[nzlug] Idea...

[Simon Bridge]

On Sat, 2008-03-22 at 22:10 +1300, Nick Taylor wrote:
> Ok... to add to the unholy brew:
> 
> 
> 1) MS support people may (perhaps) be more easily swappable parts than 
> non-ms. The cost of a £400 an hour member of staff not working easily 
> eclipses the cost of the software... and that's without getting into 
> having to re-train every one.
> 
One of things ECE noticed was that you got more seats per dollar out of
the unix admin than the ms admins - and the unix network is more
reliable - so, as they upscale, they've boon adding unix seats by
preference. (PS. I suspect someone has noticed that the unix guy seems
to have less work to do too... )

The next step is, as the MS admins move on, they don't get replaced.
Plenty of time for a policy change from on high.

> 2) MS is a conservative/following-the-herd decision. Radicals are more 
> likely to get sacked if things fuck up, and at some point things 
> probably will.
> 
That's why migrations work best when they are slow, starting with the
components that don't get seen much - and where support calls are
documented. (Also document successes.)

> 3) People who spend their lives building mini-empires within major 
> institutions often measure their importance by the size of their 
> budgets. I've known people deliberately piss millions up the wall to 
> guarantee next year's budget approval.

Ah - well. That's a whole other kettle of piranhas.

Whatever strategy is adopted, it is always possible to find someone to
put a spanner in the works. In this case, that guys dept just doesn't
get the extra xmas bonus that year.