back to article Hey you – minion. Yes, IT dudes and dudettes, they're talking to you

Who are you, dear reader, and why are you reading this? If you've a yen to answer that literally, by all means please do, but the question is somewhat more metaphorical in intent. I'm not seeking an existentialist answer about your sense of purpose in life, but I am hoping that you can answer – to yourself if to no one else – …

  1. james 68

    Utter tosh and drivel

    Let me introduce you to the real world since reality seems to be rather lacking within your pretentious little bubble, call it a service if you will.

    Systems "Architects" (In fact anyone who calls themselves "architect" and has bugger all to do with building design) tend to be overblown arsebiscuits who simply like to call themselves by whatever the new fad is in lala land. These addicts to buzzwords would call themselves 'Hitlerspenispolisher' next week if they thought it made them sound more important in their own little minds.

    Systems "Architects" tend to be the worst of the breed, in reality being nothing more than a bog standard consultant with a fetish for grandiose naming schemes. They come into the workplace, spout a load of words they read in a magazine like some kind of effluvia fountain and proceed to fuck everything up right royally. Then they get paid a ridiculous sum of money and bugger off to the nearest spa/salon to top up their fake tans never to be seen again until words like "responsibility" have ceased being bandied about.

    Systems Administrators on the other hand, are the lowly, underpaid, underappreciated sods who all of a sudden become very important indeed. Because we can fix the mess. Because we can rip out the bollocks that the "Architect" had installed and actually build something that works, is more efficient and costs half as much. Because we had that shit on standby since we first suggested it and told management that paying an "Architect" would be a colossal waste of money for anything other than as a children's party clown.

    Systems Administrators, they treat us like vermin, but it is because of us that they have a functioning business.

    And soon, when you least expect it, we shall rise up and claim our rightful place! We shall do away with "Architects" and other dandified consultant twats! We will do away with the beancounters and the managers! We will rule the universe! (Nobody ever reads this far into a comment, so our plans are safe... for now)

    1. Trevor_Pott Gold badge

      Re: Utter tosh and drivel

      It's a nice fantasy world you live in. Pity it isn't reality. It would be a nice reality. One I'd want to inhabit.

      1. james 68

        Re: Utter tosh and drivel

        I like my little world, it's cozy and there's free tea and biscuits.

        1. Trevor_Pott Gold badge
          Pint

          Re: Utter tosh and drivel

          "Biscuits"? But surely you can't be a real BOFH...I have been led to believe that the dark side has cookies! (See: North American distinction between biscuits and cookies.)

          1. james 68

            Re: Utter tosh and drivel

            North America also has Donald Trump, seems like a good enough reason to give it a miss.

            1. Trevor_Pott Gold badge

              Re: Utter tosh and drivel

              Only the barbarians to the south, thank $deity.

              1. lglethal Silver badge
                Stop

                Re: Utter tosh and drivel

                So because you took exception to the use of the term "architect" instead of "administrator" then you've basically ignored the rest of what was quite a good article in my opinion.

                The use of those terms are referenced in a mentality way, in truth he could have used any terms he wanted - how does "engineer" vs "technician" sound to you? The basic sentiment of the article was that if all you are doing is working on the day to day, and avoiding driving the long term plan then eventually you'll be out of a job as the day to day will get automated at some point. Seems like a damn good point to me?

                Why don't you do a find and replace on the article, remove the word "architect" which offends you so much and re-read the article.

                PS If your organization is wasting huge amounts of money on consultants to come in and give them direction (even if its completely the wrong direction), then maybe you really need to be getting involved in the driving of your company's technology plan - you also might want to consider why they aren't coming to you in the first place...

                1. james 68
                  Facepalm

                  Re: Utter tosh and drivel

                  SMH

                2. NinjasFTW

                  Re: Utter tosh and drivel

                  I agree and I think a lot of the issue is that the term engineer doesn't mean what it should. There should be a distinction between administration, engineering and architecture.

                  Anyone that doesn't think they need architects doesn't work in a mid to large organisation with multiple technical teams all pulling in different directions and using competing standards/technologies

                  .

                  Architects should be providing high level guidance on what tools to use and what direction to move in in line with the business plan.

                  The engineers then take this, design a platform and put it all together into a working system.

                  The administrators are then responsible for keeping everything running.

                  What often happens is that there isn't an actual engineer role but you get talented administrators doing the engineering work, and architects that want to be engineers but like being paid architect rates.

                  This creates a massive shit storm in the engineering space and everyone hates each other.

                  Make engineering a proper title again, pay it well, stop the mail room staff from being called correspondence delivery engineers and ensure that people in engineering role have the relevant skills/training to be able to do their jobs.

            2. Anonymous Coward
              Facepalm

              @James68

              Why are you so concerned about North America when you have your own outdated Royalty?

      2. Tabor

        Re: Utter tosh and drivel

        It might not be *your* reality, but it is *a* reality. For a lot of us. I wouldn't dare (or want for that matter) call myself an IT architect, though that is what I am based on the first part of your article. I solve problems, and I design infrastructure solutions based on what business needs (not wants, there is a distinction).

        And yes, I do know where I want to be in 10 years. I knew 10 years ago, and that's where I'm at. Subscription based licensing included, which is a pretty good deal. In *my* reality.

        Automated or automator ? For me it's being IT helpdesk or IT "architect". I'll do both. Because if I don't, the implication is that I will suck at part of my job.

