If you need to justify the move to a virtual infrastructure
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| tracyanne Jul 18, 2011 9:20 PM EDT |
You probably don't need it. |
| TxtEdMacs Jul 18, 2011 9:46 PM EDT |
ta, Your lack of a positive attitude truly troubles me. What's with the probably, when it's written by Ken Hess it is a near a certainty as worldly possible. YBT |
| JaseP Jul 19, 2011 9:35 AM EDT |
I just recently put Android-X86 on my Linux touch screen Atom netbook, using VirtualBox,... Does that count as a virtual infrastructure?!?! But Tracyanne's right, I probably don't need it,... but it's really cool that I could do it. |
| tracyanne Jul 19, 2011 10:14 AM EDT |
@JaseP, but did you need to justify doing it? |
| smallboxadmin Jul 19, 2011 11:31 AM EDT |
Quoting:If you look at all of the failed businesses over the past ten years, you’ll note one glaring similarity: They weren’t interested in cost savings. Wow, there's a statement. Always good for a laugh. |
| JaseP Jul 19, 2011 11:32 AM EDT |
I actually have a reason for doing it... There are a few apps that I have in Android that have no (decent) analogue in a regular Linux environment (home automation control, really easy sharable calendar integrated note taking, etc.). It would be nice to have them,and their data, universally available on all my machines. So in a way, I already have justification... That said, Ken Hess would virtualize his dog if he could... |
| Fettoosh Jul 19, 2011 12:18 PM EDT |
Quoting:If you need to justify the move to a virtual infrastructure ... you probably don't need it. I assume you mean "if ain't obvious, you probably don't need it". This might be true in some cases. But in business, no matter how obvious it might be, one always have to make a business case in order to get the support needed for success. Making a business case is justification. |
| tracyanne Jul 19, 2011 6:49 PM EDT |
Quoting:I assume you mean "if ain't obvious, you probably don't need it". Actually the bit that reads "If you need to justify the move to a virtual infrastructure" was lifted straight from the Ken Hess Article. I added the "you probably don't need it.", meaning, of course, that virtualisation, as promted by Ken Hess isn't necessarily the answer. That virtualisation should flow organically from your needs and perceived needs, not simply because it's a great sounding gee whizz solution to what may be a non problem, which appears to be the case with Ken Hess's wide eyed "ain't this such super technology, lets apply it to everything" attitude. It's not the be all and end all, it doesn't necessarily save money, it has security risks, like everything else, it has to be weighed against all other options, to see what best fits the situation. |
| khess Jul 20, 2011 9:18 PM EDT |
FYI: Businesses in the real world have to justify any technology change. |
| tracyanne Jul 20, 2011 10:43 PM EDT |
Quoting:FYI: Businesses in the real world have to justify any technology change. Really who'd have thought. Which is precisely why Business Managers need to avoid like the plague your prothlesysing. |
| vainrveenr Jul 21, 2011 12:22 AM EDT |
Quoting:FYI: Businesses in the real world have to justify any technology change. And by the same token, good CFOs at real world parent companies of online publications -- e.g., CBS Interactive's CFO for ZDNet -- have to continuously "justify" the retention (or otherwise) of their more controversial technical writers. |
| JaseP Jul 21, 2011 11:34 PM EDT |
No such thing as negative publicity... |
| jdixon Jul 21, 2011 11:52 PM EDT |
> "No such thing as negative publicity... An obituary. |
| BernardSwiss Jul 21, 2011 11:59 PM EDT |
>> "No such thing as negative publicity... > An obituary. Only if the subject is in fact not dead... |
| JaseP Jul 22, 2011 12:58 AM EDT |
Exactly, everyone dies,... The only thing an Obit does, is to celebrate the life. That a real silver lining thing is that the life gets the best publicity. |
| gus3 Jul 22, 2011 6:48 AM EDT |
Except in the case of Edgar Allen Poe. |
| khess Jul 22, 2011 3:06 PM EDT |
@Tracyanne, Did you mean, 'proselytizing?' Is that what I'm doing? Why would anyone need to avoid it? I'm subjected to it as much as anyone. I've worked for major enterprises since 1990 and I know how business works. You have to justify any change in technology and there's nothing wrong with virtualization. But, here's what I'd really like to know, just WTF is your problem with me? I could hand out gold coins and you'd find something to complain about them. |
| caitlyn Jul 22, 2011 3:14 PM EDT |
