for the professionals.

imo.

I totally agree. The days of someone getting a $100k/year job because they got an A+ cert and coded their mom's website with blinky-tag riddled HTML is hopefully over.

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: AmigaMan
I totally agree. The days of someone getting a $100k/year job because they got an A+ cert and coded their mom's website with blinky-tag riddled HTML is hopefully over.

Ahh, but the IT professional that understands technology and to a stronger extent business will go very, very far.

An IT professional is a rare breed indeed and one that cannot be outsourced, because they are the ones that understand what is driving the decisions being made. They understand the business forces and long term goals behind these decisions. In fact, they can be the ones seeing the value of outsourcing mundance tasks - and at the same time they are tech savvy enough to realize what is out there/possible. That knowledge and analytical skills of the "big picture" are what is important today.

IT is much different today. You have to be a businessman first, and a technologist second.

 

[AmigaMan]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: AmigaMan
I totally agree. The days of someone getting a $100k/year job because they got an A+ cert and coded their mom's website with blinky-tag riddled HTML is hopefully over.

Ahh, but the IT professional that understands technology and to a stronger extent business will go very, very far.

An IT professional is a rare breed indeed and one that cannot be outsourced, because they are the ones that understand what is driving the decisions being made. They understand the business forces and long term goals behind these decisions. In fact, they can be the ones seeing the value of outsourcing mundance tasks - and at the same time they are tech savvy enough to realize what is out there/possible. That knowledge and analytical skills of the "big picture" are what is important today.

IT is much different today. You have to be a businessman first, and a technologist second.

Depends on what part of the IT chain you're in. Me, I'm focusing on pure development headed toward becoming an architect someday. Others I know have chosen the managerial side of things and are on track for perhaps becoming a CIO (way in the future).

I'm not saying that if you're on the dev-side that you shouldn't have any concerns regarding the business decisions you affect, that's stupid and short-sighted. On the flip side, your managers should at least be able to understand the issues surrounding technology and how they affect business decisions. He/she should be able to at least comprehend what their architects are saying and your architects should know how to say it.

I'm a techologist first and a businessman second. And my managers want that from me otherwise they wouldn't have hired me. Someone has to do the work