|
Home > Archive > Unix administration > July 2006 > UNIX Jobs?
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
|
|
| Jesse Charbneau 2006-07-20, 7:24 pm |
| Are there *any* real UNIX jobs left?
I have switched positions a couple of times over the last few years,
and it seems that everyone wants a UNIX person to work from a Windows
box. WTF? I use UNIX! Do these jobs even exist anymore? It seems
like I went to work for an all UNIX shop, and stayed there so long that
the rules seemed to have changed.
I live near Cincinnati Ohio, and have not been able to find anything
that is UNIX only. Linux is fine, but previous jobs I had a Solaris
desktop, as well as a BSD desktop for playing.
Just wanted to get a thread going to see if anyone else has noticed
this oddity.
To me, they would *never* ask a Windows user to work from a UNIX
workstation, so why is the opposite true?
If you know of a all UNIX environment that likes guys who work their
tails off. Send em my way please 
| |
| Jeremiah DeWitt Weiner 2006-07-20, 7:24 pm |
| Jesse Charbneau <groups@thecharbneaus.com> wrote:
> Are there *any* real UNIX jobs left?
There seem to be plenty in New York...
> I have switched positions a couple of times over the last few years,
> and it seems that everyone wants a UNIX person to work from a Windows
> box. WTF? I use UNIX!
...with the caveats that:
1. Yes, lots of places expect you to use a Windows desktop because of
"corporate policy" or some crap like that. Oddly enough, "actually
getting work done" never seems to enter into this policy; this is the
nature of bureaucracy. I think the focus on Windows has something to do
with the fact that the _business_ people are more used to Windows, so
when it comes time to make decisions and write policies, that's what
they go with. My usual response to this kind of thing is to look them
in the eye and say, "I _am_ going to put Linux on this thing, and I will
continue to do my work that way. If you regard that as a firing
offense, so be it; I wouldn't want to work at someplace so arbitrary
anyway. If you don't regard it as a firing offense, please leave me
alone to do real work." So far they have all backed down. The real
nuisance comes when they need you to run some oddball program that only
runs under Windows.
2. There are a lot of job openings out there that look like this:
"Needed: Unix Administrator. Must also have 5-7 years cisco IOS
experience, security certification, C, C++, Java. Must have strong
Windows 2003 experience with Active Directory and 3-5 years Visual
Basic." Sometimes I would love to be a fly on the wall at these places,
just to see if they actually get any responses matching what they're
asking for, and what they offer in pay. And how long an appropriate
candidate would laugh at their offer, assuming they actually find one.
Then again, I have actually worked at one company where the Unix team
wrote up a nice job description, and HR, on their own initiative, added
"Must have Microsoft Word and Microsoft Project skills", without telling
us! Gee, no wonder we didn't get too many good candidates...
--
Oh to have a lodge in some vast wilderness. Where rumors of oppression
and deceit, of unsuccessful and successful wars may never reach me
anymore.
-- William Cowper
| |
| Dave Hinz 2006-07-20, 7:24 pm |
| On 20 Jul 2006 13:33:43 -0700, Jesse Charbneau <groups@thecharbneaus.com> wrote:
> Are there *any* real UNIX jobs left?
You bet.
> I have switched positions a couple of times over the last few years,
> and it seems that everyone wants a UNIX person to work from a Windows
> box. WTF? I use UNIX!
Why would _that_ matter? Sure, it's nice to have a X11 desktop of some
sort to work from, but who cares what your desktop system is?
That said, your employer shouldn't have a problem with you using
whatever you want for your desktop as long as you can get to all the
stuff you need to get to. If they won't let you, upgrade to a better
employer. If they don't at least let you keep a Ultra-60 on your desk
or something for sandbox and whatever purposes, it does truly slow you
down.
> Do these jobs even exist anymore? It seems
> like I went to work for an all UNIX shop, and stayed there so long that
> the rules seemed to have changed.
Well, Windows _is_ here and will be for the forseeable future. So from
time to time you're going to have to deal with it. Samba, or print
server integrations, or whatever the heck - it's not so bad, just hold
your nose and wash your hands good when you're done.
> I live near Cincinnati Ohio, and have not been able to find anything
> that is UNIX only. Linux is fine, but previous jobs I had a Solaris
> desktop, as well as a BSD desktop for playing.
I've made a point of asking specifically that kind of question in
interviews. "Any problem if I keep a sparc box under my desk for a
sandbox?"
> Just wanted to get a thread going to see if anyone else has noticed
> this oddity.
> To me, they would *never* ask a Windows user to work from a UNIX
> workstation, so why is the opposite true?
