|
poo poo pissing me off again: SharePoint. Volmarias posted:Do you know you can't afford him, or did you just assume? Some retirees decide to reenter the workforce so that they have something to do. My dad is suffering from this problem in the pharmaceutical field. He has 30+ years doing R&D, but hiring managers see that and assume he's going to want $fym and retire in two years.
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 21:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 23:30 |
|
|
Spazz posted:poo poo pissing me off again: SharePoint. SharePoint is the worst at what it does, except for all the others.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 21:35
|
|
|
ConfusedUs posted:SharePoint is the worst at what it does, except for all the others. hahaha your companies are still using sharepoint/anything made by microsoft 2007 called they want their garbage software back
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 21:50
|
|
|
soy posted:hahaha your companies are still using sharepoint/anything made by microsoft excuse me i think you meant to say micro$$$oft
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 21:56
|
|
|
ratbert90 posted:Oh I know, however calling somebody who is doing helpdesk a "Linux Engineer" also pisses me off because I consider a engineer one who creates things. If companies agreed to just that, then sure, but it's gotten to the point where companies are calling bill the helpdesk guy a Customer Service Engineer. That's why my company does as well so I am considered a "Linux Enterprise Engineer". Of course we have our own internal definition of Engineer (certain level Certification = Core Engineer, another goes up to Engineer, etc.) Does "Red Hat Certified Engineer" actually acount as a Linux Engineer?
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 22:07
|
|
|
ConfusedUs posted:SharePoint is the worst at what it does, except for all the others. Agreed. The company I work for built their product on top of SharePoint so I'm kind of stuck with it. We make it work for the most part, but holy gently caress can there be random bullshit that grinds my gears. Right now? SOAP calls! We have an internal URL for services configured (https://clientint.site.com/) that it works fine on, but the external URL returns access denied. And of course the ULS logs are useless. This. This is why I drink.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 22:26
|
|
|
soy posted:hahaha your companies are still using sharepoint/anything made by microsoft http://forums.somethingawful.com/forumdisplay.php?forumid=219
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 22:33
|
|
|
Lightning Jim posted:Does "Red Hat Certified Engineer" actually acount as a Linux Engineer? Go look up the definition of a professional engineer, which is licensing, not certification. There's not one for Linux, though there is one for software. I don't know where software developers actually sign off to engineering standards, and I've never met a licensed software engineer, but I guess it's a thing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 22:48
|
|
|
evol262 posted:Go look up the definition of a professional engineer, which is licensing, not certification. There's not one for Linux, though there is one for software. I don't know where software developers actually sign off to engineering standards, and I've never met a licensed software engineer, but I guess it's a thing. Licensed software engineers are the dudes writing avionics or medical equipment firmware, mostly.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 22:54
|
|
|
Sylink posted:I also posted it in the job thread here - http://mojojojo.theresumator.com/apply/oXlQUJ/Linux-Engineer-Evening-Shift.html
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 23:02
|
|
|
vibur posted:Am I the only person that sees the phrase "jack of all trades" as a huge flashing sign that says "don't apply for this"? Nope.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 23:03
|
|
|
When the very first sentence of that posting is, "Our web hosting company is looking linux system engineer to add to our support team," you don't get to complain about the bad grammar in the resumes you receive.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 23:05
|
|
|
You know the old saying - jack of all trades, paycheck of none. And now, a compliment sandwich for one of my coworkers. A good thing - you sent an email stating that you'd be working from home today with all relevant contact info, ensuring that you can stay on top of the 3 million things you need to be doing which you've no doubt decided you can get done from home. A bad thing - you sent the email at 1:15 in the afternoon. A good thing - you know how life changes are a positive thing? You've got one coming your way if business doesn't pick up.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 23:06
|
|
|
That last one sounds like a bad thing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 23:30
|
|
|
Sylink posted:We have been using resumator, which does a good job of giving us a submission form to put out. And then it posts to the boards like Indeed and w/e for us. Are you the one doing the hiring? I passed this to a friend or two, and wanted to know if there was a secret code word they can include. They're also goons, they just don't post much.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 23:33
|
|
|
evol262 posted:Go look up the definition of a professional engineer, which is licensing, not certification. There's not one for Linux, though there is one for software. I don't know where software developers actually sign off to engineering standards, and I've never met a licensed software engineer, but I guess it's a thing. Got it, thanks. Didn't know there was a difference since I'm not an true engineer. Things pissing me off again today: Do you know what the cheapest warranty you can get on a server from Dell? Basic Next Business Day Parts Only warranty. Gotta replace parts on a motherboard or some super crazy-to-remove part? Sorry, gotta do it yourself. Except for rare cases where they've paid to have a dedicated onsite technician from Dell, I feel sorry for the techs that have to deal with systems under this warranty.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2015 23:47
