Is Microsoft the New Apple?
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@Dashrender said:
Although, considering things like O365 and Rackspace and Gmail, AD is definitely seeing an end of life - and IT will look to other tools to manage desktops/laptops, many of which already exist, but now the company will have to pay reoccurring fees to use them.
But they pay recurring fees for AD today. Isn't moving away from AD also potentially moving away from recurring fees? I'm confused, I thought that AD was the recurring fee that you wanted to get away from.
They are? CALs aren't nearly as expensive as most MDMs and other management software
-
@Dashrender said:
They are? CALs aren't nearly as expensive as most MDMs and other management software
Who uses MDM for desktops or laptops? Most MDM that I've used is very cheap, Meraki is free.
-
@Dashrender said:
But they pay recurring fees for AD today.
They are? CALs aren't nearly as expensive .....
Well, you have to pay for regular (even if only occasionally) server OS upgrades. That's normally expensive. Then you have to upgrade the CALs. And you need to upgrade the OS. That's three different recurring costs with AD just for the basics.
-
You can pay for AD ad hoc, which often costs more as companies do reckless things trying to "keep costs down." Or you can use a combination of InTunes + desktop license subscriptions and Software Assurance to turn the unpredictable AD upgrade costs into a very predictable cost. When you do this it really exposes the recurring nature of it. The recurring nature is always there, you just choose for it to be predictable and granular or unpredictable and somewhat controlled as to granularity.
MDM costs normally includes hosting and support rolled into the price too. AD does not.
-
What kind of businesses are these west coast firms? I'm guessing they're generally startups with relatively few employees. I can understand why AD doesn't fit well in these types of organisations. The larger the firm, the better AD works.
Compliance issues is also a good reason for AD, as mentioned above. We're a small firm but work on a lot of government contracts, and I'm sure AD helps us pass their audits, though there are always ways around these things.
As an aside, I'm fascinated by Californian startups. We're a 100+ year old British manufacturer - very traditional. One of my pet projects is how to make us more like a Californian startup. I'm having a little trouble getting my colleagues on board with my vision. I keep telling them there is no reason we can't be the next Nest.
-
@Carnival-Boy said:
What kind of businesses are these west coast firms? I'm guessing they're generally startups with relatively few employees.
Two of the biggest companies in the world would be in that list. Actually three, including the very largest. And while I've not been inside, I know that Oracle is like that too. And those are just the insanely enormous players. Size really isn't that big of a factor, culture really is.
-
@Carnival-Boy said:
I'm guessing they're generally startups with relatively few employees.
Only one that I've mentioned is in any way small. The second smallest is hundreds of people in eighteen countries with huge server concerns. The smallest isn't all that small. But the largest ones are in the hundreds of thousands of employees.
-
@Carnival-Boy said:
As an aside, I'm fascinated by Californian startups. We're a 100+ year old British manufacturer - very traditional. One of my pet projects is how to make us more like a Californian startup. I'm having a little trouble getting my colleagues on board with my vision. I keep telling them there is no reason we can't be the next Nest.
Startups are designed around getting risky venture capital, failing nine out of ten times (and literally closing up shop and going home) and when successful selling out to a large, established company. SW is the later, they've done well enough that they are planning to sell this year hence why they don't operate the way that their users or customers would like - because they only answer to the investors. Wall St. is a fickle mistress and not a logical one at all, investors will sacrifice a year of profits for a day of increased market cap.
-
California companies are really bizarre, but it is what drives the market here. But boy are they different. If you work in IT outside of California, chances are it is as foreign as working in India to work in California. Absolutely everything is different.
-
Like what?
-
@Carnival-Boy said:
Like what?
Like they don't have IT departments (until they get really large). Hundred and hundreds of people, no IT (because everyone is "technical enough.") People tend to admin their own desktops. Laptops are common rather than desktops. Mac and Linux instead of Windows. Remote access is assumed. AD isn't often even considered, nor any centralized machine management system. On premise hosting isn't thought about, hosted services are the only real consideration. Cloud computing is a foregone conclusion (real cloud, not what people elsewhere call cloud to sound cool.) DevOps rather than traditional systems administration (there is a reason that there is a barrier to entry for IT people into this market.)
Plus soft things that you see in some other markets like NYC and Austin like free food in the office, flexible work hours, work from home, work remotely, reimbursements for using public transport, dogs in the office, lots of time working in "alternative spaces". Those sorts of things too.