      3. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Utter tosh and drivel

        Fantasy Island? You can still get re-runs on METV

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Utter tosh and drivel

      I'm a retired systems architect. By which I mean systems. I spent nearly 30 years designing and implementing everything from automated conveyor systems on production lines to a hierarchical system for collecting and analysing data from tens of thousands of devices around the world. In the process I've had to learn about accounting practice in multiple countries, explosion proof enclosures, software licensing, marketing, IP protection, security, motor controllers, water treatment, ISO 9000, server architectures, a bit about cloud towards the end, and Erlang. I enjoyed all of it except for Erlang. Sorry, Joe.

      I've always told customers that if I could find a way of doing something better without a computer, I would, because a real systems architect works with human factors as well, just like building architects are supposed to. I've designed extremely simple UIs for illiterates.

      I retired early because (a) I could afford to and (c) I had no need to take any more crap from management.

      Borrowing from the language used in building architecture, I would suggest that the people you are describing are the sort of architectural technicians who will do you an extension. They know a bit, and it's probably only the bit that lives inside the humming boxes.

      I agree with the thrust of the article. A real systems architect looks at the problem, musters resources to come up with a workable solution, and supervises the implementation. Think Brunel and the Great Western Railway.

      The problem nowadays is that it is difficult for people to get the necessary experience to have the range of skills needed, thanks to McKinsey and Taylor. I'm told this is a delivery problem for Google - a lot of very bright coders but many of them have never delivered a working platform while in an environment where the users can come and thump on their desks in person. But from my own experience, gaining a wide range of skills around a particular area of expertise is more likely to put you on the bridge than in the engine room.

      1. energystar
        Windows

        Re: Utter tosh and drivel

        "...I've always told customers that if I could find a way of doing something better without a computer..."

        Tell that to your stupid 'automatic' cashier... Part of the world [Minuscule intended] your kind inherited Us.

      2. energystar

        Re: Utter tosh and drivel

        "...But from my own experience, gaining a wide range of skills around a particular area of expertise is more likely to put you on the bridge than in the engine room."

        Agree, Education is failing sovereignly at the basic multi-skill concepts of Engineering [Social ones, specially].

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Utter tosh and drivel

      > Systems "Architects" tend to be overblown arsebiscuits who simply like to call themselves by whatever the new fad is in lala land.

      I've downvoted you because I can see that you're confusing what the article is describing with the charlatans responsible for some of the brown stuff us minions get to clean up. I too have come across people like you describe, and I like the analogy with an architectural technician who can do the drawings for your extension ... provided what you want fits in with his limited range of experience in construction methods.

      Now - reason for posting as anon ...

      What is described is happening, right now, to my job. We still have some hosting here, but the reason for having it has gone - "cloudy stuff" is now cheaper and easier to handle. So while I still have a couple of web servers (I don't deal with all the Windoze stuff) and a mail server - current policy is no new services hosted here and we're actively moving what do have off to other providers (eg for mail it's typically "Office 365 or find your own provider"). So soon I won't have any responsibility for feeding the server room with lecky, cooling it, dealing with hardware failures, introducing people to the clue-by-four when they ignore the notice about patch cable colour code, etc, etc. Yes I'll still be managing web hosting, email etc, but that'll all be accounts with hosting providers - they can take care of feeding the servers, keeping them cool, dealing with connectivity providers when the internet goes off, dealing with hardware, and backups, and .....

      Except that's not what turns me on, so I am trying to get another job. Unfortunately, while I'm an electrical engineer by training and at heart, I've been in "IT" for so long that I'm in that no-mans land where I don't have the up to date skills and knowledge to get a job back in electrical engineering, and I'm too old for anyone to consider me for a junior position while I catch up.

      Yes, there will always be jobs at pretty well every level. But, for the grunt who shoves a server in the rack - that's a menial task that will pay minimum wage and automation will (already is) largely take over from skilled people in terms of provisioning that server.

      Google is an ultimate example of that. In their storage nodes, the tin jockeys do nothing more than slide out a failed unit, slide in a new one, and tell the system what the new unit's ID is. That new device is completely configured automatically - no human intervention at all. No skilled tech to install an OS, no skilled tech to configure a database, it just gets added to the system, PXE boots, and gets configured as whatever that node is. I'm not suggesting every small business will be like that, but the skilled jobs at my level are fewer than they were, they'll get fewer, and they'll get cheaper - that means low pay.

      Now, where you want to be is the stuff that's hard to automate. Looking at the client's needs, knowing what's available, practical, and affordable. And being able to specify what the system needs to be and how it needs to be built. Be good at that, and you'll have a decent income. Unfortunately, you'll be competing with people who have less skill/knowledge, who'll undercut you with clients that don't (yet) realise your value, and will get you tarred with the same brush when they turn out to be, as you put it, an arsebiscuit.

    4. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Utter tosh and drivel

      The issue is mentality - specifically the ivory tower architect mentality and the BOFH sysadmin.

      In combination, these two characters have the ability to bring any business to its knees particularly in the absence of any effective leadership.

      The days of the IT department are numbered - IT is so fundamental to businesses these days - in fact it IS the business in many cases - that it should not exist as a separate entity or cost centre. Also numbered are the days of button pushing techies, and any architects who dont think they need to understand their customers business.

