Also remember you only need to hit about 60-70% of the job description. And you can get a much better job after only about 6 months at a new job. Keep track of your accomplishments and continuously learn and improve.
What kind of role and responsibilities are you seeking? What kind of company / employer? Position?
I'm seeking for an in-house system admin role (windows /vmware/hyper-v/azure environments). A position where I can gain knowledge from senior admins, and where I can gain experience in projects/implementations/planning/etc. I've been working for managed services, and kind of burnt out, and wanting to explore something new/different. Or something like a Projects Engineer position. Something where I can strategically plan/research, and implement.
My guess would be yes. Most of those released 2015-2016. We've since seen their 3rd gen products released around 2018 with the HD products, and now the UAP6 devices are starting to trickle out. Doesn't really make sense to keep promoting the older stuff.
Typically we see engineers cap out around $225K. But admins head closer to $500K.
Also, CIOs were more likely to be pulled from the admin ranks, not the engineer ranks. Because engineering was nearly all technical while admins had to be able to do everything an engineer could do, but apply it to the business in real time, deal with active security, and fix what the engineers broke all with the pressure on.
Also, in the SMB space, engineering is the low cost afterthought that admins do. It's maybe 5% of the job, and the easiest 5%. Consider how little knowledge or effort goes into installing a new server, and how much goes into supporting it after it is installed. We often have the most junior staff do the engineering parts because typically it requires the least experience or knowledge, and it can be double checked so doesn't matter even if they get something wrong - there is a chance to fix it before it goes live.
bro I think you lost your mind no one is making this much money in those roles
Don't confuse "I don't" with "other people don't."
The top end of IT is generally limited to a few physical locations (NY, London, Zurich) and to a few industries. So you aren't going to find it in some SMB shop, nor in some small village (other than in CT.)
This company however says they do not charge the company but charge the candidate due to the service they provide and managing/promoting the candidate. The cost seems pretty expensive too at just below £1000, which is $1,400 USD.
That's an itty, bitty fraction of the cost that the companies pay. So this means that the math alone doesn't make sense. How could these guys make money. Sure, good headhunters do really, really well. But that's because they place something like 90% of the executive level staff out there. These guys are claiming to only be going after some tiny sliver of a percentage of the market, while doing so at a tiny percentage of the pay? Doesn't add up. If they were legit, they'd hardly make a penny.
Yeah placement fees can be $50k or more easily
Yeah, for sure. Good headhunters can place no more than one person a quarter and be doing pretty well. It's not like normal recruiting where they make at most a few thousand dollars and have to do big volumes. This is very diligent service with huge amounts of time going into every placement.
and I believe in Denmark you have to employ a certain percentage of female executives.
Roughly the same in the US, except you can never do so intentionally. You have to hire them organically. If you can't, you are stuck. But the laws aren't that strict, which is good, since there aren't that many women in most fields so you often can't get a candidate.
The new gig that I'll start on Monday began with a cold contact I received on LinkedIn. The one before that I think from a cold call from a recruiter.
As far as IT Manager, are you specifically wanting to manage people? I know my manager at my current gig is hands on with projects and really has to do minimal managing of us. I've also seen people with the title of "IT Manager" but they're a one-person-show in IT at said comapny, so there isn't anyone for them to actually manage.
what about the Windows Defender, I mean the antivirus and the firewall of Windows They go hand in hand right?
They go together as in they are both security components of the Windows operating system. But that's about the extent of it. They are both very good, they should both always be used, they are both for the purpose of security. But they are not actually associated other than in name.