Time to gut the network - thoughts?
-
@scottalanmiller said in Time to gut the network - thoughts?:
@Dashrender said in Time to gut the network - thoughts?:
@scottalanmiller said in Time to gut the network - thoughts?:
@Dashrender said in Time to gut the network - thoughts?:
Well then I have to assume that the continued chorus line of "we recommend you put the VOIP phones on their own VLAN for QoS" is showing that they are uneducated in modern networking, no?
This falls into the same general category of "The average of any market is poor. The average business will fail. The average system deployment is expensive, slow and insecure. The average advice is just a sales pitch, not good advice. And on, and on."
Nothing should ever be considered "good" because it is popular. If anything, the popularity of an idea, product or concept should put it under more scrutiny, not less.
Now I'm just playing devil's advocate - how is a normal business person suppose to know that if their consultant suggest Cisco that they should really be scrutinizing that recommendation even more? They're probably lucky if they know the name Cisco (OK not really, but you get my point - he's a Shoe store owner, he doesn't know squat about computers).
This is SO easy. Go ask your mother if she has heard of Cisco or of Ubiquiti Networks.
If she's heard of Cisco, you know that you should watch out for people suggesting it. It's basically that easy. I'm not kidding. Once you advertise to the public for IT needs, you are going after this exactly problem.
LOL - so this life lesson you're talking about I think is something almost no one actually either A) understands, B) chooses to ignore or C) hasn't been taught or taken the time to understand.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Time to gut the network - thoughts?:
@stacksofplates said in Time to gut the network - thoughts?:
If it's a real consultant, and they recommend Cisco, why would you question it?
What you are questioning is if they are a true consultant.
See here where I pointed out above that it was the consulting that you were questioning, not the product ^^^^
The quality of Cisco gear is irrelevant. We are questioning why it is being recommended.
-
@Dashrender said in Time to gut the network - thoughts?:
@scottalanmiller said in Time to gut the network - thoughts?:
@Dashrender said in Time to gut the network - thoughts?:
@scottalanmiller said in Time to gut the network - thoughts?:
@Dashrender said in Time to gut the network - thoughts?:
Well then I have to assume that the continued chorus line of "we recommend you put the VOIP phones on their own VLAN for QoS" is showing that they are uneducated in modern networking, no?
This falls into the same general category of "The average of any market is poor. The average business will fail. The average system deployment is expensive, slow and insecure. The average advice is just a sales pitch, not good advice. And on, and on."
Nothing should ever be considered "good" because it is popular. If anything, the popularity of an idea, product or concept should put it under more scrutiny, not less.
Now I'm just playing devil's advocate - how is a normal business person suppose to know that if their consultant suggest Cisco that they should really be scrutinizing that recommendation even more? They're probably lucky if they know the name Cisco (OK not really, but you get my point - he's a Shoe store owner, he doesn't know squat about computers).
This is SO easy. Go ask your mother if she has heard of Cisco or of Ubiquiti Networks.
If she's heard of Cisco, you know that you should watch out for people suggesting it. It's basically that easy. I'm not kidding. Once you advertise to the public for IT needs, you are going after this exactly problem.
LOL - so this life lesson you're talking about I think is something almost no one actually either A) understands, B) chooses to ignore or C) hasn't been taught or taken the time to understand.
Well this PARTICULAR life lesson is about IT. Chevy advertises to your mom because your mom buys cars. That's fine. Cisco advertises to your mom because it wants your mom to question the IT guy at work anytime something fails and ask if it's because they didn't buy Cisco. See the difference? Cisco wants the non-IT people (is your mom actually in IT?) to push their products based on things other than the business needs.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Time to gut the network - thoughts?:
@stacksofplates said in Time to gut the network - thoughts?:
@scottalanmiller said in Time to gut the network - thoughts?:
@scottalanmiller said in Time to gut the network - thoughts?:
It only seems weird to "question" it because people get confused about what questioning means. They think that it is denying, which is totally different.
See where I warned about misusing the term "question" above ^^^^
Just because you question something doesn't even slightly imply that you don't then do it once you've checked to see if it is legit.
Cisco is legit, just like Chevy.
Yes, which is why I also pointed out that it was NOT the vendor being questions. I feel like you hare having an emotional response to what I said and not reading what was actually said. You are definitely not responding to me here.