      Both of these types will eventually be replaced by more business focused individuals who are prepared to challenge the status quo and proactively enable & deliver improvements to their employers business.

  2. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    "Who are you, dear reader, and why are you reading this?"

    Anon Coward and skiving work obviously!

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: "Who are you, dear reader, and why are you reading this?"

      According to this article I'm a systems architect - because I'm solving problems at the drop of a hat multiple times a day, most days. In reality I'm a Helldesker minion.

      IMO the article is tosh. YMMMV.

  3. jake Silver badge

    Uh ... Trevor ...

    ... are you actually channeling me?

    That is scary ...

  4. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    missed the point entirely

    Seems to still look at technology and their relative merits, my CPU/storage/network is better/faster/more shiny than your CPU/storage/network...

    Nowhere do any of the technophillic words suggest that running costs, manual effort, upgrade or exit paths are reasonable discussion points.

    Products that play nicely as a set may be a better choice, even if they are not quite as shiny as buying everything separately as the cheapest to install individually.

    How many different security models do you need to manage many unique but "best" technology stacks...

    I certainly agree that technologies can become worse or better over time though, so all services and platforms should be re-assessed routinely, but perhaps through a wider pair of eyes so their context, and indeed relevance is assessed too.

  5. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Some truths here, but too much focus on Build rather than Support

    Support teams who are button-pushers are a waste of space - I don't want handle-turners, following the idiots guides to fix issues.

    What Support teams have to be is real 'problem solvers' - people obsessed with incident reduction, root cause analysis and fix, automation, efficiency, effort reduction...

    If your Support teams do the same thing each week they are doing it wrong.

    To be value-add, you have to be a real problem solver not a button pusher. It's scary for button-pushers, because they worry about what they'll be left to do when the handle-turning monkey work goes away.

    Really good engineers/technicians/administrators WANT to engineer themselves out of a job (or at least the least skilled parts of it like repetitive widget fixing) - because the ability to do those activities is IS the highly skilled, interesting part of the job, and these skills are highly desirable and transferable elsewhere - and most importantly for self-preservation, they cannot be replaced by a computer or a handle-turner.

  6. Mayhem

    While I agree with the article

    I'm not quite sure how useful it is ... there are only so many bridge positions on a ship, and while the fate of the minions is in the end inevitable, the attrition rate is going to be horrific.

    And I'm not convinced that knowledge, skill or determination will have any bearing on who survives ... I suspect it will be the lucky, the connected and the politically savvy ... the same as in every other part of middle management.

  7. wheelybird

    Yeah, but no, but..

    I agree with the thrust of the article, but the reality is of course that there aren't as many system 'architect' jobs going as sysadmins or helpdesk. You'll still need some form of IT support; to imagine that all support and administration tasks will be automated is pretty naive.

    I don't think it's fair to dismiss readily the people who are happy to work in a support role for their whole career. Why should they aspire to an 'architect' role if they don't want to?

    The other issue is that compared to ten years ago the amount of new technologies is astounding. It's hard, no, impossible to keep up to date with them all. So yeah, an architect should have a good idea of what's out there but it's unavoidable that a lot of it will be shallow knowledge; vague impressions even.

    So the idea that an architect will come in, look at the issues and splurge out the ideal solution immediately from their vast store of knowledge is a nonsense. Anyone worth the money will spend a while analysing the issues and then a good deal of time research potential solutions and offer up different options to their employer or client.

    1. NinjasFTW

      Re: Yeah, but no, but..

      People may be happy doing the role and I have no issue with that. The problem is that a lot of these roles will be automated eventually.

      We are only just starting the see the start of it with PaaS etc.

      Systems are made to be automated, I can push a button at work and get a VM provisioned, it will have an application automatically installed (i.e. Tomcat/Websphere/Apache/Oracle/ELK/Mysql/Cassandra) with a basic configuration. We only use it for dev environments currently but there are plans to expand its use. The various middleware teams have seen their work tickets reduce by 20% since this was implemented.

      This is only going to get more widespread once docker and co start to pick up steam. There will be administrators for the Docker platform (unless devops people have their way!) but it will be less than there would be for all the individual application areas.

      The administrator role won't be going away any time soon but it will start compacting.

  8. Pascal Monett Silver badge

    "Microsoft [..] does eventually adopt them"

    Only when every other possibility of subversion, replacement, obfuscation and obliteration has been totally exhausted, died in the desert and was dragged 10 miles to the nearest water hole to find out that no, it still won't move any more.

    Then, with extreme reluctance and a twitch of disgust, Microsoft will integrate it into its world, gagging all the way. Until it starts making money out of it, that is.

  9. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    The end is indeed nigh

    When we reach that glorious technical utopia (techtopia?) where vendor hardware and software solutions do “what it says on the tin”, then yes indeed, all us button pushers are screwed.

    Anon - work for a major vendor with WFR hatchets in hand.

  10. Nate Amsden

    no need to worry

    System admins etc have a much more secure future than trevor's writing career.

    Don't get me wrong we are all fucked eventually (don't care what industry you are in IT or not)

    So take the opportunity to have fun while you still can(assuming you can).

    1. james 68

      Re: no need to worry

      Naw, Trevor ain't bad, and at least he seems to understand humour.

      Sure some of the subject matter he has written about is kind of "meh", but he at least has an idea of what he's talking about and even amuses me on occasion - which is becoming a rare thing on the register.

