So......Anyone in here in IT???

2

Replies

  • major painmajor pain Posts: 9,737 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited September 2010
    Rell Mayne wrote: »
    I understand that...they house their own server which seems better for performance ...

    and i could see them wanting to work with bigger companies because of privacy issues with virtualization just for the SLA issues....the fees for licenses of doing it would probably be a bitch alone, but if its the future its gotta be some type of way in.

    http://www.vmware.com/partners/programs/

    Anyone can be come a VMWare partner, only legitimate way if you really want to get into it, but unless you have a company ready to risk their infrastructure on a small upstart business, you will have a VERY tough time competing with providers with more years in. If you really want to get into it, you should build your customer base by supporting companies and get a better reputation that way, then start suggesting solutions to them that feature virtualization. You can then work with a vendor directly and be the medium between the company and the expertise without sacrificing your clients. In all honesty, most of it isnt hard at all, but if you are just starting out its not something I would try with a company who's business depends on it.
  • TX_Made713TX_Made713 Posts: 3,954
    edited September 2010
    *Raises hand*

    Information Systems Security/Network Admin.



    this.........................
  • konceptjoneskonceptjones Posts: 8,919 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited September 2010
    major pain wrote: »
    No, its way too expensive at the moment. Effective virtualization is JUST starting to make it worth companies money and the cost is through the roof for most smaller companies starting off and all of the medium to larger companies will want to work with a vendor that has experience in the field.

    NAS and SANs are much more than big hard drives as well and work much better with technology like VMWare.

    I would argue this.

    Effective virtualization existed back in the GSX days. Problem was that not many companies wanted to risk fucking with it.

    These days, with multi-core processors in servers and tons of RAM, it's doesn't make much sense NOT to virtualize. A low-end, dual processor 1U server is capable of running quite a few virtual machines as long as you throw enough RAM into it and attach it to a SAN (preferred) or NAS via iSCSI (yes, you can do NSF and CIFS too). Even some old hardware can have it's life extended this way. I have an old IBM HS20 blade server with only 8GB of RAM in one of my Blade Centers running 4 VM's versus the single Win2003 instance it was running when I first bought it back in 2006. attached it to a LUN on our SAN and it's hummin along nicely.

    I also use VMWare ESXi at home. I have an old PC with it installed and I use it as a security sandbox of sorts for WinXP and Linux. When I upgrade my primary PC in a few months, I'll take my current machine, load it with 2GB more RAM, and throw ESXi on it as well for client-server software development.
  • major painmajor pain Posts: 9,737 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited September 2010
    I would argue this.

    Effective virtualization existed back in the GSX days. Problem was that not many companies wanted to risk fucking with it.

    These days, with multi-core processors in servers and tons of RAM, it's doesn't make much sense NOT to virtualize. A low-end, dual processor 1U server is capable of running quite a few virtual machines as long as you throw enough RAM into it and attach it to a SAN (preferred) or NAS via iSCSI (yes, you can do NSF and CIFS too). Even some old hardware can have it's life extended this way. I have an old IBM HS20 blade server with only 8GB of RAM in one of my Blade Centers running 4 VM's versus the single Win2003 instance it was running when I first bought it back in 2006. attached it to a LUN on our SAN and it's hummin along nicely.

    I also use VMWare ESXi at home. I have an old PC with it installed and I use it as a security sandbox of sorts for WinXP and Linux. When I upgrade my primary PC in a few months, I'll take my current machine, load it with 2GB more RAM, and throw ESXi on it as well for client-server software development.

    Enterprise virtualization is just coming to the point where the ROI is significant. VMWare has made TREMENDOUS leaps and bounds from where they were just 4-5 years ago.

    While I agree its the future of technology, its still VERY expensive for most small companies and some medium sized ones as well. The hardware isnt usually the problem as most companies running an environment with standard server technology will meet minimum reqs. but the licensing is the issue. Especially with Win2008. It can be a hard sale for companies that want to convert but have cost in mind.
  • Rell MayneRell Mayne Posts: 1,171
    edited September 2010
    major pain wrote: »
    Enterprise virtualization is just coming to the point where the ROI is significant. VMWare has made TREMENDOUS leaps and bounds from where they were just 4-5 years ago.

