@scottalanmiller I first played Seiken Densetsu 3 on a translated ROM about 15 years ago, and it's still one of the best RPGs I've ever played.

Another RPG series I'd love to see them port/remake is the original Phantasy Star games, which are not to be confused with the Phantasy Star Online games that blow goats. =P

@dafyre My old roommate from a few years ago actually had over 10,000 games in his Steam library as of like 2012. I'm sure he's gotten far more by now, as he had a habit of buying virtually every humble-bundle that came out, jumped on every significant steam sale, and still bought games he just wanted to play as soon as they became available. I can only imagine how many games he has now.. lol

@grey I played Everquest for 14 years before pretty completely getting away from it. A little part of me died when the RP died on Firiona Vie where I had always played. Some of the best RP I've ever seen/done in any setting was on that server over the years. I did the raid thing, actually completed all content up to the point at the time, and then slowly got out after selling my gear and making back every penny I had ever spent on the game and then a little bit (both subscription costs and game/expac costs).

@dashrender I try and approach it this way: If my staff are waiting X amount of time because computers aren't fast enough, then that is time wasted because the resources I provided are inadequate. That waste is due to an inefficient solution, so successfully addressing that problem will result in eliminating the waste so long as I do so effectively. It's not about getting that much more work out of the employees by replacing their devices, so much as eliminating the guaranteed waste due to device inadequacy. Time spent waiting on a computer is time spent not doing something else if the time spent waiting is not long enough to spend accomplishing some other task, as switching tasks too frequently just drives up inefficiency.

If an employee has to wait on their computer to perform a task, that time is lost, period. If I remove the delay from the computer, then that time is no longer lost, hence I've saved however much time we are no longer spending waiting on the device to do its' job. As far as I'm concerned, IT has saved X amount of money in eliminating an inefficiency caused by IT's provided solution. If the employee doesn't make full use of the improvement, that is not IT's fault or problem. My job isn't to play taskmaster, but to provide the most effective and efficient solution for employees to get their jobs done as I reasonably can. I can save X amount of time by upgrading, which results in saving X amount of money. How they spend the time difference is not on me, but on their supervisors/managements' heads. IT is only responsible for what IT is responsible for, which is providing technical solutions that enable employees to work as close to their potential as possible. If my kit isn't slowing them down, then the problem isn't something within my realm of authority or influence to address.

As far as IT cost for bench and deployment time, we swap devices while most employees are not at their desks, so their interruption time is minimal if any. We also copy/paste shortcuts and personal folder contents to the corresponding location on the new device, so the user-end transition is minimal as well. If it costs my minion an hour per device, we're still netting about $400/year rough improvement in efficiency from IT's perspective when the swap is done properly, and still not including the electricity draw improvements.

Far more in the past than I do now. It's taken me a few years to get my ED to agree to allow me to institute a consistent hardware refresh policy, so I've had to spend an annoying amount of time finding and buying new equipment as needed over the past few years. The patterns for business kit follow that of consumer kit, albeit lagging almost exactly a year in desktops with HP and Dell anyway. I could get Gen 7 Intel CPU-equipped business kit about the same time as consumers could, but almost exactly a year later, the premium hardware becomes the common-fare and gets your run-of-the-mill pricing instead of the premium hardware pricing much as happens in about 6-months in the consumer realm.

I spent many years around consumer hardware retail, but worked on the service side doing sales on occasion. So seeing the similar pattern wasn't too difficult or surprising. It just took me a little while to catch when the patterns do their transitions (seems to be mid-summer between typical new hardware releases and the big, consistent software releases like Microsoft). Hardware vendors want to divest themselves of the kit they've been producing for the previous iteration while they begin shipping the new iteration(s) that replace them. Either way, I've found that we can save a few K just by timing our bulk hardware purchases to somewhere in June or July.

@jaredbusch Sure it is, but it's still more than half the cost of brand new computers every year.

I got them through PCMG, but they were only a few bucks less than buying through TigerDirect Business, Newegg for Business, and one or two other outfits.

FWIW, there do tend to be times when computers tend to be cheaper to buy than others (typically as new models are released in conjuction with new hardware availability). Just likes cars, TVs, and Cellphones, I've noticed that there are cycles for product releases (they're much longer for business and enterprise-class kit) that last about a year in between refreshes. I presume for commercial kit, it's due to increased testing time and just because businesses replace less frequently than consumers, but I could be totally off on the reason(s).