      He's alright in my book (for a consultant).

    2. Trevor_Pott Gold badge

      Re: no need to worry

      No jobs are certain. Writing least of all.

  11. phennexion

    I think IT Generalist is a pretty underrated title or categorization. I've met a few "architects" or "engineers" who think they know a perfect solution, but they're just proposing a solution that would benefit themselves/their company the most without actually properly examining the business needs and business goals.

    Same token I've seen button-pusher sys admins that put-to-many-dashs-in-everything-they-can because they think they're helping the situation, and the networks/infrastructures they design are a fucking joke.

    I appreciate the gist of the article for sure and it's very true, what I really find astonishing is the amount of button-pushers who don't give it a second thought that they may be out of a job in X number of years because they give up learning new things thinking they've already achieved the pinnacle of computer knowledge. lol

  12. PlugnPlay

    So Much hatred...........it leads to the dark side

    upfront disclaimer, I work for the company you hate and despise so much, Microsoft

    So Trevor, dear chap, where does your hatred for Microsoft originate from? I'm pretty sure that every article you write takes a shot at them? Why them specifically? How have they wronged you more than other large IT firms such as Google, Oracle, Salesforce, Amazon/AWS, Apple? You also may want to research how Microsoft is taking the US Gov. to court to protect individuals and organisations data privacy, who else is doing that?

    I'm not sure who else mobilised their Disaster Recovery team to provide support to Alberta during the current wildfires up in Ft. Mc and also matched employee donations to support the Canadian Red Cross, the same thing that we did for the Calgary floods of 2013 btw.

    As for your article, well I read all of your articles with interest, I enjoy and gain value from listening to and understanding other peoples viewpoints. I'd also say that in my 18 year IT career, I've had to evolve and learn every single step of the way and I continue to do so, some of the learnings are technology, some are culture, some are business, some are people - after all, if you're not learning, then you're actually going backwards relative to those around you.

    Its a big big world outside of Edmonton, and while Microsoft's solutions don't appear favourable in your area / opinion, there's a large portion of other folks around the planet that seem quite happy with them

    1. Trevor_Pott Gold badge

      Re: So Much hatred...........it leads to the dark side

      So Trevor, dear chap, where does your hatred for Microsoft originate from?

      Betrayal. You could start here for some background, but the long story short is really just that Microsoft turned its back on those of us who were its biggest fans. It made sweeping changes without offering us choice, didn't listen when we spoke up and eventually even removed from us the option to control our own computers.

      Once, I was one of Microsoft's most voiceferous evangelists. But betrayal is a powerful emotion, and one that lingers.

      I'm pretty sure that every article you write takes a shot at them?

      Probably less than 10% of my articles contain a shot at Microsoft. That puts them a little bit above Netapp or Nutanix and probably below VMware.

      Why them specifically?

      Betrayal.

      How have they wronged you more than other large IT firms such as Google

      Google has been naieve, but to my knowledge has not outright wronged me. My biggest issue with them is that they believed they could walk the middle line with phone vendors and telcos by giving them control over the update process for Android. The result was an unmitigated disaster.

      How else has Google wronged me? They advertise at me? Scary. They hoover up all my info? Sure, but so does everyone else. Google are at least up front about it, and give me the ability to kill their creepy spyware off. They aren't perfect - I can bitch about them all day - but I don't feel they are intentionally malicious or apathetic towards the end user.

      I have spent time at both Google and Microsoft, and much time with many folks who work at both places. Googlers are oddly naive as a whole; they legitimately believe in different things than the rest of us and think they're doing the right thing. Not so Microsoft. Microsoft employees have always evidenced an unsubtle hostility towards their own customers coupled with a sense of superiority that says any customer or user that doesn't agree with them is obviously in the wrong.

      There are, of course, exceptions...but the average attitudes of the individuals I have encountered working for the two companies seem to line up quite well with the actions of the body corporate. As such, I feel less hostility towards Google's bumbling naiveté than I do towards Microsoft's arrogant apathy. Though, admittedly, I am no less wary of the Chocolate Factory than the Beast of Redmond. I just watch for different issues stemming from different actions and motivations.

      Oracle

      Oracle are evil. Oracle have always been evil. Oracle never tried to be anything but evil. Can you really a villain who not only knows they are a villain but is honest about it as well? Or do you merely accept that this is what they are, and treat all interactions with them accordingly?

      Salesforce

      Basically an incompetent Oracle.

      Amazon/AWS

      From a culture standpoint, they share a lot with Microsoft. They are, however, far - far - worse to their staff and partners, and slightly better to their customers. I'm not a fan, but I do appreciate the role they are playing in driving change. Highly - highly - wary of them.

      Apple?

      Arrogant, high handed, self-righteous asshats that don't listen to their customer base and do whatever they want. They do, however, have the virtue of actually being right more often than not, something that other companies which attempt a similar amount of hubris fail to accomplish.

      You also may want to research how Microsoft is taking the US Gov. to court to protect individuals and organisations data privacy, who else is doing that?

      Apple, for one. Google has as well. IIRC, Twitter did too. I'd be willing to bet that if I did some searching I could find a Facebook case or two about privacy and the government.