    While I agree its the future of technology, its still VERY expensive for most small companies and some medium sized ones as well. The hardware isnt usually the problem as most companies running an environment with standard server technology will meet minimum reqs. but the licensing is the issue. Especially with Win2008. It can be a hard sale for companies that want to convert but have cost in mind.

    this is the only part id be concerned at....if you look at it, your taking the strongest selling point of Virtualization and accepting most of the risk....But i still think it could be profittable depending on which pay rate you use for virtualization when you start out. By use, subscription, etc...Plus the fact that they will pay out more money to ramp up the power of their virtual machines. Licenseing is always a bitch...one audit might smash a small Virtual business whos shit aint right.
  • major painmajor pain Posts: 9,737 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited September 2010
    Rell Mayne wrote: »
    this is the only part id be concerned at....if you look at it, your taking the strongest selling point of Virtualization and accepting most of the risk....But i still think it could be profittable depending on which pay rate you use for virtualization when you start out. By use, subscription, etc...Plus the fact that they will pay out more money to ramp up the power of their virtual machines. Licenseing is always a bitch...one audit might smash a small Virtual business whos shit aint right.

    Its very profitable :) . I regularly bill at $125/hr for VDI or Citrix.

    There is no risk for audit. With VMWare, Citrix, etc, if you dont have the licensing the shit just dont work. Its not like Win2k3 Terminal Services. So, its best just to have your shit in order, besides when a company is spending that much money, there is no need for shady stuff.
  • Rell MayneRell Mayne Posts: 1,171
    edited September 2010
    major pain wrote: »
    Its very profitable :) . I regularly bill at $125/hr for VDI or Citrix.

    There is no risk for audit. With VMWare, Citrix, etc, if you dont have the licensing the shit just dont work. Its not like Win2k3 Terminal Services. So, its best just to have your shit in order, besides when a company is spending that much money, there is no need for shady stuff.

    Your right i forgot the their is a licenseing server always running every whatever minutes.

    so your a partner right now? or do you completely have your own thing going.....thats good as hell what hardware setup do you have?

    Citrix wise whats your most common app your hosting?
  • konceptjoneskonceptjones Posts: 8,919 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited September 2010
  • Rell MayneRell Mayne Posts: 1,171
    edited September 2010
    damn... I haven't fucked with Citrix in years.

    Get with it....its still popular as hell
  • mike06mike06 Posts: 2,158 ✭✭✭✭
    edited September 2010
    nerds.....lmao!!

    **walks off shamelessly back to 30k/yr job envious of said nerds and their 45k+/yr CAREER**
  • konceptjoneskonceptjones Posts: 8,919 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited September 2010
    mike06 wrote: »
    nerds.....lmao!!

    **walks off shamelessly back to 30k/yr job envious of said nerds and their 45k+/yr CAREER**

    45???

    betta double that and add to it...
  • major painmajor pain Posts: 9,737 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited September 2010
    45???

    betta double that and add to it...

    yanananananananmean
  • major painmajor pain Posts: 9,737 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited September 2010
    Rell Mayne wrote: »
    Your right i forgot the their is a licenseing server always running every whatever minutes.

    so your a partner right now? or do you completely have your own thing going.....thats good as hell what hardware setup do you have?

    Citrix wise whats your most common app your hosting?

    I do IT consulting.

    Apps vary by client. If the app can run on TS, it can run on Citrix.
  • Rell MayneRell Mayne Posts: 1,171
    edited September 2010
    yo im tryna get into the security track....But im not exactly tryna just learn the cisco path....whats the best path to take if i wanna go for a CISSP . like what book do i open the door with
  • major painmajor pain Posts: 9,737 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited September 2010
    Security + ........ I havent looked at CISSP in a long time, but I think it requires a couple years of verifiable work experience.
  • alvarez_313alvarez_313 Posts: 1,294 ✭✭✭✭
    edited September 2010
    Rell Mayne wrote: »
    lol....

    thats like help desk shit...the eingineer is the type of nigga who takes on network problem from a whole nother level...he maintains plenty of servers that dont necessarily need to be touched from day to day, but when it is down...hes critical to the entire buisness, he makes sure backups are correctly done. Policies are configured correctly, and usually houses the areas where other IT type of workers can do their business....web developers need him and database managers need him.