I try to line up my purchases to snag the out-going version of a new hardware refresh, or the brand-new entrant to the model I've been looking to buy. Had I had a sliver more luck, I would have gotten those desktops for $620, but I couldn't get approval processed due to our grant rigmarole, and missed out by less than 48 hours. =(

If your users utilize Microsoft office alongside your EHR for instance, I'm fairly certain they would see a pretty sizable impact to attempting to use both simultaneously on a 5+ year old device. I'm guessing the EHR is essentially web-based access? If there's minimal multi-tasking, it's probably less of an issue for you than many. Although if there is a significant level of multi-tasking going on, I would suspect there's probably been a lot more machine-based delay occurring that users may not be complaining about because they just think it's normal perhaps?

I just paid $700 for new EliteDesks, and those were 7th-gen i5 with 8GB of RAM and SSDs with 3-year business warranties. >.> I guess I'm doing something right?

I might suggest you look at some conferences in Florida. I know VMware was talking about one in Tampa maybe in the past few months perhaps? I'm pretty sure Microsoft has one coming up in the next month or two in Orlando as well, and I want to say I heard there is to be a Linux-centric conference also in Orlando before years' end.

Sorry for the lack of names, just rattling off what's on the top of my head. =\

@dashrender Fair enough, I apparently glossed over that point too quickly. Although I would say there's no scenario in which a 5 year old computer, laptop or desktop, would ever not be past-due for replacement if you are including the content of my previous post as being covered under your second point.

I might suggest that one reason I've not seen mentioned at all, is replacing computers when they begin costing time waiting on the device to do it's job.

If your users have to wait say.. one minute an hour, for 8 hours a day, every day of a work year just because the computers are getting old; even if everyone is making $12/hr, you are going to spend $416/yr per-employee to pay employees to do nothing but sit and wait at their PC accomplishing nothing (with which, you could almost buy a brand new PC anyway and save all that wasted labor money). None of this accounts for potential savings at the wall outlets for upgrading to immensely electrically superior computers either, because half a decade sees a pretty substantial improvement to the cost of electricity to power dozens of computers.

It's part of why I'm not a big fan of internet-based solutions unless the overall speed of the connection and the systems on both ends can reduce the performance penalty sufficiently. It doesn't matter if I can access a system anywhere if the availability slows everyone's access down to the point where it's actually not a net-improvement on efficiency or productivity (although just net-neutral is fine) over running the solution locally for instance. Ideally, I would want the solution available directly/locally for improved speed, and remotely available for access so I get the best of all worlds, but I'm not a fan of slowing down labor to save money. Time = money, so any/all business calculations that don't account for it (of which there should be none imo) are quite simply going to yield errant results. Also, it's worth pointing out that labor is almost without exception the single largest controllable expense in virtually any organization, so maximizing the value of labor is almost always going to yield the most benefits.

Before I got my current role in IT, I used to work on my feet, walking all the time, so I maintained a very healthy weight and BMI. I ate what I wanted and basically enjoyed being young and invincible since I had also previously worked as the chief engineer for a startup sports broadcasting company while also managing a fitness center that allowed me free access to workout whenever I pleased.

Then I got married, and got happy lol. On top of that, I was no longer managing a fitness center, and I quit the job that had me on my feet walking for 6-8 hour shifts 2-4 days a week in favor of a vastly better paying desk-job. I went from 6'2", about 180lbs (I'm a pretty large-framed guy, so my fat content was actually REALLY low at that weight) to peaking at around 260 just after my kiddo was born. I'm classified as just overweight based upon my actual BMI, because eating anything remotely healthy by choice is hard when you've never had to even try before. The wife and I are starting to work on that a bit, and I'm hoping to get back down around 220 by early next year (we'll be moving or have moved by then, so automatic exercise for me, lol).

We've been working on just cooking more meals at home (we were eating out a LOT) in part just because eating out is WAY more expensive than eating at home, but also of course because eating our own meals is healthier and generally tastier. I've had questionable knees ever since I started putting on much of any weight... but thankfully, I've always been a roller skater/blader, which isn't too different from elliptical in terms of the motions and joint impact (except for ankles). I'll try and post periodically as I have notable updates.

@scottalanmiller

@scottalanmiller said in Just How Hard is University to Overcome:

@storageninja said in Just How Hard is University to Overcome:

You can find proxies for success that have statistic significance. Economic background, SAT scores, etc. Economists have been studying "why are rich people rich, and poor people poor" for a REALLY long damn time.

