Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 Internet speed test! ×

Comment Re:We ran the same calculus (Score 1) 173

However....backup, anti-virus, spam filtering, and a DR solution drives up the cost very quickly.

The marginal cost of backup and DR when you're *already* doing those things for an on-prem server environment is pretty close to zero, and if you're already virtualized and have a virtual-oriented backup software you probably already have DR integrated into your backup. AV and anti-spam are almost always done best these days by a third party service and the good ones do both anyway.

From the numbers I've run, it usually is cheaper to do it on prem above about 50 users with a 3 year benchmark. If you time the upgrade right, you can probably get 5 years out of it without falling more than a rev behind and cut the 50 user number way down.

It's pretty obvious Microsoft is heading subscription-only for everything. Since 2013, Exchange has lost much of its GUI which I think has been a way to scare on-prem admins away. They will ultimately either price on prem high enough that only a few compliance/security focused large organizations will consider it or support hybrid only (meaning you're paying for O365, used or not).

Cloud is about permanent vendor-lock in and rent-seeking, not economics. The marginal cost of a 5-9s commercial data center for hosting cloud services is greater than the marginal savings to users, which is why hosted systems always end up being so expensive unless you're doing something really trivial like a static web site.

You guys are somethign else. You bashed WIndows NT and then called Windows Server for years for not having a CLI. Hey look at Unix we do not have to sit in front of the server to admin it etc. Now MS has powershell and it is BEH WHERE IS THE GUI?! Exchange is a very complex project because many organizations have complex uses. If your admin can't handle scripting and commands then he is incompetent. If you are paying someone +$75,000 a year he or she should be a master at that price and have years of experience.

Comment Re: Time to switch (Score 1) 173

Dude it is 2017. Wordperfect and Lotus 123 lost. Deal with it. The world runs on Microsoft. You can't have your sales team making documents misformatting in potential clients computers. Customers make custom Sharepoint sites and use MS teams to arrange things.

I am not saying this as a super MS fanboy. I am just stating reality. If Libreoffice was around in the early days of the internet in the 1990s maybe this wouldn't be a thing, but the office runs on MS and Intune, Office, Skype, Sharepoint, MS project, etc.

Comment Re: Time to switch (Score 1) 173

I'm curious how big companies justify anything over $5 a month.

Most companies of any size have virtualization which almost always means that running Exchange amounts to software licensing and a fairly thin amount of admin time.

A single Exchange server should scale to 500 users pretty easily -- at $35 month, you're making a $175,000 commitment or $525,000 over 3 years. The office and Exchange licensing for on-prem isn't $525,000.

I know some organizations have struggled with Exchange reliability, but I've worked in the managed services and consulting space and the vast majority of on-prem installs I've worked with have been extremely reliable and problems have usually been the result of some really bad admin decisions.

I've laid the costs out side by side for customers who have run on-prem, including admin costs, and almost none have chosen 365.

THanks to the horrible US healthcare system and high corporate tax rates a good Exchange admin who is worth $80,000 a year costs $170,000 easily in 401K, healthcare costs, and taxes for the employer. The cost of energy for the server could easily be $10,000 a year per server. Our former MDF cost 1 million a year of electricity at our site of ust 1,100 users.

The race to the bottom with falling wages for mellinials and robotic automation is because of healthcare costs which keep going up 10% per year. So to the employer $50,000 a year for someone 15 years ago costs the same as some intern making $12/hr out of college.

With Office 365 you do not have to worry about the competence of the your admin too. You log in and work. Office 365 is great for small to medium sized companies who do not know even how to make a Sharepoint or use PowerBi. THe tools are there for anyone to quickly whip something together.

Unless you are a very large enteprise with very unique requirements it is just cheaper and easier to pay a bill. Does your employer have a custom electrician and plumbing officers which generate the water and electricity or do they pay a bill each month?

Comment Re:Time to switch (Score 1) 173

If you run the other popular operating system, full installs of Pages, Numbers and Keynote come with it.

As usual the anti MS hate is in the story. The title is wrong.

Yes MS plans to keep desktop versions of their apps. What MS is doing is requiring an Office 365 account to use Skype for Business and OneDrive when support ends in 2020 for Office 2016.

The desktop apps are here to stay folks

Comment Re: Serious stupidity (Score 1) 210

Nuclear isn't a viable alternative. It's incredibly expensive to build and operate. Yes, it is largely emission free, but the other costs surrounding it simply do not make it a large scale alternative, at least not fission. And who knows when we'll ever have fusion reactors that can actually produce economically viable levels of power.

Comment Re:More "trust me" science (Score 1, Interesting) 210

Models have all predicted warming, and there is warming.

But really, I doubt you know fuck all about any of the models. I doubt you know anything about AGW, but go ahead, prove me wrong. Describe, in terms that those who actually do research in climatology would use, and with snarky references to Al Gore or "lefties", what exactly AGW theory states, and why exactly the theory makes those specific set of claims. I openly challenge you to demonstrate you know anything about the science you're attacking.

Comment Re:Just because you can doesn't mean you should (Score 1) 83

So let's get this straight. You have databases that optimize SQL queries because of the narrow scope of that language, and somehow you think throwing in random code blocks in some other language where optimization for the data set is just about impossible and you don't think you're going to get serious performance hits?

There are certainly times when stored procedures may be necessary, but I've made it my policy to avoid them wherever possible. Using convenience as an argument for overriding a pretty sound programming philosophy sounds like a recipe for shit performance.

Comment Re: Louisiana is one big sinkhole (Score 1) 304

Why don't we deal with what scientists, rather than you going off on tangents about "alarmists" and seeming to accept the inevitability that which we could change. It's almost as if you don't actually want to deal with the science or the repercussions of human activities, but would rather play some pointless rhetorical game. I'll state right here that I don't give a fuck what Al Gore or Greenpeace says. They are not sources of information I go to, so throwing out what they say (or what you claim they say, since I don't recall any report that Al Gore said all the coast lines would be underwater by 2017) doesn't mean fuck all to me.

Yes, things change. Eventually the house you're living in will fall down. So I guess it's okay if I come and light in on fire, right?

Slashdot Top Deals

Work is the crab grass in the lawn of life. -- Schulz

Working...