Quoting:just WTF is your problem with me?I can't speak for tracyanne, of course, but I also find you writing to be somewhere between useless and harmful. The problem is that you write nonsense. Let me give you a great example: Quoting:Some of those very bad reasons are quite compelling.You're once again on the virtualization will save you money shtick. Many times it will. Sometimes it just won't. You always ignore the fact that virtualization has overhead too. I don't buy the personnel reduction argument either. Hardware support is handled by a support contract with a vendor in most places I've worked. In house help usually doesn't spend much time or effort dealing with it. OTOH, virtualization can add a layer of complexity that makes software issues more interesting and sometimes more time consuming to resolve. Bottom line: there is no panacea. Virtualization is important technology and it has an important place in a modern IT infrastructure. You don't provide factual pros and cons. Instead you come off like a salesman touting what he wants to sell. Oh, and yes, at times you come off like a proselytizing zealot. The last time you did I called you on it. I expect to do so again. |
| khess Jul 22, 2011 4:03 PM EDT |
@caitlyn, That's your opinion and it certainly doesn't reflect reality. But, that's cool, if you're spending your time worrying about what I'm saying and how I'm saying it, you're not spewing your useless drivel on anyone's psyche. The only relevant thing that I've seen that you've written is when you wrote about me. And, by the way, the people who agree with me: Amazon, IBM, HP, VMware, Citrix, Cisco, EMC, RedHat, Veeam, etc. are more relevant than you are. Here's another funny little tidbit: I actually work with the technology that I write about in one of the world's largest enterprise technology companies. Don't worry, more fodder for you coming in the near future. |
| jdixon Jul 22, 2011 11:50 PM EDT |
> And, by the way, the people who agree with me: Amazon, IBM, HP, VMware, Citrix, Cisco, EMC, RedHat, Veeam,.. All people trying to sell something. And you expect me to take their word over an independent analyst with a proven track record? What have you been smoking and where can I get some? |
| tracyanne Jul 23, 2011 12:30 AM EDT |
Quoting:Did you mean, 'proselytizing?' No Ken I meant ''proselytising'. Quoting:But, here's what I'd really like to know, just WTF is your problem with me? What caitlyn said. Your articles are one sided, wide eyed Gee Whizz. You come across like a snake oil salesman. Apparently there is no down side to Virtualisation, it's the greatest thing since sliced bread, and the world will go to hell in a hand basket if we don't all virtualise everything. Basically your articles are advertorials. Quoting:You have to justify any change in technology You do indeed have to justify every change in technology. That however is not what you are doing. Quoting: and there's nothing wrong with virtualization. In principle there is nothing wrong with Virtualisation. There is, however, a lot wrong with the way you peddle it. |
| dinotrac Jul 23, 2011 1:24 PM EDT |
Ah yes! I can't make an argument so I'll ask you to be impressed by the people who...um.... sell the service. |
| khess Jul 23, 2011 11:48 PM EDT |
LOL. |
| dinotrac Jul 24, 2011 2:15 AM EDT |
@ken - >LOL That was my thought, too. I have to admit, to a bit of devil's advocacy, because I think virtualization is a wonderful thing. Yeah, more than a few folks have used it on Edmund Hilary grounds (because it's there), but I can't forget talking to an IBM mainframe salesman back at the turn of the century (boy -- does that phrase seem weird when talking about something in my lifetime) who was positively aglow about it. Folks here may not realize, but virtualized Linux partitions on Z-series hardware provided conquest sales to a market that had seen nothing but dwindling replacement purchases for years. Still, "all of the cool kids are doing it" remains the same stupid argument I don't let my daughter get away with. Kind of like rehab. No, no, no. |
| khess Jul 24, 2011 9:41 AM EDT |
I'm sure that when Winchester developed the first repeating rifle back in the 1800s there were "commenters" who sat around doing nothing except commenting that the writers who wrote about the revolutionary new arm were full of crap too. I'm writing about technology that I know and that is at the edge of things going on. I could sit around and nay say about virtualization but that would be silly. |
| tracyanne Jul 24, 2011 10:12 AM EDT |
