Linux Demanding Growing Faster than Talent Pool
-
Wish they had junior admin positions available within 50 miles of where I live. Nothing even close to Linux like around.
-
@coliver said:
Wish they had junior admin positions available within 50 miles of where I live. Nothing even close to Linux like around.
We have two Linux admin positions open here right now. One wants a Masters Degree + In Field Linux Admin Experience. The other want's 5-7 years experience as a Linux admin.
https://listings.jobs.vt.edu/postings/54560?utm_source=Indeed&utm_medium=organic&utm_campaign=Indeed
-
@coliver said:
Wish they had junior admin positions available within 50 miles of where I live. Nothing even close to Linux like around.
SMBs and rural locations can't consider Linux mostly because there aren't enough Linux admins in the word for any smaller shops to start investing in that direction. The lack of talent is completely crippling the market, and even so it is growing like crazy.
-
@thecreativeone91 said:
@coliver said:
Wish they had junior admin positions available within 50 miles of where I live. Nothing even close to Linux like around.
We have two Linux admin positions open here right now. One wants a Masters Degree + In Field Linux Admin Experience. The other want's 5-7 years experience as a Linux admin.
https://listings.jobs.vt.edu/postings/54560?utm_source=Indeed&utm_medium=organic&utm_campaign=Indeed
Well the one isn't a Linux job, it's a teaching job, and a junior one. That's not an IT job at all. So while you could argue it's a Linux job, sort of, it's not one working on Linux nor in the field. So I would not count that. People getting that job would not normally qualify for work as a Linux admin - or else the school couldn't afford them. You can tell from the Master's degree requirement that it isn't a serious IT job.
Rackspace has some hard core IT people. Five years experience is not so crazy to expect. High, but not unreasonable. If you had a few years and experience and interviewed well I'm sure that you would be considered. That's a far cry from ten years required.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@coliver said:
Wish they had junior admin positions available within 50 miles of where I live. Nothing even close to Linux like around.
SMBs and rural locations can't consider Linux mostly because there aren't enough Linux admins in the word for any smaller shops to start investing in that direction. The lack of talent is completely crippling the market, and even so it is growing like crazy.
Even the local colleges and hospitals have minimal Linux deployments. Makes it hard to get a start in that specialization. Seems like a self-defeating mentality, we can't deploy it because we don't have anyone to manage it. There is no one to manage it because the infrastructure isn't there to help train them.
-
@coliver said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@coliver said:
Wish they had junior admin positions available within 50 miles of where I live. Nothing even close to Linux like around.
SMBs and rural locations can't consider Linux mostly because there aren't enough Linux admins in the word for any smaller shops to start investing in that direction. The lack of talent is completely crippling the market, and even so it is growing like crazy.
Even the local colleges and hospitals have minimal Linux deployments. Makes it hard to get a start in that specialization. Seems like a self-defeating mentality, we can't deploy it because we don't have anyone to manage it. There is no one to manage it because the infrastructure isn't there to help train them.
Why? I mean personally I think Linux is easier to manage than a window server, and I'm not even counting the oddities that can happen with group policy since there's nothing to compare it to on the linux side.
I personally am pretty big on using open source solutions when it makes sense to. so I've added linux to most every environment I've touch. usually in the form of debian or CentOS servers. They make great content filters, web servers among many other things.
-
@coliver said:
Even the local colleges and hospitals have minimal Linux deployments. Makes it hard to get a start in that specialization. Seems like a self-defeating mentality, we can't deploy it because we don't have anyone to manage it. There is no one to manage it because the infrastructure isn't there to help train them.
Rarely does anyone defeat SMBs but themselves.
-
No one should need Linux at work to get experience. Linux is free. Everyone can get it at home and learn it on their own if they want.
-
ZDNet writes about the same issue: Companies Really Want Linux Savvy Employees and They Want Them Now.
-
@coliver I've done work for a few doctor's offices around here. They've switched to Medent for their medical records. They deploy on-site CentOS servers, but their clients are only Windows based. I haven't seen the back end, so it could possibly be just an Oracle or DB2 server, but why develop on Linux and then not have a Linux client?
-
@johnhooks said:
@coliver I've done work for a few doctor's offices around here. They've switched to Medent for their medical records. They deploy on-site CentOS servers, but their clients are only Windows based. I haven't seen the back end, so it could possibly be just an Oracle or DB2 server, but why develop on Linux and then not have a Linux client?
Because that is where the money is. The office workers need more than just the records software. For the vast majority of office workers that means word/excel/outlook and that means Windows.
Why waste the time trying to develop an application for Linux when no one will buy it?
Server side, it makes no sense to develop for Windows server as that adds cost to the person you are selling to. They already have desktops, but they may not have a server. You provide a solution that runs on a free server OS and you have magic business solutions.
-
@JaredBusch said:
@johnhooks said:
@coliver I've done work for a few doctor's offices around here. They've switched to Medent for their medical records. They deploy on-site CentOS servers, but their clients are only Windows based. I haven't seen the back end, so it could possibly be just an Oracle or DB2 server, but why develop on Linux and then not have a Linux client?
Because that is where the money is. The office workers need more than just the records software. For the vast majority of office workers that means word/excel/outlook and that means Windows.
Why waste the time trying to develop an application for Linux when no one will buy it?
Server side, it makes no sense to develop for Windows server as that adds cost to the person you are selling to. They already have desktops, but they may not have a server. You provide a solution that runs on a free server OS and you have magic business solutions.
Not that $600-800 for a Windows license isn't nothing, but I really doubt that's killing a project like EHR installs.
-
@JaredBusch Good point. I found it a little weird because the install process is literally a bunch of batch scripts. You have to call their "tech support" when you add a new client. They download some batch scripts to the pc from their website and then run them. So now that I think about it, I don't know whether the program is just copied to the client from the server or if the application is some kind of Java/something else. It doesn't look like a native windows application (if that makes sense) the way it behaves, almost looks like a web app. I guess that's why I was thinking that way.
-
Obviously looks don't mean that much, but the way the menus slide in and fade out, things like that.
-
@Dashrender I agree. The one office only has four employees and a doctor. The whole system cost $40K and $300 a month for support. So the windows licenses are next to nothing.
-
@johnhooks said:
Obviously looks don't mean that much, but the way the menus slide in and fade out, things like that.
I hope that's not a real patient record.
-
@johnhooks said:
@JaredBusch Good point. I found it a little weird because the install process is literally a bunch of batch scripts.
That's not that unusual.
-
@thecreativeone91 Off google images, so I have no idea.
-
@johnhooks said:
@coliver I've done work for a few doctor's offices around here. They've switched to Medent for their medical records. They deploy on-site CentOS servers, but their clients are only Windows based. I haven't seen the back end, so it could possibly be just an Oracle or DB2 server, but why develop on Linux and then not have a Linux client?
No real connection between the two. Since the back end and the front end are presumably not tightly coupled, the decision as to what to use for one would have no influence on the other.
-
@johnhooks said:
@coliver I've done work for a few doctor's offices around here. They've switched to Medent for their medical records. They deploy on-site CentOS servers, but their clients are only Windows based. I haven't seen the back end, so it could possibly be just an Oracle or DB2 server, but why develop on Linux and then not have a Linux client?
I'm always more surprised that companies are still making OS specific apps. It seems like programming for the web has gotten to the point where this would be almost unnecessary... especially since you then don't have to worry about the underlying OS as much.
