|
Hour of back and forth today about computer 6 not working with remote app today. I ask for a screen shot, VNC into it see someone actively using it. Turns out they mean the OLD computer 6 that was decommissioned 2 years ago. Finally get a poor quality camera photo with unreadable text of the error. They connected an XP machine. The server is actively rejecting the connection I noticed this because they caught a bit of the blue taskbar. Response: Computer actively being rejected this will not be changed. Hoping that's the end of it. I know it's not going to be. I'm going to get an email CCed to CEO CFO and the person at my site that is the primary point of contact / translator. This is going to end up in an hour long meeting where we then end up scheduling a 1 on 1 with the CFO to decide if we should buy another computer for that site, ultimately decided that no we don't need another there after another hour and move on. Main reason the computer won't be purchased is software licensing for all the stuff they will need and that the only reason they want 1 more right now when they already have too many is that they have 3 people training their replacements unknowingly right now so it's completely unneeded 99% of the time.
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 15:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 09:56 |
|
|
you know what's cool? ingress acls into our dmz being changed without any prior notification in the middle of delivering a remote training course.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 15:33
|
|
|
Thanatosian posted:Yeah, I had always wondered why companies did that, and couldn't imagine someone actually buying into having so much smoke blown up their rear end; then that New York Times article came out several months ago, followed by this rebuttal, which is basically IBuyIntoCorporateBullshit.txt. Ugh. I can't stand his style of writing, it belongs on some late-night cable-tv infomercial. Adding on to it there was the Jay Carney anti-NYT piece on Medium but hey I guess it helps Amazon Exec's sleep at night after continually being an awful employer.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 16:09
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:Ugh. I can't stand his style of writing, it belongs on some late-night cable-tv infomercial. Just husband just got out of Amazon after 9 years. We've been together 10. I haven't seen him this happy in at least 4. In order to stay around that long you are basically required to parrot the bullshit and feed the line to the college kids coming in. I think that was the part that made him the most depressed. 4 different orgs were like this. When he got into Amazon, I might note, you didn't have to parrot any line. He literally told his original interviewers that he had never been to Amazon.com and thought they still only sold books in 2006. silicone thrills fucked around with this message at 17:48 on Feb 17, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 16:15
|
|
|
Thanatosian posted:Yeah, I had always wondered why companies did that, and couldn't imagine someone actually buying into having so much smoke blown up their rear end; then that New York Times article came out several months ago, followed by this rebuttal, which is basically IBuyIntoCorporateBullshit.txt. Honestly, I work at AWS and it is the most amazing place I have ever worked. For the nineteen years prior to working here, I had a completely mercenary attitude towards my job: I show up. I make infrastructure magic. I finish special projects ahead of schedule. I go home. I didn't care what the company did and no, I didn't make any friends or go out with colleagues after work. I'm not sure what they put in the water here, but the AWS leadership principles resonate with me and they treat everyone like grownups and professionals until proven otherwise, and if you prove them otherwise you don't last long. I work with wicked smart people doing amazing things with technology and interact with customers doing amazing poo poo on our platform on a daily basis. Since taking the time to find a company I believe in and going after it, my quality of life has skyrocketed and I actually give a poo poo about doing my job well. After this experience, I firmly believe that working for a company you respect makes all the difference between being a mercenary and actually being engaged in your work. Of course these are the ranty/bitching threads so the posts are biased in one direction but seriously folks, before looking for your next gig, take a minute to think about what you need and want out if a company (not just in terms of salary or benefits, but consider what kind of product or service interests you) and aim there. And yes, some of us just need a loving job. Some of us work in non-tech areas whose options for IT careers are limited. Some of us are just starting out and need any job at all to get the experience or get a foot in the door and all of that is okay. You should always have a long term goal for your career in terms of aspirations and what your ideal job looks like. #AgrikksSelfHelpSeminars
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 16:59
|
|
|
I think the focus on how crappy being at the Amazon mothership is is almost a red herring. The labor problems at Amazon are in the fulfillment centers, not the skyscrapers where people are getting paid out the rear end.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 17:03
|
|
|
Inspector_666 posted:I think the focus on how crappy being at the Amazon mothership is is almost a red herring. The labor problems at Amazon are in the fulfillment centers, not the skyscrapers where people are getting paid out the rear end. I DO think that the closer you are to Jeff Bezos' projects (books, kindle, fire phone, etc) the harder your life gets. But I'm out here in the boonies in AWS-land and not a software developer so from here life looks pretty good. I do enjoy the fact that Andy Jassy has no idea who I am, though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 17:20