|
|
|
On the flipside, We have Prosupport 4HR onsite and we do most part replacements ourselves because nobody has ever put in the effort to get the dell techs Datacenter access and a rack schema.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2015 00:19
|
|
|
We recently acquired a number of branch offices and in one of them I'm trying to get DHCP off of the branch router (because it would fail intermittently until the router was rebooted for no reason we were ever able to determine) and onto the branch Windows 2003 server. Installing the role onto the server goes fine, until it comes time to actually set it up. The add scope wizard fails to come up, and if I try to manage DHCP via MMC it tells me Access Denied, whether from my remote workstation or from the server itself and regardless of the permissions on the account, up to and including Domain Admin. The service is running and the server is authorized in AD, and I can even see the event log signifying that, but I have no ability to configure DHCP at all. Have any of you come across anything like this before? My Google-fu is failing me and all I can find are suggestions to authorize the server or compress the database, which is not helpful. I'm beginning to think that either my Google skills are lacking or I've somehow managed to find a problem that no one else has ever had. I've removed and reinstalled the role a half-dozen times, ditto with authorizing/deauthorizing it. At this point I'm tempted to just use this branch as a test-bed for the Windows 2003-to-2012 project that's going to need to happen this year.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2015 00:22
|
|
|
Fenrisulfr posted:We recently acquired a number of branch offices and in one of them I'm trying to get DHCP off of the branch router (because it would fail intermittently until the router was rebooted for no reason we were ever able to determine) and onto the branch Windows 2003 server. Installing the role onto the server goes fine, until it comes time to actually set it up. The add scope wizard fails to come up, and if I try to manage DHCP via MMC it tells me Access Denied, whether from my remote workstation or from the server itself and regardless of the permissions on the account, up to and including Domain Admin. The service is running and the server is authorized in AD, and I can even see the event log signifying that, but I have no ability to configure DHCP at all.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2015 00:32
|
|
|
You may find that you need Enterprise Admin group membership
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2015 00:40
|
|
|
jim truds posted:That last one sounds like a bad thing. He didn't say for whom it was good.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2015 01:05
|
|
|
DrAlexanderTobacco posted:He might be overqualified on paper, but what if every single hiring manager made the same assumption as you? He might be completely desperate at this point. For god's sake, this. I've been in the overqualified boat and not getting callbacks. Talk to the guy, see if he'll take what you're paying. If it works out, you might end up with a fantastic employee that you'll keep throwing raises at.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2015 03:40
|
|
|
theperminator posted:On the flipside, We have Prosupport 4HR onsite and we do most part replacements ourselves because nobody has ever put in the effort to get the dell techs Datacenter access and a rack schema. I wouldn't trust them ("Dell" tech) to do it anyway. We made that mistake a couple of times and each time, they would replace something, pop out of the server room and say 'oops, I broke *thing* while trying to remove *bad part*'. Since then, we just tell them to send the parts and do it ourselves.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2015 03:42
|
|
|
Fenrisulfr posted:We recently acquired a number of branch offices and in one of them I'm trying to get DHCP off of the branch router (because it would fail intermittently until the router was rebooted for no reason we were ever able to determine) and onto the branch Windows 2003 server. Installing the role onto the server goes fine, until it comes time to actually set it up. The add scope wizard fails to come up, and if I try to manage DHCP via MMC it tells me Access Denied, whether from my remote workstation or from the server itself and regardless of the permissions on the account, up to and including Domain Admin. The service is running and the server is authorized in AD, and I can even see the event log signifying that, but I have no ability to configure DHCP at all. You need to be a DHCP Administrator: http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd759157.aspx anthonypants posted:It just sounds like you don't have an account with the proper AD credentials? This. theperminator posted:You may find that you need Enterprise Admin group membership Only for child -> parent domains.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2015 04:01
|
|
|
anthonypants posted:It just sounds like you don't have an account with the proper AD credentials? Urit posted:You need to be a DHCP Administrator: http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd759157.aspx I tried that, it didn't help. It also doesn't seem to be necessary as long as the user is in the local Administrators group, looking at some of our other DHCP servers. I should also mention that I've done this a few times before and have never had a problem, though the other servers I've done this on were 2008 R2 so maybe there's a difference there that's screwing me up?