Find any study for this, though. It's all about motivation and self education. I've never seen anyone do a study that in any way would be useful to compare against college. My guess is that the researchers are all from colleges and know that they'd be defunded if they produced that data.

I've read a number of studies where they've actually been finding that raw IQ matters more to the question of why the rich people are rich (who didn't inherit it) and the poor are poor more than anything. The problem is of course, there's really not much that can be done if you don't have a high IQ, because there's about nothing anyone can do to improve their IQ. If, as they say, IQ is really just how quickly and efficiently people can process and utilize data, the theory that IQ directly effects probability for success makes a fair bit of sense. They haven't said anything ultra-conclusive in their studies aside from the fact that they found pretty universal links between higher IQ and greater success in general.

It would naturally make sense too that those with higher innate intelligence are more likely to be able to self-teach more content more quickly than those with less, but higher IQ would then also by the same theory penalize those people even more in the University setting. Interestingly enough though, the studies were all being done by big colleges and universities world-wide as a collaborative effort.

@scottalanmiller I was saying that I'm paid on par with the regular for-profit market now. I think we all know that non-profit as a whole is notorious for underpaying employees, I was pointing out that for me, that is no longer the case as I am paid on-par with the rest of the market after excluding the effects of non-profits on IT pay.

My organization was mostly suffering from my predecessor (and their MSP at the time) getting to the point of total burnout from incessant hindering and poor management at the executive level. That changed when my current boss was brought in, we had essentially a full network meltdown about 2 weeks after I walked in the door, and I was able to sell him on the value of IT and how proper investment would prevent similar issues in the future. It kind of needed to happen to wake people up in my org (the ones that mattered anyway), and I was the "unqualified" candidate that they took over the far better "qualified" candidates on paper because tbh, my wife worked there and they were willing to give me a shot on the cheap for a while only to find out they kind of got lucky. I'll admit, I got the job on a certain level of the GOBS at work, but they've had the benefit of reaping the rewards of my competence for their risk.

I got my foot in the door on the cheap, but am now paid on-par with typical for-profit contemporaries in my area with nearly all the freedom I could want in terms of my sphere of responsibilities. So in my mind, it was a gamble that paid off for both parties, since it nicely improved my resume to where I can get a job virtually anywhere I want if and when I decide it's time to move on.

@scottalanmiller Ironically, we're actually non-profit and he works from home. Only one director is allowed to work from home simply due to sheer workload requirements negating any other way to make all the things that need to happen, happen at times. I'm certain it's far more likely an emotional decision than a business one, because there's really no practical reason that for instance, I cannot work remotely as often as not.

@scottalanmiller I must have really lucked out with a killer good SMB then, as I get all of the above benefits you mentioned including some paid travel (once, maybe twice a year atm), excepting work from home benefits. That may materialize in the next year or so anyway when my organization may well absorb another organization that is essentially just like mine in a neighboring county that would require us to become a multi-location organization, thereby forcing some de-centralization to occur. My one big gripe with our current Executive is that the he is very anti-remote access for some reason.

I suppose one of the issues I've experienced with vetting MSPs is that I've not run into many SMBs that weren't technology-savvy who even knew what the difference between an MSP, a VAR, and a vendor rep were about as often as not. However, I will say that the acting as a partner versus a vendor, service provider, or a supplier has been very noticeable in the MSPs I've talked with, as most of the MSPs I've talked with seem to be all about what they can do for us instead of what we actually need or want them to do for instance. You know, marketing BS instead of just trying to do their jobs and sell us what we want/need, lol. It all sounded impressive to the others in management, as they didn't know enough to know why the marketing was just BS. We do have an MSP who while we really don't like the MSPs owner, we like the folks actually working there, as they have/do partner with us to back me up and offer real value.

@scottalanmiller I'm not arguing that SMBs don't make poor decisions, but that poor decisions have immensely greater impact in SMBs than they do in Enterprises. I don't think it's necessarily too outrageous to claim that many Enterprises make colossal blunders too, but most survive many such blunders and generally make less of them, in part due to the mitigating effects of scale that simply don't exist for SMBs. Enterprises naturally should and generally do make less poor decisions than SMBs, I completely agree! However part of the likely reason is once again because of scale. It's far easier to avoid lousy decisions with a lot more perspectives on a situation, a phenomenon that is relatively rare in the SMB space (I am referring to general terms, not IT-specific, as that's really just one of many examples where SMBs suffer from poor decisions).

