Tech chat - an occasional blog about stuff I find interesting
Discussions and thoughts around (but not limited to) technology/IT as seen by a sometimes dyspeptic but still relatively engaged hack
Thursday 24 July 2008, 3:19 PM
Why I am now a Technology Tory
If the classic definition of being Tory is a dislike of big government and a hankering after the clarity of the past, I now find myself happy to be classed as such.
What has 'gone wrong' in so much of business use of IT, it seems to me, after not just coming up to 25 years in technology one way or another but based on some recent experiences (!) with clients, is too simplistic a belief in the power of systems and processes.
Time and again I find myself being told that complicated-way-of-doing-something X is to be preferred to simpler-but-low-tech Y. In effect: I work with people who want to use collaborative online multimedia systems when I say we can get the job done - quicker, cheaper too - with the equivalent of a fax and a pencil.
This is because people (companies, organisations) genuinely think complex systems are 'better'.
Translation to the real world: PFI, the National Curriculum/SATs, CCTV, NPfIT - the list goes on and on and on.
Call this touching faith 'Technology Socialism'.
I want nothing to do with it. It just doesn't work!
A process by definition will tend to damp down the interesting ends and margins in favour of the middle. It'll take too long to set up. It will be cumbersome. And then we'll scrap it and get the latest, best new Thing.
Enough, say I - begone with your Tech Red nonsense. Back to basics is the way forward.
It's the story of the pen in space, isn't it - the Yanks spend loads developing a ballpoint that writes in zero g and the Soviets just bring pencils into orbit.
They wasn't stupid, them Russkies I now believe...
What has 'gone wrong' in so much of business use of IT, it seems to me, after not just coming up to 25 years in technology one way or another but based on some recent experiences (!) with clients, is too simplistic a belief in the power of systems and processes.
Time and again I find myself being told that complicated-way-of-doing-something X is to be preferred to simpler-but-low-tech Y. In effect: I work with people who want to use collaborative online multimedia systems when I say we can get the job done - quicker, cheaper too - with the equivalent of a fax and a pencil.
This is because people (companies, organisations) genuinely think complex systems are 'better'.
Translation to the real world: PFI, the National Curriculum/SATs, CCTV, NPfIT - the list goes on and on and on.
Call this touching faith 'Technology Socialism'.
I want nothing to do with it. It just doesn't work!
A process by definition will tend to damp down the interesting ends and margins in favour of the middle. It'll take too long to set up. It will be cumbersome. And then we'll scrap it and get the latest, best new Thing.
Enough, say I - begone with your Tech Red nonsense. Back to basics is the way forward.
It's the story of the pen in space, isn't it - the Yanks spend loads developing a ballpoint that writes in zero g and the Soviets just bring pencils into orbit.
They wasn't stupid, them Russkies I now believe...
Tuesday 24 June 2008, 12:30 PM
The realities of server management - a conversation
Please go here
http://resources.zdnet.co.uk/articles/video/0,1000002009,39437728,00.htm
to check out the first (of 3) slices of our recent discussion here on what our summer server OS research has told us about the reality of the UK market.
I think the insights of the panel - respected analyst Katy Ring of The Bathwick Group, a Linux (Debion) and MSFT customer - are well worth hearing.
Did we get to any answers? Well, it'd be nice, we agreed, if we could get a cross-platform unified server management tool... that'd be nice, yes, along with World Peace and a pill that would take off 3 stone overnight. (That was my wish item after seeing meself on screen, not a serious point in the conversation.)
Will put up links to parts 2 and 3 as they come on stream.
http://resources.zdnet.co.uk/articles/video/0,1000002009,39437728,00.htm
to check out the first (of 3) slices of our recent discussion here on what our summer server OS research has told us about the reality of the UK market.
I think the insights of the panel - respected analyst Katy Ring of The Bathwick Group, a Linux (Debion) and MSFT customer - are well worth hearing.
Did we get to any answers? Well, it'd be nice, we agreed, if we could get a cross-platform unified server management tool... that'd be nice, yes, along with World Peace and a pill that would take off 3 stone overnight. (That was my wish item after seeing meself on screen, not a serious point in the conversation.)
Will put up links to parts 2 and 3 as they come on stream.
Tuesday 24 June 2008, 12:26 PM
UNIX is of course far more than just Linux
A couple of weeks back (28th May) I posted that I recommended an innediate trip to the Laughing Academy for anyone still doing work in a UNIX that was non-Linux.
I had in mind the proprietary OSes of course of the likes of IBM (AIX) and HP (HP-UX) - and I still doubt if anyone is starting fresh endeavours on those platforms, though of course maintenance/legacy work will continue for a good few years yet.
Problem with my analysis: I had of course forgotten that big non-Linux UNIX still very much alive. Step forward our friends at Sun Microsystems and Solaris.