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2015 09:58
|
|
|
Thanks for the input guys, we are revamping a lot of things. Though, you guys need to see some therapists with your hopeless negativity and assumptions about "poo poo jobs" 
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2015 00:09
|
|
|
ah yes we're the problem and not your poo poo job posting
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2015 00:12
|
|
|
Sorry you can't have a conversation man  relax but I'll just ignore you instead. Have a nice day.I'm new to hiring and such thats why I actually bothered to ask for input. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2015 00:24
|
|
|
Sylink posted:Thanks for the input guys, we are revamping a lot of things. Your job posting communicated "poo poo job" in a number of ways; if you don't want honesty then next time I suggest getting your recruiting help from Robert Half.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2015 00:24
|
|
|
Sylink posted:Sorry you can't have a conversation man Grow a thicker skin. Nice ignore burn though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2015 00:26
|
|
|
I don't recall saying I disagreed with you, so good non-point.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2015 00:26
|
|
|
One more suggestion: when you ask for help and get it, maybe try expressing your gratitude in a non-backhanded fashion.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2015 00:31
|
|
|
Guys, why all the fighting? Let's remember what's really terrible here: users, printers, and Sharepoint.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2015 00:46
|
|
|
Sylink posted:Thanks for the input guys, we are revamping a lot of things. Yeah you're not helping the assumptions with a passive-aggressive response like that. Che Delilas posted:One more suggestion: when you ask for help and get it, maybe try expressing your gratitude in a non-backhanded fashion. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2015 01:05
|
|
|
Can we go back to talking about running DHCP on switches? It's just the worst. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2015 01:05
|
|
|
For arguments sake let's say you were doing DHCP on switches, if those switches were a Cisco stack with two members, does that automatically make the DHCP service HA, or do you have to pick a stack member for the service to run on? I know there's a Cisco thread but this seems a bit trivial and it's sort of on topic for here now.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2015 01:11
|
|
|
OH GOD STOP I DIDN'T MEAN IT
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2015 01:11
|
|
|
My old MSP's office manager was called Dorris, and controlled where everyone sat. The technical director called it his DHCP service
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2015 01:14
|
|
|
Actually seeing those four letters together brought back a deeply-buried memory of a previous job where my boss kept massive spreadsheets of static IP addresses for things like printers, scanners, cameras, access points etc. and made the argument against setting static leases of "well, what if the DHCP service fails?". Which I never really understood because the clients wouldn't be doing much at that point and so it wouldn't matter. I can understand the logic behind not wanting to use something in an unorthodox or unsupported way, but to not use a service that is literally there to make your job easier because it might break was one I couldn't wrap my head around. Surely you could make that argument about everything? DrAlexanderTobacco posted:My old MSP's office manager was called Dorris, and controlled where everyone sat. The technical director called it his DHCP service The office manager is where the real power lies, and woe betide anyone who forgets that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2015 01:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 23:30 |
|
|
Rhymenoserous posted:"Linux Engineer" Yeah, that's a straight up tech support position. Maybe you could get away with calling it T2 since they have server access and aren't just reading a script, but if the company doesn't at least have a separate front line T1 team that handles initial calls and emails and takes care of the "how do I sent emails" level of newbie questions, then even that's a stretch. "Engineer" implies that they are going to be involved in designing and building systems, which doesn't seem to be the case at all. If that's how the job posting is titled, it's no wonder the OP isn't getting anyone literate applying. Smart people looking for an entry level support job aren't even going to look at a "X Engineer" job posting, and anyone actually looking for a sysadmin/engineering role is just going to sigh, roll their eyes, and close the tab when they read the job description, so all that's left are desperate people shotgunning resumes or people who can't be bothered to read.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2015 01:46
|
|