It's a practical way to get _something_ on your desk. In an ideal
world, they'll let you reload it with Linux or Solaris X86 or whatever.
In a less ideal world you just use it for email and calendar and do all
your real work from the _other_ box. For years I've run a Linux OS as
my main desktop, with the corporate build of Windows (at 2 different
places now) in a VMWare instance running in that linux system. A bit of
tweaking to the HAL and windows drivers, and it doesn't even know it's
not running native, or that it's sharing the box. Might be a good
compromise if they're open to that.
> If you know of a all UNIX environment that likes guys who work their
> tails off. Send em my way please
Sometimes you just need to be flexible. If they can meet you partway,
it's a win for both.
| |
| polarbearlien 2006-07-21, 1:20 pm |
| My primary platform is Unix also. I talked to my Group Leader before
since he wanted
to work on Windows XP, 2000, server 2003. Very few people would ask
Windowners to
work on Unix, but a lot of people expect Unixer to work on windows. And
I got some input from those who expect Unixer to work Windows. The
answer is if you are an Unixer
you don't have problem with learning Windows, but not vice versa.
True or not, that leave people to judge it. I don't have comment on
that. Personally,
I like Unix very much.
Please don't quote me. Even though I an Unixer, I have never say
something like
that.
Jesse Charbneau wrote:
> Are there *any* real UNIX jobs left?
>
> I have switched positions a couple of times over the last few years,
> and it seems that everyone wants a UNIX person to work from a Windows
> box. WTF? I use UNIX! Do these jobs even exist anymore? It seems
> like I went to work for an all UNIX shop, and stayed there so long that
> the rules seemed to have changed.
>
> I live near Cincinnati Ohio, and have not been able to find anything
> that is UNIX only. Linux is fine, but previous jobs I had a Solaris
> desktop, as well as a BSD desktop for playing.
>
>
> Just wanted to get a thread going to see if anyone else has noticed
> this oddity.
>
> To me, they would *never* ask a Windows user to work from a UNIX
> workstation, so why is the opposite true?
>
> If you know of a all UNIX environment that likes guys who work their
> tails off. Send em my way please
| |
| Michael Heiming 2006-07-21, 1:20 pm |
| In comp.unix.admin Jeremiah DeWitt Weiner <jdw@panix.com>:
> Jesse Charbneau <groups@thecharbneaus.com> wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> There seem to be plenty in New York...
Sure:
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT
[vbcol=seagreen]
> ...with the caveats that:
> 1. Yes, lots of places expect you to use a Windows desktop because of
> "corporate policy" or some crap like that. Oddly enough, "actually
> getting work done" never seems to enter into this policy; this is the
> nature of bureaucracy. I think the focus on Windows has something to do
> with the fact that the _business_ people are more used to Windows, so
> when it comes time to make decisions and write policies, that's what
> they go with. My usual response to this kind of thing is to look them
> in the eye and say, "I _am_ going to put Linux on this thing, and I will
> continue to do my work that way. If you regard that as a firing
> offense, so be it; I wouldn't want to work at someplace so arbitrary
> anyway. If you don't regard it as a firing offense, please leave me
> alone to do real work." So far they have all backed down. The real
> nuisance comes when they need you to run some oddball program that only
> runs under Windows.
Usually ask during some job interview if there would be any
problem running linux on my desktop. Never any problems.
> 2. There are a lot of job openings out there that look like this:
> "Needed: Unix Administrator. Must also have 5-7 years cisco IOS
> experience, security certification, C, C++, Java. Must have strong
> Windows 2003 experience with Active Directory and 3-5 years Visual
> Basic." Sometimes I would love to be a fly on the wall at these places,
> just to see if they actually get any responses matching what they're
> asking for, and what they offer in pay. And how long an appropriate
> candidate would laugh at their offer, assuming they actually find one.
Seem you forgot about the university degree, multiple vendor
certs in various areas, at least 5 years experience in foreign
countries and of course not older then 26! Working happily 60-80
hours weekly for a (minimal) 40h salary.
Of course this is just the dream candidate, which doesn't exist in
reality. If you have 25% of the requested "features" you might
get the job. If you really want it at all? ;-)
> Then again, I have actually worked at one company where the Unix team
> wrote up a nice job description, and HR, on their own initiative, added
> "Must have Microsoft Word and Microsoft Project skills", without telling
> us! Gee, no wonder we didn't get too many good candidates...