In terms of compensation, I agree, SMBs tend to understand what the ownership/leadership understand. If role X isn't one of those things, they're probably going to make poor decisions in regards to hiring anyone for such things whether they opt for MSP, Internal-IT, or whatever else when we are talking about IT. How are SMBs whose problem is lacking good advice, supposed to be able to tell the difference between good and poor advice in fields they have no real practical knowledge in or of? How would you say good MSPs should be solving that problem, since any MSP can spout off numbers, point at satisfaction rates, and still be pretty terrible while looking impressive to the uninformed on such matters?

I'm among those who started down the "Higher Education" path at the unyielding behest of my parents (especially my dad) who demanded that either I pay rent, or go to college and I would not be charged rent. So I went to junior college, because unfortunately, while reaping the immense benefits of being home-schooled from Kindergarten all the way through completing High School, there's very minimal support for the transition into College that all public high schools and basically all private high schools have dedicated staff for.

I started off majoring in Accounting, because accountants make good money and would be a totally certain necessity for my career right? Well, Accounting bored me practically to tears, so naturally once I finished my courses in Accounting, I changed majors lol. Since I've always loved math, Accounting actually suited me well enough.. but the actual work of accounting just chilled my soul and tore all excitement from me to do it for decades as a career. So I switched to business management, because I was already managing full time at my job in the real world in the meantime, struggling to work full time and go to college full time simultaneously.

Just shy of two years into that field, I came to the frustrating realization that there will almost always be some shmuck higher on the totem pole that will cause me problems and make things difficult for me. The thought of surpassing them all was statistically improbable, I already knew that. Not that it couldn't be done, but how long would it take for me to do so, and would how much better it would be if and when I finally made it to the top be worth how much it would likely suck until I got there? I decided that going exclusively into management was going to drive me kind of crazy, but thankfully I was working in management as high-volume bench IT, doing ungodly amounts of consumer support and service... and I loved it! So my journey into IT began , switching to studying basically every IT related course I could.

About a year and a half into that, and 2/3 of the way through the CCNA courses being provided at the institution I had been attending (I would finish the courses with my CCNA), I realized that Networking wasn't really my thing either, but I loved Systems.. I loved Virtualization (this was the mid/late 2000s btw), I loved security, and I loved being able to put it all together myself. Since I couldn't afford anything to build a home lab, I actually sold people my pet projects at Circuit City for a while when the idea of a Computer-controlled Home Theater didn't exist in the mainstream yet. There was no Roku, Facebook was only just a new startup with Myspace still being the dominant social media, YouTube wasn't owned by Google, streaming was still a novel idea, and Blu-Ray was ultra-high tech and still a new, groundbreaking quality technology for home use, 40" was still considered your average big-screen, and 1080P TVs still cost no less than $1500. I was the guy who sold a couple a $40,000 home entertainment and computer solution as their retirement gift to one another. Nobody any of us had ever heard of had ever setup anything like that before.. but I created the solution and sold it, we put it together, we made it work, and we gave them what most people waited more than half a decade to get. The guy found me at my next job some years later, basically doing the same thing as I was when I sold him his solution but with less official management responsibilities, and thanked me for getting them what they got. It was still better than everything else available, and what I sold him years ago was still working pretty much exactly how we set it up.

I didn't learn to sell from College, I actually learned while working and attending college, that I could do a lot more and learn a lot more working than at college. I'm sure Scott would agree that that's probably not uncommon. I was attending a community college where ALL of the faculty teaching anything IT related were industry veterans with around 7-10 years minimum experience in IT, so they weren't career academicians. I'll never forget the Cisco instructor I had who would constantly be saying "the book says X, but this is what you actually need to know". Also, she had a surprisingly heavy piece of foam painted like a brick that she threw at inattentive students... it was awesome, but I digress, lol. I was paying out of pocket, and even with the obnoxiously cheap CC rates I was paying (think about 2K/semester), I still ended up realizing that it wasn't worthwhile. Had I realized before it was too late that my extremely desirable ACT score could have taken me to any college in America for free, things might have gone differently for me... but it didn't, and I'm frankly not upset that it didn't.

@scottalanmiller You make a fair point, and I agree with your assessment that legitimate success should enable us to have more control over location and income with less risk of losing control over any of those things.

Really, we could probably boil "success" down to getting what we want out of life. More or less anyway, right?