      Microsoft isn't sticking up for you, me, or anyone else. They're engaged in some PR. Nothing more. If you want to toot Microsoft's horn you could mention the one and only thing they've done that was any good in the cloud space lately: decoupling themselves from ownership of their UK cloud. By paying someone else to own and operate the gear Microsoft have removed the US legal attack surface for that data. Even if they wanted to, they can't give that data up. They deserve a cookie for that; they were the first major cloud provider to listen to what we've all be screaming about for a decade.

      I note, however, that beyond the one instance, they haven't proceeded with that model. Even with their new datacenter in Canada. So I am chalking that up to a PR stunt as well.

      I'm not sure who else mobilised their Disaster Recovery team to provide support to Alberta during the current wildfires up in Ft. Mc and also matched employee donations to support the Canadian Red Cross, the same thing that we did for the Calgary floods of 2013

      Pretty much every tech company with an Albertan footprint, and most tech companies with a Canadian footprint, even if not Albertan has done something. You'd be surprised the number of them that I am coordinating with who do not want public PR or mention of their efforts. They are just helping because they can. Those companies I respect.

      Its a big big world outside of Edmonton,

      I am aware. I've been to may parts of it.

      and while Microsoft's solutions don't appear favourable in your area / opinion, there's a large portion of other folks around the planet that seem quite happy with them

      Actually, while there are many people who are happy with Microsoft, I think you'll find that the actual percentage of individuals and businesses happy with Microsoft is small. Certainly it is much smaller than the number of individuals and businesses that use Microsoft.

      Microsoft may be a necessity but it is not something most - or even many - desire. When a gun is at your head, you do as your told. But that doesn't mean that if the gun were put away you'd voluntarily do the same thing.

      Do not make the mistake of the Microsoft body corporate and mistake obedience for trust or compliance for loyalty. Microsoft's actions have dispelled trust and it's apathy towards that fact has eradicated loyalty.

      All Microsoft has left to count on is fear. And no empire lasts long ruling on fear alone.

      As for me, I will keep on being cynical about virtually everyone. Trust is earned, and it takes effort to maintain. I eagerly await any vendors willing to work hard to build that trust amongst its customers, partners, developer ecosystem and its own staff. That's a company I can get behind.

      1. Tabor

        Re: So Much hatred...........it leads to the dark side

        Well said Trevor. In my opinion better written than the original article. I think, however, that the company you can get behind does not exist. If it does it will get bought, or go public, and we all know that building trust is not profitable to shareholders. And thus said company will try to get behind you, to, ahem, introduce you to that jolly old chap called Ben Dover.

        I have to ask though : "All Microsoft has left to count on is fear", was that a reference to the title of the post you replied to ?

        If so: well played, sir. Well played.

        1. Trevor_Pott Gold badge

          Re: They lied, there were no cookies.

          Just because the company I would like to back is unlikely to exist, does that mean I should cease trying to hold vendors accountable for their actions? Great vendors do exist. I work with several, and friends with several others. They aren't Microsoft, but they aren't nonexistent either.

          I support those vendors whom I can trust and I deride those I cannot. Nobody will ever convince me that this makes me immoral, unethical or even biased.

          Trust is critical to vendor selection and to business in general. Especially when we start talking "cloud". Unfortunately, I don't believe Microsoft's employees are likely to ever understand or agree.

          "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!" --Upton Sinclair

      2. PlugnPlay

        Re: So Much hatred...........it leads to the dark side

        While your opinions, perceptions and feelings cannot be challenged as they are yours to make, some of your facts need checking or providing sir, you'll find that in both Germany and China the DC's are not owned or operated by MS (http://news.microsoft.com/europe/2015/11/11/45283/#sm.00000d14djcak1dhqs27pssa2fuzh and http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/archives/2013/05/22/microsoft-launches-azure-in-china-via-21vianet-group/) , on the legal case, Microsoft is leading the charge with the backing of the other tech companies http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-36050151 . Other tech companies have taken parts of the US Gov to court - ref apple vs FBI but not the actual US Gov.

        If you could point me and your readers at some facts to support your generic statements / observations, I'd appreciate it

        1. Trevor_Pott Gold badge

          Re: So Much hatred...........it leads to the dark side

          I didn't know about Germany and China. Good on Microsoft for that. One good deed shines out amongst all their misdeeds! A start, then. One very small step towards redemption.

          As for other tech companies that have sued US.gov, there's Twitter: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/10/08/twitter_sues_us_government_for_right_to_disclose_nothing/

          And that's just for starters. Though I do question "sued some part of the government but not the actual government". There isn't a distinction. You sue whichever arm of the government happens to be restraining you from doing what you wish. "The government" isn't a single entity in the US. It was designed that way on purpose.

          It is not shocking that other tech companies have backed Microsoft in their PR stunt, just as Microsoft has backed the PR stunts of other companies. Given that Microsoft have themselves removed the ability of end users to control what data Microsoft hoovers up (from our online accounts, services and even our desktops and servers!) and then gives over to law enforcement I flat out do not believe that suing the US government is an act of altruism, morality or ethics.

          Microsoft has proven time and again they don't give a rat fuck about our privacy or our data sovereignty. They just need us proles to believe that they do, so we'll keep buying their stuff.

          If Microsoft want to start building trust they will immediately A) apologize for their misdeeds. B) Return complete control of our operating systems and applications to us. No ransomware edition special price versions only for elites. Total control to all who want it. C) Commit to offering choice in future major UI changes, API changes and so forth so that we can vote with our wallets for the product we actually want.