LOL...Real professionals you have to admit, perhaps they just
thought you had forgotten about those "most" important skills,
though they could have added excel and powerpoint... ;-)
--
Michael Heiming (X-PGP-Sig > GPG-Key ID: EDD27B94)
mail: echo zvpunry@urvzvat.qr | PERL -pe 'y/a-z/n-za-m/'
#bofh excuse 161: monitor VLF leakage
| |
| Jesse Charbneau 2006-07-22, 7:20 pm |
|
Michael Heiming wrote:
> In comp.unix.admin Jeremiah DeWitt Weiner <jdw@panix.com>:
>
>
>
>
> Sure:
>
> X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT
>
Yep. I was at work. Isn't that special? ;) Try these headers..
>
>
> Usually ask during some job interview if there would be any
> problem running linux on my desktop. Never any problems.
>
And it didn't seem to be an issue during the interview. The person I
replaced used a MAC and nobody (supposedly) blinked an eye. I mention
running Linux and its like I said a bad word.....
I do have a Linux box, (grafted), but the laptop I was given runs
Windows and of course the vpn is Windows only. No luck on the mac
front either as they won't purchase a license for the macs.....
>
> Seem you forgot about the university degree, multiple vendor
> certs in various areas, at least 5 years experience in foreign
> countries and of course not older then 26! Working happily 60-80
> hours weekly for a (minimal) 40h salary.
No doubts here. I recently applied for a "Software Engineer" position,
and UNIX/Linux/C was high on the list, but the description listed a
Electrical Engineer degree with a emphasis in software. I talked to a
friend who has exactly that and he suspected I was more qualified than
he was. Go figure. (I don't have a CS/EE degree).
>
> Of course this is just the dream candidate, which doesn't exist in
> reality. If you have 25% of the requested "features" you might
> get the job. If you really want it at all? ;-)
>
>
> LOL...Real professionals you have to admit, perhaps they just
> thought you had forgotten about those "most" important skills,
> though they could have added excel and powerpoint... ;-)
Yep. Sure does help out the novice visualize things, never mind just
working the systems will get them that, and personally, I have never
had any issues when demonstrating things to other UNIX folk, oh,
wait....they have never needed me to do a presentation. ;)
I am actually at the point of just forgetting corp america altogether.
Seems most places concentrate on mediocrity rather than quality of
service, which is really astonishing. The place I work at spends
millions in outsourcing what a handful of UNIX admins could accomplish
with better results, and faster turn around.
Oh, and "what does that matter?" (For the first reply.)
Windows to me seems like my daughters fascination with Playdough, sure,
it's very pretty, but trying to actually do anything with it makes it
crumble fast.
Cygwin is a nice complement for a Windows system, but so far, it seems
better in a pinch than anything else. Definitely not comparable to
running a full blown UNIX box.
| |
| Michael Heiming 2006-07-22, 7:20 pm |
| In comp.unix.admin Jesse Charbneau <groups@thecharbneaus.com>:
> Michael Heiming wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
[vbcol=seagreen]
[vbcol=seagreen]
[vbcol=seagreen]
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Yep. I was at work. Isn't that special? ;) Try these headers..
Don't give that much about headers, just from time to time take a
look and wonder quite often...
However your nntp software seems broken, it quotes empty lines?
Fixed up the mess.
[ forced to use windoze at work? ]
[vbcol=seagreen]
> And it didn't seem to be an issue during the interview. The person I
> replaced used a MAC and nobody (supposedly) blinked an eye. I mention
> running Linux and its like I said a bad word.....
> I do have a Linux box, (grafted), but the laptop I was given runs
> Windows and of course the vpn is Windows only. No luck on the mac
> front either as they won't purchase a license for the macs.....
Corporate desktops/laptops tend to come pre installed with doze.
However, the mistake can be easily adjusted in a few minutes. ;-)
[..]
[vbcol=seagreen]
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Yep. Sure does help out the novice visualize things, never mind just
> working the systems will get them that, and personally, I have never
> had any issues when demonstrating things to other UNIX folk, oh,
> wait....they have never needed me to do a presentation. ;)
OO works as nice and can create a PDF out of any application.
> I am actually at the point of just forgetting corp america altogether.
Don't bother, such trends come over here faster then in the past.
> Seems most places concentrate on mediocrity rather than quality of
> service, which is really astonishing. The place I work at spends
> millions in outsourcing what a handful of UNIX admins could accomplish
> with better results, and faster turn around.
Perhaps, but they just don't produce colorful powerpoint slides,
which is what management wants to see...
> Oh, and "what does that matter?" (For the first reply.)
> Windows to me seems like my daughters fascination with Playdough, sure,
> it's very pretty, but trying to actually do anything with it makes it
> crumble fast.
It looks pretty ugly to me in comparison with a full fledged KDE
desktop and is totally useless for real work. For example how
would you go about making automated some menu out of
~/.ssh/known_hosts to ease up login? Presuming you tend to work
on a large amount of systems.
