Mmmmm... hamburgerology :drool:
Split from Newham BSF - Looks like I may become an RM Employee! to prevent going off-topic
Here's one right on our doorstep. And another. And another. And another.
Like I said, just because you have a CC3/4 network doesn't mean you can't go and study and obtain your Microsoft qualifications. Or Linux qualifications. Or Cisco qualifications. Or a degree in hamburgerology... they're totally separate things.
RM CC3/4 is a single product (like AVTIVStudio, SIMS) that is aimed at the education market - it makes sense that it's not used outside of the educaton market. In a similar way that schools don't use enterprisey software that are specific to other markets.
Last edited by webman; 28th May 2008 at 10:18 PM.
Mmmmm... hamburgerology :drool:
Technicians need to be trained in what they are using. I can advertise for someone with Cisco Microsoft or Linux experience and chances are that I would find someone. With CC3/4 I narrow the potential applicants, and am likely to need to re-train them before they start, adding extra cost.Like I said, just because you have a CC3/4 network doesn't mean you can't go and study and obtain your Microsoft qualifications. Or Linux qualifications. Or Cisco qualifications. Or a degree in hamburgerology... they're totally separate things.
Show me ANY job in the Business sector where CC3/4 is required... nowhere...
Show me AD, Exchange, SQL, Vanilla, Server 2003/2008 WSUS Ghost etc and it's everywhere..
Find Jobs in desktop support at JobServe. desktop support Jobs
Find Jobs in desktop support at JobServe. desktop support Jobs (show me ANY job that asks for CC3/4
So keep on with the CC3/4 and become unemployable in the real world...
CC3/4 is a product aimed at the education market to make our lives easier. You seem to have entirely ignored that CC3 doesn't physically stop you from learning whatever you like.
Your mistake is assuming everyone who works with CC3 networks wants to work with IT and networks in the private sector, it's simply not true.
Last edited by webman; 29th May 2008 at 12:18 AM.
i must be telepathic
It's an interesting topic, but I have experience of using both types of network. I do prefer using a standard vanilla setup of Active Directory.
I agree that it doesn't stop anyone from enrolling on any course to become Microsoft certified, but if you had only ever used RM and managed a network RM's way it would without doubt be a shock to the system. CC3 is simply a mask which uses most of the policies of Active Directory, but not all. Ranger is the same. Obviously there's no talk of RM when becoming Microsoft certified.
You also miss out on other opportunities such as setting up server roles, such as Active Directory, DHCP, DNS as RM do all this for you when you sign up for a contract.
What RM have developed is a system which is supposed to be more user friendly. I can imagine more ICT Co-ordinators using RM's system than using Active Directory and I think this is RM's selling point. The problem with this selling point is that it comes at a price.
I'm not RM certified but I am Microsoft certified and have just about managed to get by. Some features are similar, but some features are completely different and it did initially take me time to see how RM do things differently.
A good example is with RM Explorer and Folder Redirection. The end result is very similar with controlled Start Menus/Desktops, but the procedure to achieve this is different.
To conclude I think using an Active Directory setup is better. Many IT Professionals started their careers working in schools (I know I did), but I can use my expertise in Business environments who also use Active Directory.
There are no annual subscriptions with a vanilla setup, but generally speaking there are with RM and Ranger setups. Sure you probably could opt of these, but would that be advisable? At least opting for a vanilla setup you can post in various forums or support groups (including Microsoft themselves) for free to resolve issues which can occur.
My sole experience with an RM network was at as a student at my high school. The whole thing seemed to ba a massive hack at that point and it usually rendered a quater of the suite machines unusable without rebooting before logon because the custom RM rubbish at the start kept crashing out an falling over taking the machine with it.
Admittedly this was a long time ago when the suites were installed with Windows 98SE and I expect that RM has moved on a lot since then. The whole experience though left me with a profound dislike of 'helper' software that took the place of already working solutions and made them unstable and resource hungry simply to make it easier for the clueless managed services company that ran our network to run it.
