Possible Refresh for Local Firehouse
-
@thecreativeone91 said:
Yeah, I don't think said retailer is involved in that portion of the work. That's out of their scope.
I've heard of them doing stuff way out of their depth before. This sounds normal to me. But I could easily be wrong.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@thecreativeone91 said:
Yeah, I don't think said retailer is involved in that portion of the work. That's out of their scope.
I've heard of them doing stuff way out of their depth before. This sounds normal to me. But I could easily be wrong.
They don't around here I know, I'm friends with the GM of said retailer. It's bench tech, home networking with SOHO routers and printers only.
-
@thecreativeone91 said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@thecreativeone91 said:
Yeah, I don't think said retailer is involved in that portion of the work. That's out of their scope.
I've heard of them doing stuff way out of their depth before. This sounds normal to me. But I could easily be wrong.
They don't around here I know, I'm friends with the GM of said retailer. It's bench tech, home networking with SOHO routers and printers only.
I know that in the area where he is they used to do business stuff that was outside of that scope.
-
@handsofqwerty said:
They have the system running their doors on a legacy XP desktop that, if it died, they'd be unable to unlock/open doors. Their desktops are >all pretty old as well.
For the door system, initally P2V the machine to get it off the legacy hardware and move it to something like an HP Proliant Microserver with a RAID1You are likely going to run into licensing issues with this.
-
@coliver said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@coliver said:
@thecreativeone91 said:
Keep in mind doing this personally (especially if you don't have an LLC) you are taking a lot more personal liability than handing it over to @ntg
I just want to quote this for emphasis. It was what I was trying to get at earlier. If something goes wrong you are personally liable...
Not saying you will be negligent... but...
Well he is representing a company. So he has more than an LLC in this case.
He is? I know he will be for the printer installation, but what about for the actual hardware/software refresh? Is he representing himself or the company he works for at that point, has his company approved this labor?
My retailer would be well-compensated, I assure you.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@thecreativeone91 said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@thecreativeone91 said:
Yeah, I don't think said retailer is involved in that portion of the work. That's out of their scope.
I've heard of them doing stuff way out of their depth before. This sounds normal to me. But I could easily be wrong.
They don't around here I know, I'm friends with the GM of said retailer. It's bench tech, home networking with SOHO routers and printers only.
I know that in the area where he is they used to do business stuff that was outside of that scope.
Yeah, the official scope has never limited our store. If it's in the realm of my abilities, I'll do it. Besides, from what I'm aware, nothing limits me to just SOHO equipment. Maybe somewhere something does, but that's never been how we worked, and I can do onsites for businesses, so it's not like I'm only allowed to do it for home users.
-
@thecreativeone91 said:
@coliver said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@coliver said:
@thecreativeone91 said:
Keep in mind doing this personally (especially if you don't have an LLC) you are taking a lot more personal liability than handing it over to @ntg
I just want to quote this for emphasis. It was what I was trying to get at earlier. If something goes wrong you are personally liable...
Not saying you will be negligent... but...
Well he is representing a company. So he has more than an LLC in this case.
He is? I know he will be for the printer installation, but what about for the actual hardware/software refresh? Is he representing himself or the company he works for at that point, has his company approved this labor?
Yeah, I don't think said retailer is involved in that portion of the work. That's out of their scope.
No, this would be through the retailer. But the ongoing support would not be. It'd be both too costly and not sufficient for them to have me do the ongoing support. I was discussing this with @Minion-Queen before. I can do the refresh cheaper than she would have to charge for, but the actual ongoing support would be cheaper through her.
-
@thecreativeone91 said:
@handsofqwerty said:
They have the system running their doors on a legacy XP desktop that, if it died, they'd be unable to unlock/open doors. Their desktops are >all pretty old as well.
For the door system, initally P2V the machine to get it off the legacy hardware and move it to something like an HP Proliant Microserver with a RAID1You are likely going to run into licensing issues with this.
It wouldn't be a permanent solution. It'd just be to get it off the legacy hardware. Once it was, I could find a way to migrate it off to another OS, whatever that might have to be.
-
@handsofqwerty said:
@thecreativeone91 said:
@handsofqwerty said:
They have the system running their doors on a legacy XP desktop that, if it died, they'd be unable to unlock/open doors. Their desktops are >all pretty old as well.