> Cygwin is a nice complement for a Windows system, but so far, it seems
> better in a pinch than anything else. Definitely not comparable to
> running a full blown UNIX box.
You just can't be productive with doze, I suspect at least 30-40%
lesser productivity then a Linux desktop would offer if not more.
Sure there are quite a few add ons that can make your life easier,
but the time to just install them all does take longer then
simply installing some OS that has all the stuff you need per
default and just lets you work without constantly annoying you.
--
Michael Heiming (X-PGP-Sig > GPG-Key ID: EDD27B94)
mail: echo zvpunry@urvzvat.qr | PERL -pe 'y/a-z/n-za-m/'
#bofh excuse 121: halon system went off and killed the
operators.
| |
| Doug Freyburger 2006-07-24, 7:22 pm |
| Jesse Charbneau wrote:
>
> Are there *any* real UNIX jobs left?
Lots.
> I have switched positions a couple of times over the last few years,
> and it seems that everyone wants a UNIX person to work from a Windows
> box. WTF? I use UNIX!
One of the features of working in UNIX is folks generally learn
to use the right tool for the job.
> To me, they would *never* ask a Windows user to work from a UNIX
> workstation, so why is the opposite true?
And in general UNIX's place has been in the data center. Use the
data center server in the data center, the end user display on the
desk. Not a difficult equation.
Can UNIX be used as an end user station? Sure. BTDT got the
teeshirt. It was worth the effort getting it set-up. Heck, I even
prefer the way I can set up X with autofocus. But was UNIX
intended as an end-user station? Not particularly.
Deal is, companies want employees who will use the right tool
for the job and not make it into a religious stance. Which, when
you think about it, was the UNIX philosophy all along.
If you want to load Linux on your desktop, lots of places will
let you do that. But if you think it's somehow neccessary ...
| |
| Jesse Charbneau 2006-07-26, 7:26 am |
|
Doug Freyburger wrote:
> Jesse Charbneau wrote:
>
> Lots.
>
>
> One of the features of working in UNIX is folks generally learn
> to use the right tool for the job.
And since when has WIndows ever been the right tool for the job, in
respect to an admin? Personally, I had a windows box for years, but
mainly for testing to see what the end users would see. I guess if you
admin Windows boxes, maybe this could be the case, but even then, I
prefer a X11 desktop with rdesktop for getting into the Windows pc's.
>
>
> And in general UNIX's place has been in the data center. Use the
> data center server in the data center, the end user display on the
> desk. Not a difficult equation.
Not my fault most people prefer to be ignorant of how a computer works.
Personally, if people are so lame that they can't learn, then maybe
they should have a typewriter and hard copy.
>
> Can UNIX be used as an end user station? Sure. BTDT got the
> teeshirt. It was worth the effort getting it set-up. Heck, I even
> prefer the way I can set up X with autofocus. But was UNIX
> intended as an end-user station? Not particularly.
I never claimed it was, but it has typically been exactly what I need
in order to do my job efficiently.
>
> Deal is, companies want employees who will use the right tool
> for the job and not make it into a religious stance. Which, when
> you think about it, was the UNIX philosophy all along.
Not a religious stance, a practical stance. Windows limits my ability
to my *job*. Yes, UNIX philosophy dictates the right tool for the
right job (or is that life), but telling an admin/engineer that they
*have* to use Windows to do their job seems kind of like telling a
plumber to fix your sink without using a wrench.
>
> If you want to load Linux on your desktop, lots of places will
> let you do that. But if you think it's somehow neccessary ...
If you think _you_ are more productive with WIndows, then by all means,
have at. But having lived on a X11/UNIX box for years, I find it
completely limiting to work from a windows box. I don't need a bunch
of bells and whistles; I need an xterm, xbiff and a couple of other
utilities. Thats it! No endless sea of menus hindering my
performance.
| |
| Dave Hinz 2006-07-26, 1:26 pm |
| On 26 Jul 2006 05:08:05 -0700, Jesse Charbneau <groups@thecharbneaus.com> wrote:
>
> Doug Freyburger wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> And since when has WIndows ever been the right tool for the job, in
> respect to an admin? Personally, I had a windows box for years, but
> mainly for testing to see what the end users would see. I guess if you
> admin Windows boxes, maybe this could be the case, but even then, I
> prefer a X11 desktop with rdesktop for getting into the Windows pc's.
I do my admin work via ssh nearly all the time, and there's plenty of
ssh clients for 'doze. Some of 'em are even free.
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Not my fault most people prefer to be ignorant of how a computer works.
> Personally, if people are so lame that they can't learn, then maybe
> they should have a typewriter and hard copy.