|
|
|
The person I know working at the actual Kindle subsidiary (lab126) said it's way less stressful there than when they were working at just general Amazon.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 17:24
|
|
|
Agrikk posted:#AgrikksSelfHelpSeminars I know exactly what you mean, and I've worked at companies where I believed in them right up until they re-orged or "pivoted" and managed to completely lose all trust I had in them. It's always fun while it lasts. I there's only one company that I interviewed at that I walked into on my first day and said "I've made a terrible mistake" and quit 3 months later. I'm in the "right" field for Seattle since I'm in tech, but the trick right now is finding a new one that's a. not a creepy info grabber (ad companies, marketing, etc.) and b. is actually interesting (isn't someone's organic handcrafted pet food delivery startup) that will actually hire me because my skills list is fairly muddled.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 17:25
|
|
|
Agrikk posted:#AgrikksSelfHelpSeminars I will get to this point one day. For now I'm just a mercenary for hire though. I've made friends at my current gig, but MSP work just isn't for me.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 17:42
|
|
|
It might be time to  for me soon. The politics of this place are too much.Constant sniping/backstabbing, blame-shifting, a complete inability to take responsibility or ownership of anything, etc. It didn't used to be this bad, but after a recent manager shift things took a turn for the worst.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 17:46
|
|
|
Agrikk, are you in the Seattle area, or elsewhere? Any idea if they're cool with remote employees?
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 18:15
|
|
|
Pissing me off today: GAL weirdness. User's number comes up wrong when you look them up via GAL and I can't find any reason why. I'm not a loving microsoft guy, I'm not a loving Lync guy. How did I get sucked into this piece of poo poo that is Lync Enterprise Voice?? 
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 18:22
|
|
|
DigitalMocking posted:Pissing me off today: GAL weirdness. You probably don't want to know how to actually fix this since you'll just get more similar problems dumped on you. But with Lync if someone's details look fine when you look them up, but not for one user, 9 times out of 10 it's because that user has a contact saved in Outlook with those details in it. Lync gives personal contacts higher priority than the GAL.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 18:27
|
|
|
stubblyhead posted:Agrikk, are you in the Seattle area, or elsewhere? Any idea if they're cool with remote employees? It depends. My husband had a guy who only was onsite for one week a month but that was a pretty special deal. His dad was dying and so it was a limited thing. There's teams in alot of other places now though - phoenix, new york, various locations in CA, etc but it depends if you want to work in a specific group.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 18:28
|
|
|
No, $ProjectManager, I'd love for you to change the requirements for the eighth time! It's not like our consultants did it right the first seven times, so what does it matter?
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 19:54
|
|
|
Our primary vendor's catalog/ordering website. About a year ago they launched a brand new modern website. However for some reason I cannot comprehend, they built the entire thing on Sharepoint. Predictably, it goes down constantly, throws random errors, is horribly slow at times, etc.. It has been all but unusable since Monday this week. According to my users however, this is somehow my fault.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 20:02
|
|
|
stevewm posted:About a year ago they launched a brand new modern website. However for some reason I cannot comprehend, they built the entire thing on Sharepoint. I can tell you why. It's because SharePoint is Access for the Web. Users can create custom schema lists (tables) and update them in a pretty UI. It has data validation, computed columns, etc. Then it starts doing what you've described once the O(n^m) complexity of how lists are implemented kicks in where n is the number of items and m is the number of joins to other lists. Sharepoint: not even once.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 20:55
|
|
|
friends dont let friends sharepoint
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 20:57
|
|
|
go3 posted:friends dont let friends sharepoint People say this but I have yet to work at a company that doesn't use sharepoint.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 21:26
|
|
|
Urit posted:...Then it starts doing what you've described once the O(n^m) complexity of how lists are implemented kicks in where n is the number of items and m is the number of joins to other lists.... It is a fairly complex website. So I can only imagine the cluster gently caress of joins and lists. This is a website that supports several thousand co-op members and likely receives thousands of hits per second. It also appears SharePoint Foundation might be in the mix as well... The sign-in page if its not working will throw a error mentioning "Sharepoint Foundation".
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 21:28
|
|
|
go3 posted:friends dont let friends sharepoint You should see the glares I give people when I hear "we could use Sharepoint to..."