    He usually runs exchange managers on a high scale and administrates the server heavy applications . For the most part as long as you have shit configured correctly...You will be alright. do it right the first time and your fine. there are different level admins....some work in network operations with cisco gear some work within server Os's other just handle citrix n shit.

    once you get to the level of knowing everything and every term, and know how they all fit together you may as well just contract your whole life out and keep bounceing around

    I've been in IT for 16 years now.. The above is basically what you have to look forward too. I tend to enjoy project managment at this point and time myself. I'm planning on copping about 4 certs over the fall\winter period. Speaking of virtualization we use the vmware line.. Shit is INCREDIBLE.. We do baseline resource usage testing on servers beforehand to see how much resources to allot on the virtual side, man these servers hardly use 2% of the total processing power lol.. We have spent quite a bit on the equipment needed but in the long run it's gonna be a helluva cost savings in terms of our footprint in the building, energy cost, cooling cost etc...
  • Rell MayneRell Mayne Posts: 1,171
    edited September 2010
    major pain wrote: »
    Security + ........ I havent looked at CISSP in a long time, but I think it requires a couple years of verifiable work experience.

    Security + just sounds simple as fuck...it has no track like Cissp....in order to actually get a Cissp you have master a lot of shit + the fact you have to have 5 years of work experience to actually get the cert and you have to get the cert with signed references for your job experience. Maybe im lookin at the fact that network + and A+ are some childish ass certs. I think i may take the cisco track for security then figure out how to head toward the cissp way. looking for the knowledge more so then the cert. Lil do niggas know if your not specializeing yourself in IT your gonna get your job taken easily especially with cloud computing and remote everything bein more accessible.
  • major painmajor pain Posts: 9,737 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited September 2010
    Rell Mayne wrote: »
    Security + just sounds simple as fuck...it has no track like Cissp....in order to actually get a Cissp you have master a lot of shit + the fact you have to have 5 years of work experience to actually get the cert and you have to get the cert with signed references for your job experience. Maybe im lookin at the fact that network + and A+ are some childish ass certs. I think i may take the cisco track for security then figure out how to head toward the cissp way. looking for the knowledge more so then the cert. Lil do niggas know if your not specializeing yourself in IT your gonna get your job taken easily especially with cloud computing and remote everything bein more accessible.

    Security + is the basics of IT security. It might be simple, but you need a valid starting point for most companies to bring you on for that type of work. Look into ethical hacking as well if Security is where you want to go. Most people in IT that work for security groups dont have CISSP and for good reason.
  • King EraunoKing Erauno Posts: 6,093 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited September 2010
    Im a systems/network administrator...also do help desk. basically i AM the IT dept..its 3 of us IT people...my boss isnt technical at all...and her boss is the IT director who doesnt do shit

    i have no certs..imma try to focus and work on them..but im just lazy..to sit and study and all that bs...smh

    i got this job off of a referral and bs interview. jumped from helpdesk to full time systems admin...not that hard at all
  • Rell MayneRell Mayne Posts: 1,171
    edited September 2010
    whats the dif between regular VMware and ESXi...yes i can use google but itll give me the technical gist... i rather hear it from the source
  • major painmajor pain Posts: 9,737 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited September 2010
    Rell Mayne wrote: »
    whats the dif between regular VMware and ESXi...yes i can use google but itll give me the technical gist... i rather hear it from the source

    ESXi is free version of ESX so less features and little scalability. As far as how it works, its exactly the same.
  • cutthecrapolabuddycutthecrapolabuddy Posts: 367
    edited September 2010
    i would like to get into it as a side hustle while i'm at schoolgoing for electrical engineering). i gave the ITS department at my school during the summer and they liked it. but they said that there are no positions available maybe until next semester. what is recommended to read upon to boost my knowledge?
  • konceptjoneskonceptjones Posts: 8,919 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited September 2010
    major pain wrote: »
    ESXi is free version of ESX so less features and little scalability. As far as how it works, its exactly the same.

    No, they don't really work the same. Most functionality is the same, but ESXi doesn't have either a command line console or web admin interface, meaning you have to use the VIC for administration.
  • major painmajor pain Posts: 9,737 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited September 2010
    No, they don't really work the same. Most functionality is the same, but ESXi doesn't have either a command line console or web admin interface, meaning you have to use the VIC for administration.

    LOL, semantics... the backbone of the two is the same is what I meant and like I said ESX has more features than ESXi. C'mon fam.
  • UPTOWNUPTOWN Posts: 12,993 Regulator
    edited September 2010
    iiiight so can yall tell me exactly what i need to know to get to where yall are??

    i see mega peeps in here talking about starting with help desk .... but what else??
2
Sign In or Register to comment.