Just so you know, taking an attitude with people you're asking questions
of is rarely a recipe for success. And what does having a 'doze box on
your desk have to do with someone being "ignorant of how a computer
works"?
[vbcol=seagreen]
> I never claimed it was, but it has typically been exactly what I need
> in order to do my job efficiently.
So download vmware player and run your linux or unix instance as an app
in windows. Or go with a native linux install and run the corporate
build of windows in a vm. I've done both, I prefer the latter.
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Not a religious stance, a practical stance. Windows limits my ability
> to my *job*.
I'm sorry but if it does, then you are only showing your own ignorance
while shouting about that of others.
> Yes, UNIX philosophy dictates the right tool for the
> right job (or is that life), but telling an admin/engineer that they
> *have* to use Windows to do their job seems kind of like telling a
> plumber to fix your sink without using a wrench.
If you can't get your job done from a windows box, I wonder what your
job is. Perhaps if you'd tell us what you can't do we might have a
solution for that problem. Several alternatives have already been
mentioned by me and others on that specific subject.
[vbcol=seagreen]
> If you think _you_ are more productive with WIndows, then by all means,
> have at. But having lived on a X11/UNIX box for years, I find it
> completely limiting to work from a windows box. I don't need a bunch
> of bells and whistles; I need an xterm, xbiff and a couple of other
> utilities. Thats it! No endless sea of menus hindering my
> performance.
Are you familiar with "x over ssh"?
| |
| Doug Freyburger 2006-07-26, 7:28 pm |
| Jesse Charbneau wrote:
> Doug Freyburger wrote:
>
>
> And since when has WIndows ever been the right tool for the job, in
> respect to an admin?
Something you seem to have missed about what the job is.
There's more than the technical to being an engineer. There's
only the technical to being a technician. SysAdmin is an
engineering job not a technician job.
Engineering includes customer service and customer
convincing and customer teaching. If you can't take on a
relaxed attitude that it's fine to sit in front of a Windows box
and use it as a widget on which to display a flock of UNIX
interfaces, then you're likelt going to have trouble dealing
with customers and end users and managers. But you'll
get along just fine with engineers and with fellow technicians.
> Not my fault most people prefer to be ignorant of how a computer works.
Attitude matters. You're on CUA not where most people are.
Yet you're treating CUA regulars who've used UNIX for decades
like most people. Perspective time.
> If you think _you_ are more productive with WIndows, then by all means,
> have at.
If I thought it mattered I'd load Linux on my company-supplied
laptop and be done with it. As it is I keep the laptop running
Windows, use it to launch assorted putty and X sessions ...
> But having lived on a X11/UNIX box for years
Chortle. Real UNIX works fine at 9600 baud. Screen movement is
all that's needed for vi and friends ...
> I find it completely limiting to work from a windows box.
I know. Even when X is running I can't set it to focus follows cursor,
don't raise window on focs, type blind in background windows. It's
how I had my Solaris workstations set for years. But since X runs
fine on this laptop to display anything I need coming from a UNIX
box, I get limited by having to type at a window on top. Such limits.
| |
| Jesse Charbneau 2006-07-31, 1:24 pm |
|
> Something you seem to have missed about what the job is.
> There's more than the technical to being an engineer. There's
> only the technical to being a technician. SysAdmin is an
> engineering job not a technician job.
And why is it ok for folks with no engineering background dictate to
the rest of us what we will use as our interface to those systems?
Seems to me, we (the admins) are more educated on what will work best
for us.
I agree that there is more to being an engineer, but I don't think it
is impossible for an engineer to do their work from a UNIX box. The
job I held for several years was exactly that (without the title), and
I managed everything fine from a workstation running BSD, so I think it
is entirely feesable to let the engineer decide their own fate, as it
were.
>
> Attitude matters. You're on CUA not where most people are.
> Yet you're treating CUA regulars who've used UNIX for decades
> like most people. Perspective time.
>
Yep. I should have clarified a bit more on that and stated the "end
users". So, if the end users are to not inclined to learn something
about using the computer, why should admins have to stoop to their
level in order to have a job doing what we are trained to do, in this
case UNIX? If we were still forced to by a $10k workstation, I could
understand it, but in this age of cheap pc's and free OS's (BSD's), why
is this an issue with employers?
It was not my intention to "talk down" to any CUA readers/posters. It
was more of a "why should users (end users) dicate how I work, when
they are unable to learn the systems I manage?" Again, should have
clarified that.
>
> If I thought it mattered I'd load Linux on my company-supplied
> laptop and be done with it. As it is I keep the laptop running
> Windows, use it to launch assorted putty and X sessions ...