Plus the pay difference. Here pay is often partially in equity, not in salary.
-
When you have a technical staff you can get away with those things, but when you don't - now what?
It sounds like you couldn't even get a job as a receptionist in those companies if you can't fix your own PC issues for the most part. One one hand that sounds almost awesome - people who understand the technology that they use, realize it has pitfalls and they themselves know how to get around a lot of them... but the rest the US this is simply not the case - but you've already said that.
-
I just wonder how life would be different around my office if everyone had to provide their own computer, or at least just maintain their own computer - if you're computer is broken, it's on YOU to fix it, not some IT department. I think half our employees would be fired inside a week because they'd break something and have no clue to how fix it, nor do they care cause it's not their problem.
-
@Dashrender said:
When you have a technical staff you can get away with those things, but when you don't - now what?
Then this model isn't for you
Microsoft designed their models around how "normal" companies work and how they should work. Managing desktops isn't a bad thing. Just important to realize that it isn't for absolutely everyone, but it is for most people. Both models have value, just for different kinds of companies. -
@Dashrender said:
It sounds like you couldn't even get a job as a receptionist in those companies if you can't fix your own PC issues for the most part. One one hand that sounds almost awesome - people who understand the technology that they use, realize it has pitfalls and they themselves know how to get around a lot of them... but the rest the US this is simply not the case - but you've already said that.
That is mostly true. The difference is that most receptionists out here have as many IT skills as most L1 IT people. Even the most computer illiterate person here is a power user compared to most of the US market.
-
@Dashrender said:
I just wonder how life would be different around my office if everyone had to provide their own computer, or at least just maintain their own computer - if you're computer is broken, it's on YOU to fix it, not some IT department. I think half our employees would be fired inside a week because they'd break something and have no clue to how fix it, nor do they care cause it's not their problem.
Keep in mind that while it is semi "on you" to fix it, you work in an office where every single person is kind of IT. Everyone can help you and everyone trains you and you can't hide in a pool of people who can't use computers like you can in other companies. If you can't use a computer, you are useless and can't do your job. So you either learn very quickly or move on. It's not as weird as it sounds when you see it in action. And it isn't that there is never any IT, but it is a minor, background function often focused on big things.
And here, where I am right now, the office manager (not IT) deals with things like getting you keyboards, mice, monitors, etc. And even sets up your computer for you!
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@Dashrender said:
I just wonder how life would be different around my office if everyone had to provide their own computer, or at least just maintain their own computer - if you're computer is broken, it's on YOU to fix it, not some IT department. I think half our employees would be fired inside a week because they'd break something and have no clue to how fix it, nor do they care cause it's not their problem.
Keep in mind that while it is semi "on you" to fix it, you work in an office where every single person is kind of IT. Everyone can help you and everyone trains you and you can't hide in a pool of people who can't use computers like you can in other companies. If you can't use a computer, you are useless and can't do your job. So you either learn very quickly or move on. It's not as weird as it sounds when you see it in action. And it isn't that there is never any IT, but it is a minor, background function often focused on big things.
And here, where I am right now, the office manager (not IT) deals with things like getting you keyboards, mice, monitors, etc. And even sets up your computer for you!
That makes sense, if you're working there, you probably do care about learning more about computers in general anyway, so learning to fix problems comes more naturally.
-
It's interesting to see this microcosm, as you said way outside the norm. Do other countries have areas that are heavily devoted to tech and as a side effect the area in general is more knowledgeable than average?
I ask this assuming that the only reason this exists in California is because of Silicon Valley, am I mistaken?
-
@Dashrender said:
It's interesting to see this microcosm, as you said way outside the norm. Do other countries have areas that are heavily devoted to tech and as a side effect the area in general is more knowledgeable than average?
Yes, India has Bangalore, for example. Spain has Madrid. Canada has Ottawa. Those are some of the most dramatic.
-
@Dashrender said:
I ask this assuming that the only reason this exists in California is because of Silicon Valley, am I mistaken?
Silicon Valley is the epicenter (pun intended) of it but Seattle maintains its own microcosm of this nature which, I believe, spills into Portland. Because of the amazing pull of Silicon Valley, San Fran and Seattle it ends up being the dominant culture on the entire west coast. But Austin is similar, being a development city too.