There are many solutions to the issues that can use the built in features of Windows without the need to mutate it into an unweildly monster that you have even less chance of being able to understand when it comes to tracing deep down problems. Some tasks do need the specialized software but most can use existing core technologies built into Windows itself.
Again I don't know what the situation is now but I stand by my remarks about needlessly complicating the basics to make the more complicated stuff easier.
We have people looking for work experience coming at us thick and fast with MCSE's, CCNA's, ITIL, you name it. They have it. Yet, we throw them into our environment and they are lost. I'm not saying learning is a bad thing. Everything I know today is through private and personal study. However, I have learnt a heck of a lot more about Network Administration in day to day usage of the system. An RM CC network would take this opportunity away from me.
I understand we work in schools, but as Grommit mentioned, CC can't be compared with Active Studio or SIMS.net it's an entirely different kettle of fish, it's an unnecessary cost in my eyes. We weighed up a lot of things before moving to a vanilla system and we haven't been restricted by RM's way of doing things.
In addition to this, I see working in a school as a stepping stone to better things outside of the Education sector. Why? Because of the restrictions that come as working in Education IT. Once you are Network Manager, on your measely pay that is damn better elsewhere in the Private Sector you have no where else to go in Education.
Recruitment agencies can't understand when I call and tell them I provide 1st - 3rd line support. The buck ends with me. They are shocked when you tell them 3 people are responsible for a network of 14 servers and 700 PCs. I know at least 3 people who started working in IT support after me, providing simple 1st line application support nearly on £40k, rising by the year. Maybe some IT personnel working in schools are happy where they are, but frankly put I live in London, need to provide for a family and go on to bigger and better things. Things are getting more expensive day by day, yet I haven't had a pay increase in 3 years because I started at the top of my scale. The last thing I need is to limit my experience skills set by having to work with RM CC.
you mentioned earlier about emplyability and about training and learning about products in one's own time as being no substitute for real world experience...and it goes without saying i totaly agree with that
.but for yourself i'm sure there a lot of things you have little or no experience with....you've got experience with a lot of the major microsoft server products, but i'm sure there are a lot of products used in industry that you have no clue about...in which case you've either got to see if you can get hold of a trial/demo of that product and learn in your own time because there's no scope for purchasing and implementing said product in you're IT environment...
or if you can't do the self-taught route through courses or trial you have to hold your hands up at interview when asked and try if possible to find a nearest match so as to convince them you're worth training up. Sometimes a nearest match won't do. For some skills knowledge of an alternative prdocut may be good enough, but it's not always the case and companies aren't always willing to invest the time in training for certain skills/prduct knowledge. Better to have some lab experience than none at all.
It's pretty obvious webman is a bit of a web whizz....the fact he works in a school no doubt means he can't just focus on the web stuff and has to muck in with the other parts of a sysadmins lot....but if he finds his long term future not int he jack-of-all nature of school sysadmin and he's found a specialism that he can pursue i don't think he'll find any employability issues because he'll be looking to appy for certain roles..
irrespective of whether his team use an overlay on their network. You can't use an overlay for IIS or apache or for creating a mysql/sql server database (or rather you shouldn't)....and for a specialised role it's normally someone else dealing with in IT looking after AD/DNS/DHCP. Allowing dba's to dba and webmasters to webmaster.
As someone who's mentioned they are lookign to move on and up.....and by the way as a person with a young family i totally understand you're situatoin except the bit about iiving in london, than god!!! surely you understand the point about using an overlay to simplify areas of windows mgmt affording people like webman the time to develop the skills that will serve them in career progression.
Last edited by torledo; 29th May 2008 at 08:21 AM.
as Zoom2000 said... There is nothing like daily experiance to get your skills up...
I did an Excahnge 2007 course and because I was not using Exchange 2007 everyday I forgot all i learnt within a month....
I went on a ISA course and because I use that everyday I used my training and mastered my skills on ISA...
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)