As I am doing now, but I still have issues with this as I have come
across software that requires xauth and I have been unable to get it to
work using xauth or ssh tunneling, and the other admins I was working
with had the same issue and had just loaded a linux box to use that
particular package. Something the management at the time was
completely against me doing.
Something about the cygwin implementation of X just does not work with
certain software. Not sure if it is a bug, or old X installation or
what, but it never did work, and I ended up leaving the company.
>
>
> Chortle. Real UNIX works fine at 9600 baud. Screen movement is
> all that's needed for vi and friends ...
Yeah, but there is nothing like having multiple desktops, multiple
screens (xinerama), endless xterms, xbiff, mutt, etc. Windows chokes
when I have a bunch of stuff open at once and I hate rebooting midway
through a piece of work.
>
>
> I know. Even when X is running I can't set it to focus follows cursor,
> don't raise window on focs, type blind in background windows. It's
> how I had my Solaris workstations set for years. But since X runs
> fine on this laptop to display anything I need coming from a UNIX
> box, I get limited by having to type at a window on top. Such limits.
Exactly! I run into this constantly and it would be much nicer to have
an interface that was actually customizable, stable and usable; all at
the same time.
So, back to my main question. Are the any *REAL* UNIX jobs left, or do
we always have to make nice for HR/MGMT? And by real (I am clarifying
here), I mean live and breath UNIX/X11/Networking and only interface
with Windows when it is necessitated by an end user not being able to
get some stupid trinket to work.
| |
| Dave Hinz 2006-07-31, 1:24 pm |
| On 31 Jul 2006 07:20:40 -0700, Jesse Charbneau <groups@thecharbneaus.com> wrote:
>
(you snipped the attribution of the person you're quoting. Please don't
do that.)
[vbcol=seagreen]
> And why is it ok for folks with no engineering background dictate to
> the rest of us
Huh? The people here have a significant background, and we're trying to
tell you that if you feel you can't do your job from whatever desktop
you're presented with, then you're doing it wrong. Several of us have
even provided suggestions which you seem to dismiss.
[vbcol=seagreen]
> As I am doing now, but I still have issues with this as I have come
> across software that requires xauth and I have been unable to get it to
> work using xauth or ssh tunneling, and the other admins I was working
> with had the same issue and had just loaded a linux box to use that
> particular package.
So why not just ask about that specific problem?
> Something about the cygwin implementation of X just does not work with
> certain software. Not sure if it is a bug, or old X installation or
> what, but it never did work, and I ended up leaving the company.
Over a desktop issue? Sorry, there are much better reasons to change
jobs.
> So, back to my main question. Are the any *REAL* UNIX jobs left, or do
> we always have to make nice for HR/MGMT?
Yes, you always have to make nice for HR/MGMT.
> And by real (I am clarifying
> here), I mean live and breath UNIX/X11/Networking and only interface
> with Windows when it is necessitated by an end user not being able to
> get some stupid trinket to work.
A unix admin can admin their boxes from whatever desktop they are
given. Desktop snobbery doesn't gain you anything.
| |
| Michael Heiming 2006-07-31, 1:24 pm |
| In comp.unix.admin Jesse Charbneau <groups@thecharbneaus.com>:
> Doug Freyburger wrote:
[stuff]
[vbcol=seagreen]
> And why is it ok for folks with no engineering background
> dictate to the rest of us what we will use as our interface to
> those systems? Seems to me, we (the admins) are more educated
> on what will work best for us.
Don't see people dictate things, it might just be ignorance in
combination with none asking for the right tool?
> I agree that there is more to being an engineer, but I don't
> think it is impossible for an engineer to do their work from a
> UNIX box. The job I held for several years was exactly that
> (without the title), and I managed everything fine from a
> workstation running BSD, so I think it is entirely feesable to
> let the engineer decide their own fate, as it were.
Sure, perhaps others are just not allowed to run anything else
then doze on their corporate desktop? But instead of admitting
that it certainly can reduce productivity in order of magnitudes,
depending on your work environment, they just resort to tell you
what kind of idiot you are asking for a job where you can run
*nix on your desktop.
Just ask during a job interview and ask to see the office of the
admins you are supposed to work with.
[stuff]
> So, back to my main question. Are the any *REAL* UNIX jobs
> left, or do we always have to make nice for HR/MGMT? And by
> real (I am clarifying here), I mean live and breath
> UNIX/X11/Networking and only interface with Windows when it is
> necessitated by an end user not being able to get some stupid
> trinket to work.
Just ask! HR/MGMT stuff perhaps doesn't know you could run *nix
on your desktop and might not even care. But if you don't say
anything, it's likely you'll get a desktop with a fresh eXPensive
on it as anyone else...