It would be patently daft to prematurely bury Solaris and I stand corrected.
Where this leaves UNIX is still an interesting question, surely - Solaris vs Red Hat vs SuSE versus non-commercial distributions of Linux, it seems.
I had in mind the proprietary OSes of course of the likes of IBM (AIX) and HP (HP-UX) - and I still doubt if anyone is starting fresh endeavours on those platforms, though of course maintenance/legacy work will continue for a good few years yet.
Problem with my analysis: I had of course forgotten that big non-Linux UNIX still very much alive. Step forward our friends at Sun Microsystems and Solaris.
It would be patently daft to prematurely bury Solaris and I stand corrected.
Where this leaves UNIX is still an interesting question, surely - Solaris vs Red Hat vs SuSE versus non-commercial distributions of Linux, it seems.
Friday 20 June 2008, 10:56 AM
Cost and control key to server management for foreseeable
Took part in a fascinating debate the other day here at ZDNet.co.uk which we filmed and which will be on the site in the next few days.
This was again exploring issues thrown up by the research but that was just the starting point. This time the experts we had in to kck around the problems were an analyst and two users, one a confirmed Linux (Debion) man and the other primarily (but not exclusively) a Microsoft Server backer.
I don't want to blow the cool stuff in the video before it goes up, obviously, but if there was any one consistent theme it was this: Wish as we might for one meta (mega?) server control layer, the nature of this stuff (its complexity and legacy aspect) means server management will always be a central factor in any IT professional's life.
Sometimes, yes, we will have rock-solid server OSes at the foundation of the stack. BUT we will always have 'the stack' - as in, a web of complexity, made up of new, old, partner, and yes, broken environments to make work.
Wish it were different? Well, me too. But then I wish Portugal had won last night's Euro 2008 quarter final - I am out of the office sweeptsake now :-)
This was again exploring issues thrown up by the research but that was just the starting point. This time the experts we had in to kck around the problems were an analyst and two users, one a confirmed Linux (Debion) man and the other primarily (but not exclusively) a Microsoft Server backer.
I don't want to blow the cool stuff in the video before it goes up, obviously, but if there was any one consistent theme it was this: Wish as we might for one meta (mega?) server control layer, the nature of this stuff (its complexity and legacy aspect) means server management will always be a central factor in any IT professional's life.
Sometimes, yes, we will have rock-solid server OSes at the foundation of the stack. BUT we will always have 'the stack' - as in, a web of complexity, made up of new, old, partner, and yes, broken environments to make work.
Wish it were different? Well, me too. But then I wish Portugal had won last night's Euro 2008 quarter final - I am out of the office sweeptsake now :-)
Wednesday 18 June 2008, 11:59 AM
A new threat from the datacentre: you're making your staff deaf!
An interesting side effect of datacentre growth has come to my attention, as part of this month's intense look by ZDNet.co.uk into server use in the UK (based originally into our poll of the ZDNet UK community, but since bolstered by commentary and input from a range of sources from analysts to suppliers to end users): such growth can lead to health and safety violations.
We're talking risk of deafness.
The threat is the sheer noise building up in busy server rooms, as they crank up the volume to cope with all the heat they need to dissipate. Think about it: with their tiny processor fans, how hard do those little machines have to sweat to cope?
The law says the minimum above which danger to hearing can occur is 80 decibels on a daily/weekly exposure - that's about as loud a sound as loud singing from 3 feet away or a noisy car driving by as close as 25 feet from you.
I'd say in my experience we are easily meeting that level in busy server farms!
FYI, according to the government (http://www.hse.gov.uk/noise/), the latest iteration of legislation around noise hazards in the workplace specifically state, 'By law, as an employer, you must assess and identify measures to eliminate or reduce risks from exposure to noise so that you can protect the hearing of your employees'.
Another argument for consolidation/virtualisation/green IT, I'd say.
We're talking risk of deafness.
The threat is the sheer noise building up in busy server rooms, as they crank up the volume to cope with all the heat they need to dissipate. Think about it: with their tiny processor fans, how hard do those little machines have to sweat to cope?
The law says the minimum above which danger to hearing can occur is 80 decibels on a daily/weekly exposure - that's about as loud a sound as loud singing from 3 feet away or a noisy car driving by as close as 25 feet from you.
I'd say in my experience we are easily meeting that level in busy server farms!
FYI, according to the government (http://www.hse.gov.uk/noise/), the latest iteration of legislation around noise hazards in the workplace specifically state, 'By law, as an employer, you must assess and identify measures to eliminate or reduce risks from exposure to noise so that you can protect the hearing of your employees'.
Another argument for consolidation/virtualisation/green IT, I'd say.
Previous