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 21:28
|
|
|
Agrikk posted:Honestly, I work at AWS and it is the most amazing place I have ever worked. For the nineteen years prior to working here, I had a completely mercenary attitude towards my job: I show up. I make infrastructure magic. I finish special projects ahead of schedule. I go home. I didn't care what the company did and no, I didn't make any friends or go out with colleagues after work. After getting away from Verizon and into my new gig last summer, I know what you mean. I just hope it lasts for a while.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 21:29
|
|
|
Urit posted:I can tell you why. It's because SharePoint is Access for the Web. Users can create custom schema lists (tables) and update them in a pretty UI. It has data validation, computed columns, etc. Then it starts doing what you've described once the O(n^m) complexity of how lists are implemented kicks in where n is the number of items and m is the number of joins to other lists.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 21:31
|
|
|
Tigntink posted:People say this but I have yet to work at a company that doesn't use sharepoint. They use sharepoint, but it sharepoint doesn't work properly.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 21:33
|
|
|
stevewm posted:Our primary vendor's catalog/ordering website. Ingram?
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 21:34
|
|
|
Access is good for the same thing Unity is. They are both great for prototyping and proof of concept. They in no way should be the final thing you use to make your product. You use them to get investors and make the real thing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 21:39
|
|
|
stubblyhead posted:Agrikk, are you in the Seattle area, or elsewhere? Any idea if they're cool with remote employees? I'm in Seattle and work 95% remotely. They are totally cool with remote workers. Of course I generalize and I'm sure there are positions requiring on-site 100% of the time. I have job postings for AWS in the jobs thread, FYI. Agrikk fucked around with this message at 21:56 on Feb 17, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 21:52
|
|
|
Thanks Ants posted:Ingram? Do It Best... One of the big 3 hardware co-ops in the US...
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 21:57
|
|
|
Agrikk posted:I'm in Seattle and work 95% remotely. Thanks, I will check it out. In other not-pissing-me-off news, phone interview tomorrow.  e: Agrikk, sent you an email stubblyhead fucked around with this message at 22:57 on Feb 17, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 22:06
|
|
|
Tigntink posted:People say this but I have yet to work at a company that doesn't use sharepoint. sharepoint is great as long as you aren't the one that has to go in and fix things when it inevitably shits itself
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 00:16
|
|
|
stevewm posted:It is a fairly complex website. So I can only imagine the cluster gently caress of joins and lists. SharePoint Foundation is the basis of SP and then the SharePoint product (without Foundation in the name) is built on top of that, so the branding is wonderfully inconsistent between the two layers. Basically SharePoint is just DLC on top of SharePoint Foundation. Manslaughter posted:sharepoint is great as long as you aren't the one that has to go in and fix things when it inevitably shits itself I was that person.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 00:24
|
|
|
The poor sod hired to maintain our sharepoint sits near me in the cubicle farm, their desk is an endless stream of confused assistants and middle management cruising by to ask how long it would take to implement Impractical Feature #5383. The rare occasion that's not going on, I hear a lot of sighs and cursing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 00:27
|
|
|
A client of ours submitted a ticket because they found they were having trouble emailing one of their partners. The NDR contains this nugget of information:code:Welp.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 01:45
|
|
|
Agrikk posted:I'm in Seattle and work 95% remotely. Our tams are out of Raleigh so they have some presence in that area. gently caress now I need to check the jobs thread.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 03:59
|
|
|
I have no doubt Amazon isn't the sum of its negative press but when it comes to handling PR fallout you don't resort to the tactics of late-night informercials.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 04:22
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:I have no doubt Amazon isn't the sum of its negative press but when it comes to handling PR fallout you don't resort to the tactics of late-night informercials. I agree. I'd love to know what group of folks were responsible for that rebuttal. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 05:29
|
|
|
On SharePoint chat. One of our bigger departments wants to move to a product built on top of SharePoint for document management etc. Around the same time some discussion was had about our own IT Dept documentation. I suggested we put it up on this thing so we will become familiar with its day to day use etc. The dirty looks I got and the general "Never mention this again" feeling was priceless. If it is going to be such a rotten dog why are we pushing it on to our users?
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 09:00
|
|
|
Because the users don't know any better.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 09:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 09:56 |
|
|
Because IT probably advised against SharePoint but have been told to deploy it anyway.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 09:42
|
|