Good luck
--
Michael Heiming (X-PGP-Sig > GPG-Key ID: EDD27B94)
mail: echo zvpunry@urvzvat.qr | PERL -pe 'y/a-z/n-za-m/'
#bofh excuse 125: we just switched to Sprint.
| |
| Jesse Charbneau 2006-07-31, 1:24 pm |
|
Dave Hinz wrote:
> On 31 Jul 2006 07:20:40 -0700, Jesse Charbneau <groups@thecharbneaus.com> wrote:
> (you snipped the attribution of the person you're quoting. Please don't
> do that.)
>
>
>
> Huh? The people here have a significant background, and we're trying to
> tell you that if you feel you can't do your job from whatever desktop
> you're presented with, then you're doing it wrong. Several of us have
> even provided suggestions which you seem to dismiss.
>
Why do you keep taking my statements personally? I am not talking
about you. And I dismiss your statements because I am not interested
in using Windows (The exact topic of this thread), period. I do not
care to find ways to work *with* Windows. I don't want to use it at
all. If you are going to continue to try and get me to see your point
of view (that the interface I use doesn't matter), please dont bother
as I am not interested.
Why does it seem to offend you that other people are not inclined to
agree that the desktop doesn't/shouldn't matter to the admin? Other
posters here have also made similar statements (that they prefer
X11/Linux/UNIX whatever over Windows) and yet you seem to disregard
those as "techies".
To me, using UNIX is all I care to do, you can call me a
techie/evangelist or whatever you want, still doesn't change my mind
with regards to what I should/shouldn't be able to use as *my* desktop
and the fact that every where you look, managers/hr/whatever who have
no technical merits to speak of are dictating to the rest of us how
things 'ought to work, which is grade A baloney.
And to add a point here, you are not the only one with a significant
background. I have over a decade of professional (admin) experience
myself (and was programming 10 years before that). Don't assume.
Oh, and "just so you know"; I am well versed with Windows, and have
done tons of programming/sysadmin work in Windows, so I am not some
UNIX guy from the stone age. I chose the UNIX path over Windows
because I believe in the technical merits of that OS, and refuse to
work on a system that requires contant baby siting.
>
>
> So why not just ask about that specific problem?
>
Because I have gotten to the point of not caring. I am not interested
in working around the deficiencies of a OS that is garbage, plain and
simple, and I am not willing to fight to get something to work that on
a UNIX/Linux box *just works*.
>
> Over a desktop issue? Sorry, there are much better reasons to change
> jobs.
Did I say that I left that job because of that? Seems you like to read
a lot into my statements. I never said that I left that job because of
having to use Windows. I left that position because it sucked and was
not worth my time, desktop issues aside.
>
>
> Yes, you always have to make nice for HR/MGMT.
>
But shouldn't we be the ones making the technical decisions, Not
HR/MGMT? Isn't that why they hired us in the first place? Because of
our technical abilities/experience/knowlege.
>
> A unix admin can admin their boxes from whatever desktop they are
> given. Desktop snobbery doesn't gain you anything.
Who's being snobby? I prefer to be in an environment that trusts me
(the person the company hired because of my abilities) to make the best
decisions regarding the merits of my desktop, and allows me to choose
the path that best suits my needs and which allows me to be vastly more
productive, as I see it. What is the problem with that?
| |
| Dave Hinz 2006-07-31, 1:24 pm |
| On 31 Jul 2006 09:49:57 -0700, Jesse Charbneau <groups@thecharbneaus.com> wrote:
>
> Dave Hinz wrote:
> Why do you keep taking my statements personally? I am not talking
> about you. And I dismiss your statements because I am not interested
> in using Windows (The exact topic of this thread), period.
Well, seems your options are limited, then, aren't they?
> I do not
> care to find ways to work *with* Windows. I don't want to use it at
> all. If you are going to continue to try and get me to see your point
> of view (that the interface I use doesn't matter), please dont bother
> as I am not interested.
You would benefit from reading and learning from this article:
http://catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
Good luck in your future endeavors.
> To me, using UNIX is all I care to do, you can call me a
> techie/evangelist or whatever you want, still doesn't change my mind
> with regards to what I should/shouldn't be able to use as *my* desktop
> and the fact that every where you look, managers/hr/whatever who have
> no technical merits to speak of are dictating to the rest of us how
> things 'ought to work, which is grade A baloney.
It seems to me you are letting your personal feelings get in the way of
getting the job done.
[vbcol=seagreen]
> But shouldn't we be the ones making the technical decisions, Not
> HR/MGMT? Isn't that why they hired us in the first place? Because of
> our technical abilities/experience/knowlege.