Quoting:I'm sure that when Winchester developed the first repeating rifle back in the 1800s there were "commenters" who sat around doing nothing except commenting that the writers who wrote about the revolutionary new arm were full of crap too. And just like virtualisation today, the Winchester repeating rifle wasn't appropriate for everyone or all sitauations. Just like you those wriers who attempted to sell the Winchester repeating rifle as the solution for everyone in every situation and every problem, were also wrong. |
| khess Jul 24, 2011 1:35 PM EDT |
Nope, it was totally appropriate for all situations, that's why the flintlock and other single shot guns went away. So, buzzzzzzzzzzzz, wrong again. |
| tracyanne Jul 24, 2011 6:22 PM EDT |
Actually there you go over selling again. It wasn't appropriate where you needed a handgun, it certainly wasn't appropriate where you needed a concealed weapon. A woman certainly could not carry one in her purse, and it wasn't appropriate where a shotgun was a better choice. Virtualisation is in the same league. And you have demonstrated that you are indeed a snake oil salesman. |
| jdixon Jul 24, 2011 11:31 PM EDT |
> ...that's why the flintlock and other single shot guns went away. I hope you know more about virtualization than you do guns, Ken. Neither of those have gone away. |
| TxtEdMacs Jul 25, 2011 11:02 AM EDT |
Quoting: I hope you know more about [anything] than you do guns [...] Place barrel at left or right temple [your choice], squeeze the trigger ever so slightly (scrunch up tight, the noise could deafen you) and one shot will do it. YBT |
| tracyanne Jul 25, 2011 5:46 PM EDT |
I thought he missed and hit his foot |
| gus3 Jul 25, 2011 7:13 PM EDT |
No, his foot was in his mouth. |
| dinotrac Jul 26, 2011 6:16 PM EDT |
@khess - Kids today! Does nobody study history any more? This line: Quoting:technology that I know and that is at the edge of things going on.makes me wonder. At the edge of things going on? I suppose it seems that way to a bunch of newcomers, but we're talking about technology that went commercial 43 years ago. Yeah, it's come a long way since then, but...not exactly new and amazing. |
| Bob_Robertson Jul 27, 2011 10:39 AM EDT |
Mainframes were "virtualizing", as Dino points out, a very long time ago. |
| hkwint Jul 28, 2011 7:02 AM EDT |
Quoting:Here's another funny little tidbit: I actually work with the technology that I write about in one of the world's largest enterprise technology companies. Hmm, maybe the company where you work is selling virtualization? Do you happen to know an article called "Op Eds for sale?" Because it pretty well describes my problem with some of your writings. If you work with virtualization, sure, you want to advertize your skills as being relevant. In the very same way a VB6-programmer would like to advertize their skills as 'relevant'. You probably intended to say to Caitlyn: "IBM, Amazon's etc's profit is more important (to me?) than an adequate independent study if virtualization will actually save money, or cost more to the client". But sigh, if we want an adequate independent case study we can always reside to getthefacts.com. JaseP: Thanks for the part about the dog, nominated for best joke of the day! ED: Oh wait a minute, we don't need no GetTheFacts to find stories about your employer selling virtualization; http://www.vmware.com/files/pdf/customers/apac_au_07Q4_cs_vm... and stuff like this http://www.informationweek.com/news/hardware/data_centers/21... and so on... Ever thought about joining EDS's evangelism team? Think you would be a great addition! |
| dinotrac Jul 28, 2011 2:37 PM EDT |
Hans -- @JaseP gets a big BOO for the dog thing. After seeing his comment, I virtualized my dog. Then I brought him up multiple times. Seemed pretty cool, but... at night, The Barking! |
| jdixon Jul 28, 2011 2:56 PM EDT |
> I virtualized my dog... I have a virtual dog: http://www.virtualpet.com/vp/farm/tekno/tekno.htm He doesn't handle multiple iterations very well though. :( |
| JaseP Jul 28, 2011 5:52 PM EDT |
Woof!!!
Quoting: Woof!!! [quote] Woof!!![/quote] Neither does this forum!!! |
| vainrveenr Jul 29, 2011 12:31 AM EDT |
Quoting:Woof!!!Leading just barely tangentially to 'Woof the Puppy builder'. See http://bkhome.org/woof/index.html and http://bkhome.org/blog/?viewCat=Woof for further "Woof" info. |
| hkwint Jul 29, 2011 8:40 AM EDT |
Hmm, yet another thread completely derailed by a silly dog... What should I say? |
| jdixon Jul 29, 2011 8:54 AM EDT |
> What should I say? Heel? |
| dinotrac Jul 29, 2011 2:15 PM EDT |
>Heel? I was thinking "Sit, Ubu. Sit." |
| hkwint Jul 29, 2011 2:23 PM EDT |
Dino: But don't learn the other almost same command with additive 'h', the dog will be confused because the two almost sound the same, and then it will get dirty. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!