For the door system, initally P2V the machine to get it off the legacy hardware and move it to something like an HP Proliant Microserver with a RAID1You are likely going to run into licensing issues with this.
It wouldn't be a permanent solution. It'd just be to get it off the legacy hardware. Once it was, I could find a way to migrate it off to another OS, whatever that might have to be.
Migrating from a licensed to an unlicensed setup is never okay.
-
@handsofqwerty said:
@thecreativeone91 said:
@handsofqwerty said:
They have the system running their doors on a legacy XP desktop that, if it died, they'd be unable to unlock/open doors. Their desktops are >all pretty old as well.
For the door system, initally P2V the machine to get it off the legacy hardware and move it to something like an HP Proliant Microserver with a RAID1You are likely going to run into licensing issues with this.
It wouldn't be a permanent solution. It'd just be to get it off the legacy hardware. Once it was, I could find a way to migrate it off to another OS, whatever that might have to be.
Permanent or not, you should still be properly licensed. If I remember correctly there is no way to properly license a virtual instance of XP. When you start it may be worth having a conversation with the vendor to see where else that software is supported, before any hardware/software is ordered.
-
@coliver said:
@handsofqwerty said:
@thecreativeone91 said:
@handsofqwerty said:
They have the system running their doors on a legacy XP desktop that, if it died, they'd be unable to unlock/open doors. Their desktops are >all pretty old as well.
For the door system, initally P2V the machine to get it off the legacy hardware and move it to something like an HP Proliant Microserver with a RAID1You are likely going to run into licensing issues with this.
It wouldn't be a permanent solution. It'd just be to get it off the legacy hardware. Once it was, I could find a way to migrate it off to another OS, whatever that might have to be.
Permanent or not, you should still be properly licensed. If I remember correctly there is no way to properly license a virtual instance of XP. When you start it may be worth having a conversation with the vendor to see where else that software is supported, before any hardware/software is ordered.
There is some complex way to do it, I believe. I remember having this discussion with Microsoft and I thought that they came up with something, but very expensive.
-
Remember when it comes to licensing - this is not your money and not your problem. All you have to worry about is sticking to the proper licensing. If the firehouse has opted to do things in an expensive way, it is in no way your problem to fix. They made those decisions and those decisions are primarily around cost. They decided to save some money in the past in exchange for having to spend more in the future. That future is here and the problem is no one's but theirs.
Never skip licensing requirements because you don't want someone to have to pay them. You leave the realm of IT and there is no reason to do that. This doesn't impact you personally, don't take it on like it does. It's unfortunate that what they want to do isn't free, but it's not unfortunate for you.
-
If they cared about the money they would not be running Windows XP still today. That's just silly. There has to be free options for this. Do the best job you can within the rules, but don't bend the rules on behalf of a client - this not only cheats the vendors who are supplying the parts (like MS) but also cheats other IT shops that are seen as more expensive because they follow the rules.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
Remember when it comes to licensing - this is not your money and not your problem. All you have to worry about is sticking to the proper licensing. If the firehouse has opted to do things in an expensive way, it is in no way your problem to fix. They made those decisions and those decisions are primarily around cost. They decided to save some money in the past in exchange for having to spend more in the future. That future is here and the problem is no one's but theirs.
Never skip licensing requirements because you don't want someone to have to pay them. You leave the realm of IT and there is no reason to do that. This doesn't impact you personally, don't take it on like it does. It's unfortunate that what they want to do isn't free, but it's not unfortunate for you.
Ok, that is a valid point.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
If they cared about the money they would not be running Windows XP still today. That's just silly. There has to be free options for this. Do the best job you can within the rules, but don't bend the rules on behalf of a client - this not only cheats the vendors who are supplying the parts (like MS) but also cheats other IT shops that are seen as more expensive because they follow the rules.
Yeah, that's true.
-
@handsofqwerty said:
@scottalanmiller said:
Remember when it comes to licensing - this is not your money and not your problem. All you have to worry about is sticking to the proper licensing. If the firehouse has opted to do things in an expensive way, it is in no way your problem to fix. They made those decisions and those decisions are primarily around cost. They decided to save some money in the past in exchange for having to spend more in the future. That future is here and the problem is no one's but theirs.
Never skip licensing requirements because you don't want someone to have to pay them. You leave the realm of IT and there is no reason to do that. This doesn't impact you personally, don't take it on like it does. It's unfortunate that what they want to do isn't free, but it's not unfortunate for you.