Then next time you interview, ask about the desktop if you care about
the desktop. I just did, and I asked. Just like any other project,
gather the requirements and see if the option meets them. If not,
consider a different one.
| |
| Jesse Charbneau 2006-07-31, 1:24 pm |
|
Dave Hinz wrote:
> On 31 Jul 2006 09:49:57 -0700, Jesse Charbneau <groups@thecharbneaus.com> wrote:
>
>
> Well, seems your options are limited, then, aren't they?
>
It does indeed.
>
> You would benefit from reading and learning from this article:
> http://catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
>
I have read it before, but will give it another look.
> Good luck in your future endeavors.
Thanks, you too.
>
>
> It seems to me you are letting your personal feelings get in the way of
> getting the job done.
Could be, but as I said; I have been all UNIX for so long that I have
grown to the point of loving the UNIX way, and would prefer to keep
working in that type of environment.
>
>
>
> Then next time you interview, ask about the desktop if you care about
> the desktop. I just did, and I asked. Just like any other project,
> gather the requirements and see if the option meets them. If not,
> consider a different one.
I will keep that in mind, although I have asked at the last two
interviews, and it seems maybe I wasn't asking the right questions. :-(
Thanks for the discussion Dave. Very insightful.
| |
| Tim Skirvin 2006-07-31, 7:19 pm |
| Dave Hinz <DaveHinz@gmail.com> writes:
> Huh? The people here have a significant background, and we're trying to
> tell you that if you feel you can't do your job from whatever desktop
> you're presented with, then you're doing it wrong.
My attitude on this: I certainly *can* do my work on any platform
you toss me in front of, but I can do it more efficiently if you leave me
on the kind of hardware that I'm really trying to support (or at least
something similar). Using a different platform slows me down by ~10% -
enough to be noticeable, but not enough to really make the difference in
anything except my efficiency.
I would find it upsetting if my bosses tried to stick me on a
Windows box to do my job. I would find it more upsetting if they blocked
my attempts to use a machine that I already feel comfortable with simply
for some ill-defined administrative reasons. But I doubt that either of
these would be adequate to encourage me to leave on my own.
- Tim Skirvin (tskirvin@killfile.org)
--
http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/ Skirv's Homepage <FISH>< <*>
http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/history/ Skirv's History
| |
| Dave Hinz 2006-07-31, 7:19 pm |
| On Mon, 31 Jul 2006 14:50:24 -0500, Tim Skirvin <tskirvin@killfile.org> wrote:
> Dave Hinz <DaveHinz@gmail.com> writes:
>
>
> My attitude on this: I certainly *can* do my work on any platform
> you toss me in front of, but I can do it more efficiently if you leave me
> on the kind of hardware that I'm really trying to support (or at least
> something similar). Using a different platform slows me down by ~10% -
> enough to be noticeable, but not enough to really make the difference in
> anything except my efficiency.
Sure I can see that. That said - I've got a 'doze laptop on my desk,
and an ultra10. The _only_ time I've used the ultra10 in the last month
or so, is when I needed an X11 window from a remote box for an
application install. 99% of what I do, I do via PuTTY.
> I would find it upsetting if my bosses tried to stick me on a
> Windows box to do my job. I would find it more upsetting if they blocked
> my attempts to use a machine that I already feel comfortable with simply
> for some ill-defined administrative reasons. But I doubt that either of
> these would be adequate to encourage me to leave on my own.
Well, I can see it being a contributing factor, but in the big scheme of
things, it's a pretty minor one. To me, anyway.
| |
| Tim Skirvin 2006-07-31, 7:19 pm |
| Dave Hinz <DaveHinz@gmail.com> writes:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Sure I can see that. That said - I've got a 'doze laptop on my desk,
> and an ultra10. The _only_ time I've used the ultra10 in the last month
> or so, is when I needed an X11 window from a remote box for an
> application install. 99% of what I do, I do via PuTTY.
I... well, I'm okay with PuTTY. I mostly use an older version of
ssh.com's SSH for Windows, which is a bit more full-featured, on my home
desktop (games); but I use putty on the road, and it does have advantages.
Still, I feel *crippled* when using either of them, compared to the dozens
of terminals across two screens / eight virtual windows I always have open
on my SunBlade 2000 I use at the office.
Windows just seems crippled when I'm doing real work. I could
probably make it work, but it's harder to do that than to just work on a
Unix system in the first place.
- Tim Skirvin (tskirvin@killfile.org)
--
http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/ Skirv's Homepage <FISH>< <*>
http://tskirvin.livejournal.com/ Skirv's LiveJournal
|
|
|
|
|