          That will be a start. Three suggestions amongst hundreds. And it will take a track record of many years of adhering to customer-first, privacy-first principles before trust can truly start being rebuilt.

          Unfortunately, Microsoft don't care. And as you have so ably demonstrated, neither do its staff. Blame the victim is in full force. It's "all in their mind", etc. And you wonder "the hatred" comes from.

          1. Nate Amsden

            Re: So Much hatred...........it leads to the dark side

            If google didn't do what they did it is likely android would not be in the market leading position it's in.

            Apple of course had millions of customers ready to gobble up the first iphones. What did google have? Not much. Microsoft was able to get full control of their phone platform (i think?) But of course nobody uses it.

            Webos was the same. BB10 the same. Firefox OS the same (i assume).

            For all the doom and gloom about android vulnerabilities I've yet to read about wide scale expoitation. Usually the stories are crap coming from dodgey chinese sites targeting chinese users.

            I don't pay close attention most of my tech news comes from el reg. Though I believe if there was serious exploitation going(not involving manually instaling apks or non main stream app stores) on there would be articles here about it.

            Every once in a while some security thing comes up that affects a few apps though usually it is yanked from the stores pretty quick.

            Android updating won't be fixed in my mind until there is the ability to roll back any upgrade(app or OS) easily. There have been several apps I have updated only to find them worse than before with no way to go back.(I supose one exception is the built in apps. I was able to downgrade samsung S health this way. The newer version didn't support landscape mode and added nothing else that wanted to make me keep it)

          2. PlugnPlay

            Re: So Much hatred...........it leads to the dark side

            So Trevor, dear sir, as your stated belief is that all 100k+ employees of Microsoft are untrustworthy coupled with your stated feelings of hatred and betrayal towards my employer, it does not bode well for us having an open and balanced public debate between the two of us.

            It also appears from your statements that you have already pre-judged me, as an individual and by association, as untrustworthy whilst also insinuating that I cannot have a balanced and fair conversation due to who pays my salary - I'm assuming that’s why you posted Upton Sinclairs quote? I'm intrigued as to what you think I've ably demonstrated by my comments on my personal approach to constantly learning, learning from others and listening openly to others viewpoints whether I agree with them or not - to me this is all important feedback that I can build on

            This leads me to conclude that you are intolerant of those views that may differ to yours

            One parting question I do have for you though, which organisations do you trust in business and why?

            1. Trevor_Pott Gold badge

              Re: So Much hatred...........it leads to the dark side

              " your stated belief is that all 100k+ employees of Microsoft are untrustworthy"

              I never said that. I do believe that most Redmondians in key positions are untrustworthy. Those with the influence to have their voices heard and their decisions count. But, in my experience, most of the drone-level worker bees at the bottom of the pyramid are decent folk, many of whom even agree that their employer are untrustworthy. They're just doing their job and getting paid, however. Worrying about why their employer does what they do is beyond their pay pay grade. Please draw some distinction between a project manager and the poor bastard manning the support lines.

              It also appears from your statements that you have already pre-judged me

              Actually, your word usage and the precise ways you sidestep various issues that would weaken your position to focus on those things you think allow you to degrade the credibility of your opponent as an individual - and thus make the uncomfortable arguments they bring up seem as though they are unfounded - are incredibly reminiscent of a True Believer Microsoft salesbloke that inhabits these parts and I honestly suspect that you're him.

              He absolutely isn't capable of an objective discussion about Microsoft, any more than someone busy burning witches or blowing up heathens is capable of having an objective discussion about interfaith morality and the validity of atheism. As a side note, he's actually pretty representative of the mid-to-upper tier Redmondian employees I've had the opportunity to interact with.

              "I cannot have a balanced and fair conversation due to who pays my salary"

              No, I don't think you can have a balanced and fair conversation based on what you've said and how. Look, I talk to people all the time about the good and bad of their employers. From support phone staff to product managers, VPs to CEOs. That's my actual job...and you'd be surprised how many of them are perfectly open to calm, rational discussion about what their employers (or, in the case of the CEOs, what their minions) do right and what they do wrong.

              You, on the other hand, and pretty clearly coming at this from a completely different standpoint. I am prepared to have dispassionate, objective discussion with anyone who demonstrates the self-awareness that all organizations and individuals make mistakes, that we all have blinders, biases, prejudices, differing needs and both rational and irrational expectations. I don't see that from you.

              What I see is a True Believer whose goal is to either convince others of the Unquestionable Truth of their employer's Perfect Vision, or, failing that, to humiliate the heathen critics, thus bringing everything they say into doubt. I emphatically do not see you as open minded. I see you as evangelical. And to be perfectly, 100% clear: I loathe evangelicals, of any faith.

              "This leads me to conclude that you are intolerant of those views that may differ to yours"

              I am perfectly tolerant of views that differ to mine. Understand that I love arguing. If the world agreed with me then I'd have nothing to do!

              What I can't stand are people who seek to convert me. Who make conversion a moral quest. I can't stand people who relentlessly pursue my agreement when it is quite clear that I will never agree with them; usually because we have a philosophical difference at a very core level that informs all aspects of our belief systems.

              Stepping away from technology, for example, let's approach this from another side. I am strongly left libertarian. I oppose the authoritarian right with every fiber of my being. Despite this, I can and do have friends who are strong believers in the authoritarian right.