Ok, that is a valid point.
This is a really tough one that IT people tend to someone take on emotionally. It's like we feel emotionally attached to the money or hate delivering bad news. Imagine a doctor or a car mechanic in the same position - they simply state how bad it is and give you the options. Sure, they try to save you money (mechanic - used parts from the junk yard or third party manufacturer; doctor - generic medicine or a lower cost procedure) but they don't take on the feeling of "oh, you shouldn't be THAT sick, let's work around the issue."
Learning to detach emotionally and still fight to find the right solution but limit the solutions to what you are allowed to do. Just look at it as any other constraint. It actually makes things easier because when you don't have the constraint of following the licensing you actually wade around in a large grey area where you could push the licensing envelope just a little more here or there and get this or that for it.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@handsofqwerty said:
@scottalanmiller said:
Remember when it comes to licensing - this is not your money and not your problem. All you have to worry about is sticking to the proper licensing. If the firehouse has opted to do things in an expensive way, it is in no way your problem to fix. They made those decisions and those decisions are primarily around cost. They decided to save some money in the past in exchange for having to spend more in the future. That future is here and the problem is no one's but theirs.
Never skip licensing requirements because you don't want someone to have to pay them. You leave the realm of IT and there is no reason to do that. This doesn't impact you personally, don't take it on like it does. It's unfortunate that what they want to do isn't free, but it's not unfortunate for you.
Ok, that is a valid point.
This is a really tough one that IT people tend to someone take on emotionally. It's like we feel emotionally attached to the money or hate delivering bad news. Imagine a doctor or a car mechanic in the same position - they simply state how bad it is and give you the options. Sure, they try to save you money (mechanic - used parts from the junk yard or third party manufacturer; doctor - generic medicine or a lower cost procedure) but they don't take on the feeling of "oh, you shouldn't be THAT sick, let's work around the issue."
Learning to detach emotionally and still fight to find the right solution but limit the solutions to what you are allowed to do. Just look at it as any other constraint. It actually makes things easier because when you don't have the constraint of following the licensing you actually wade around in a large grey area where you could push the licensing envelope just a little more here or there and get this or that for it.
Yeah, you have a point. I'm not real good at separating myself in that way either.
-
@handsofqwerty said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@handsofqwerty said:
@scottalanmiller said:
Remember when it comes to licensing - this is not your money and not your problem. All you have to worry about is sticking to the proper licensing. If the firehouse has opted to do things in an expensive way, it is in no way your problem to fix. They made those decisions and those decisions are primarily around cost. They decided to save some money in the past in exchange for having to spend more in the future. That future is here and the problem is no one's but theirs.
Never skip licensing requirements because you don't want someone to have to pay them. You leave the realm of IT and there is no reason to do that. This doesn't impact you personally, don't take it on like it does. It's unfortunate that what they want to do isn't free, but it's not unfortunate for you.
Ok, that is a valid point.
This is a really tough one that IT people tend to someone take on emotionally. It's like we feel emotionally attached to the money or hate delivering bad news. Imagine a doctor or a car mechanic in the same position - they simply state how bad it is and give you the options. Sure, they try to save you money (mechanic - used parts from the junk yard or third party manufacturer; doctor - generic medicine or a lower cost procedure) but they don't take on the feeling of "oh, you shouldn't be THAT sick, let's work around the issue."
Learning to detach emotionally and still fight to find the right solution but limit the solutions to what you are allowed to do. Just look at it as any other constraint. It actually makes things easier because when you don't have the constraint of following the licensing you actually wade around in a large grey area where you could push the licensing envelope just a little more here or there and get this or that for it.
Yeah, you have a point. I'm not real good at separating myself in that way either.
But I'm working on it.
-
@handsofqwerty said:
Yeah, you have a point. I'm not real good at separating myself in that way either.
It's a very common thing in IT. Either we take on a feeling of ownership of the network or of the finances or something else. IT people tend to look at what they do as something other than a job which causes problems that few other fields have.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@handsofqwerty said:
Yeah, you have a point. I'm not real good at separating myself in that way either.
It's a very common thing in IT. Either we take on a feeling of ownership of the network or of the finances or something else. IT people tend to look at what they do as something other than a job which causes problems that few other fields have.
We tend to be quite passionate people as a rule. I think when you have that level of passion that a sense of ownership just comes with it naturally.