              We have glorious - oftentimes passionate, loud and emphatic - arguments everything in existence. They argue selfishness and the importance of the stick as the fundamental aspects of human. I argue compassion and the importance of the carrot. But at the end of the day, we happily disagree and go have a beer. It's a careful balance, hard to maintain, but one I enjoy.

              The key is that - despite the arguing - we're not trying to convert one another. We are presenting evidence. We are advancing hypotheses and proposing experiments to prove our views, or debating how this new evidence might cause us to change our hypotheses. We don't expect to win. We expect to follow the evidence, even if we start from different assumptions.

              To me, that's the highest form of human interaction. And conversion is the lowest.

              I'll answer your question in the form of a separate sysadmin blog post, as it is worth it's own discussion.

      3. This post has been deleted by its author

      4. energystar
        Pint

        Re: So Much hatred...........it leads to the dark side

        ... Cheers

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: So Much hatred...........it leads to the dark side

      I once worked for a US company for several years.

      I liked most of my US colleagues far more than their UK equivalents. I got on much better with my US superiors than with my UK boss. They tolerated my dislike of guns and my tendency to drive with both hands on the wheel; I tolerated their occasional bouts of fundamentalism, and we got on fine. It was a good company to work for. The engineers in particular were bright, well motivated, and a pleasure to work with.

      Unfortunately decisions in the past had led to a number of old and wobbly product lines, some of which caused severe customer dissatisfaction. And which were being band-aided rather than fixed. And there were those in the top management who had bright ideas, one of which was to move a whole lot of production to China on the basis that a workforce which a year before had probably been working paddy fields were suddenly going to become experienced in the vagaries of a technical product which wasn't just a screwdriver job.

      The result was that their main competitor, a nasty outfit with an aggressive management culture but with a tendency to fix quickly what didn't work, proceeded to eat their lunch and dinner.

      In short, I believe everything you say about Microsoft but I can still understand Mr. Pott writing as he does, because the two things are by no means exclusive.

  13. OzBob

    But how can you become an effective Architect

    if you haven't first been an Administrator?

    And as for Administrator jobs becoming redundant, not while my co-workers refuse to write anything down and hold it in their heads instead.

    1. Trevor_Pott Gold badge

      Re: But how can you become an effective Architect

      Re: administrator first, architect later...that's a problem for future generations. These things are cyclical, and right now we're in a "cut back on the proles" phase. It looks set to last at least a decade, probably two.

      as for "keeping it all in their heads"...that can be bypassed. Toodle about the site and read about "shadow IT". It's been written about before.

    2. Erik4872

      Re: But how can you become an effective Architect

      "But how can you become an effective Architect if you haven't first been an Administrator?"

      Yes, this is the killer. Entry level positions need to be available in the field. People don't just wake up and become systems architects. It takes a lot of experience, hopefully in diverse environments, to get the exposure you need to make smart choices that aren't just "well, Gartner says these guys are good..."

      "And as for Administrator jobs becoming redundant, not while my co-workers refuse to write anything down and hold it in their heads instead."

      Totally agree, but I've seen many situations in my career where people didn't document anything for "job security." They've been laid off like anyone else, and it's fallen to the ones left behind to very carefully probe around and solve the puzzle. Terry Childs comes to mind, as does my own personal experience with the "network BOFH" who built a huge enterprise network by himself and failed to document anything. Getting rid of him meant a huge spend on network consultants, but he was gotten rid of all the same and the company paid the fees to get their network back.

  14. energystar
    Windows

    There is a photocopier...

    At the back-store, if you feel a lack of identity, and purpose...

    1. energystar
      Windows

      Re: There is a photocopier...

      Taking the right decisions inflicts on true living more than a limb loss. Decisions taken as peons, against our personal, best interests. No heroes, histories or even worth a small anecdote here. Just anonymous [minion] blood. Sometimes stupidly spent. But ours, finally.

      1. energystar

        Hey Jude, don't make it bad

        Take a sad song and make it better

  15. 0laf
    Megaphone

    Bloody job titles

    They don't often help do they.

    I know plenty of "IT Team Leaders" that are working as "Systems Architects" by the definitions in the article.

    I probably work as a "Security Architect" but that certainly isn't my job title.

    I know I've been excluded from relevant government discussions because my job titled didn't fit their little list even if my role did.

    The sentiment is true though, whereever possible IT minions should be encouraged to think about the wider picture. It's good for them and will make them better at their job and it's good for the business because it will get better solutions. But it should be encouraged right down to the helldesk not just to the sysadmins

    Today's helldesk operators will be 'digital architects' (or some-such pish) in 10yr.

  16. Bentheredonethat
    Thumb Up

    But wait, there's more...

    Kudos to Trevor. IMHO however, he left out some pretty salient considerations on the subject.

    He didn’t mention the problem that virtually *no one* has *any idea* that the occupation (role) of “IT architect” even exists. Consequently everyone around you, from your wife to your customers to your company’s CEO is constantly, incessantly trying to adhere a specific Minion label onto your forehead. “Oh, so you’re a (insert common IT job description here) guy! I get it…” Or the part where from that point forward, you will forever in that person’s mind be the “server guy” or the “network guy” or “one of the help desk guys.”

    He doesn’t mention how major systems and technologies are most commonly selected in the real world where: The VP of Sales independently signed a deal with Salesforce.com, the VP of Customer Service independently bought an extraordinarily-inappropriate phone system, the CFO insisted on a particular accounting system and the CEO played golf with the Oracle guy. The result being a colossal cluster fuck.

    Or that most “CTO’s” couldn’t attach a USB mouse to a PC if their life depended on it.

    Another thing he didn’t talk about was the reality that acquisition of industry “certifications” can and will instantly rat-hole an IT professional into the role of Minion. Or the difficulty in explaining how it is that one is qualified to be an IT Architect when in fact you don’t have a long list of Minion certifications…

    It also seems entirely possible the number of “architect” jobs will decrease rapidly as everything moves toward SaaS and hosted systems. All that remains will be the management of contracts and Minions, which is all that every “CTO” I have ever seen does anyway.

    Thought provoking article for sure.

  17. Erik4872

    Agree somewhat, but don't call it "architect."

    I've been in systems admin and engineering for almost 20 years. Most of your article is very much correct, but please don't call the smart people "architects." I've been anointed an architect because of my company's rigid promotion hierarchy and partly because that's what IT calls its smart guys. [1] Honestly, the term is so badly misused. Most "architects" I know and interact with spend their days reading Gartner reports and drawing pretty Visio pictures, and are disconnected from day-to-day real world stuff. These are the guys who come in from the consultancy down the road and foist the latest best practices document on an unsuspecting audience of executives. I end up having to deconstruct a lot of these presentations and often force-fitting whatever pile of garbage the execs got sold into a working environment. Maybe we should reserve the term "systems engineer" for the top smart person role and leave the "architect" job off in some fluffy cloud bubble somewhere because of the connotation.

    I've said before that the people who are going to survive the next wave of IT cuts and still get paid reasonably well are generalists. It's going to be much more about connecting third party services and making then work as reliably as the stuff the company hosted in a data center. That requires a lot of "systems thinking" and the ability to troubleshoot quickly and efficiently on systems you don't necessarily have full control over.

    I'm already seeing this manifest itself -- the latest generation of storage provides "good enough" performance without a storage wizard turning the dials in many cases. The server OS vendors are increasingly moving towards containerization, microservices and cloud hosting. Anyone whose sole job is in that minion category, just closing support tickets all day, is going to have to learn a lot more to keep getting paid the big money. Even if enterprises don't adopt the cloud in huge numbers, this will still be true. I'm working on a big new development project in Azure, and honestly the developers have absolutely no idea how complex it's going to be from a systems standpoint. I don't have to build pieces of kit anymore, or implement a massive hardware cluster, but I do need to make sure the application's components function in someone else's data center. The complexity is still there; the basics are taken care of but that's it!

    [1] Don't take "smart guys" as self-promotion. I know full well I don't know everything and when I should be talking to someone who does.

    1. This post has been deleted by its author

  18. energystar
    Pirate

    As for "HS Practitioners"...

    The Manila Galleons' Minions are my true heroes:

    https://aeon.co/essays/the-manila-galleons-that-oceaneered-for-plague-and-profit

    1. energystar
      Pirate

      Re: As for "HS Practitioners"...

      "The returns on even small cargoes from the East could be huge....This led to some amazingly inhumane decisions by those in charge. Careri describes huge shipboard cisterns, designed to both store and collect water on the journey, being smashed to make room for goods belonging to an officer’s friends. This was practically an act of murder: sailors’ ration of water was already a mere two pints a day."

      .....

      "Most ships, even as late as the 18th century, relied for rudimentary medical help on a multitasking barber whose most effective tools were his enema syringe and tooth-puller."

      ....

      How amazing the most optimized money logic is totally deprived of human logic!

  19. JustNiz

    >> By the same token, however, it is intellectually lazy to clamp onto a vendor or product and go full fanperson.

    You've just identified every member of every IT department in every company I've ever worked for. Without exception they're all hardcore Microsoft fanbois who know little or nothing about any other environment, and furthermore will never accept that anything could ever be as good as Windows.

  20. Lotaresco
    Coat

    Head above the parapet

    I used to be me, then I was a technician, a computer scientist, an admin, a sysadmin, a software engineer, a systems engineer, a consultant, and now an architect (of the non-building and hence slightly illegal kind). I didn't give myself any of the titles they were handed out by "management" depending on their whims about where the business was going. Currently I'm an independently examined and regulated architect who has to provide evidence of professional achievement every 8 months and pass an examination every 3 years. I don't see it as some soft option and I don't know many IT professionals who have to work under such a regime.

    As Erik4872 says, there's a need for generalists who can do the big picture as well as for those who can implement the designs. I'm not so worked up about the use of "architect" because the role is similar to the level a building architect works at. It's an architect who designs the building and some poor engineer who has to work out how to do it and to perform the calculations necessary to ensure it won't fall down. Yet buildings designed by engineers tend to be less useful and certainly more hideous than ones designed by architects (although both can fail).

    Thankfully retirement is just a few years away for me, because I'm fairly sure that "enterprise" systems will, in future, be designed by project managers choosing drop-down options from a web app. The client will then be recommended to buy all the kit that the vendor wants to sell them.

  21. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    On the one hand demand on some companies is elastic. Sometimes good and sometimes bad. But to buy into an elastic support scheme is bad? Better to buy loads of legally required licences and then have them sat around for a few years unused? Or is there a way to sell on such licences?

    Just saying that for many companies where demand isn't contracted in stone for the next few years, then a subscription model may be a godsend.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like