It's not that Cisco is always wrong, but if your "consultant" recommends Cisco you should be more wary of him than if he suggested Juniper or Ubiquiti
The chances that the advice is good is too low to not question it. It's because it is a predictable scam response.
Both of those statements mean you are directly questioning the vendor or consultant. I'm not having an emotional response. You still haven't explained how someone who doesn't know how this stuff is supposed to work, is supposed to know when someone is telling the truth or not.
-
@Dashrender said in Time to gut the network - thoughts?:
@scottalanmiller said in Time to gut the network - thoughts?:
@stacksofplates said in Time to gut the network - thoughts?:
The people who are hiring the consultants don't know what they need, or they wouldn't have a consultant. How do you question someone on recommending one brand if you don't know anything about it?
Because even to non-technical people it's an obvious case. If you feel comfortable with the recommendation because it is an "expensive, well known, well advertised brand aimed at a non-technical person" you know to question it. Why would they market to those people if not to support this scenario? They would not, obviously. That advertising has only one function.
So you're saying that if a completely non technical person was presented with any non advertised (aka known) solution/company name, that the customer would question that it's the right thing, but just because it's using a name they heard on TV but literally know nothing about, so they'll just assume it must be good/right? Yeah sadly I'm sure you're right. But if that's the case, then you're pretty much screwed.
I didn't quite say that, at least not in this thread, but this is also true and also a problem. Don't specifically not question the case where you are most likely to be getting screwed and don't specifically question the case where someone is most likely doing a good job.
So what you are mentioning is the "what to avoid" and I was giving the "what to do", but they complement each other. If someone presents you with a recommendation that is so obviously a copy of what general marketing or bad practice suggests you would get when getting screwed, question the motives or qualifications of the person giving it to you more than in other cases.
There is no situation where you just assume someone is an expect. But there are huge cases where you question if they are... like when they try to sell you a SAN without asking your needs, or only sell very high cost brand name gear. You have to wonder, are they making money somewhere either through the sales channel or possibly simply through the lack of skills channel (skills cost money to acquire and maintain) or possibly because they think you are politically motivated and they feel that it is the only way to placate you and you need to deal with things in that way.
-
@stacksofplates said in Time to gut the network - thoughts?:
@scottalanmiller said in Time to gut the network - thoughts?:
@stacksofplates said in Time to gut the network - thoughts?:
@scottalanmiller said in Time to gut the network - thoughts?:
@scottalanmiller said in Time to gut the network - thoughts?:
It only seems weird to "question" it because people get confused about what questioning means. They think that it is denying, which is totally different.
See where I warned about misusing the term "question" above ^^^^
Just because you question something doesn't even slightly imply that you don't then do it once you've checked to see if it is legit.
Cisco is legit, just like Chevy.
Yes, which is why I also pointed out that it was NOT the vendor being questions. I feel like you hare having an emotional response to what I said and not reading what was actually said. You are definitely not responding to me here.
It's not that Cisco is always wrong, but if your "consultant" recommends Cisco you should be more wary of him than if he suggested Juniper or Ubiquiti
The chances that the advice is good is too low to not question it. It's because it is a predictable scam response.
Both of those statements mean you are directly questioning the vendor or consultant. I'm not having an emotional response. You still haven't explained how someone who doesn't know how this stuff is supposed to work, is supposed to know when someone is telling the truth or not.
Nope, I never questioned the vendor, never once. Because you are not dealing with a vendor, there is nothing to question. We are discussing paid for advice and questioning the capabilities or motives of the person providing that advice. And it takes zero technical skills to question the bigger of the two (motives) and very little to question the former (technical.)
THere is no challenge here, only a need for a company to care about doing a good job.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Time to gut the network - thoughts?:
If someone presents you with a recommendation that is so obviously a copy of what general marketing or bad practice suggests you would get when getting screwed,
This is what I'm talking about. These people don't know what bad practice is or what general marketing is. You still haven't supplied how these people are supposed to find what bad practices are.
-
@stacksofplates said in Time to gut the network - thoughts?:
@travisdh1 said in Time to gut the network - thoughts?:
@travisdh1 That said, I don't know what the price difference actually is myself. For servers and backbone it might be worth the upgrade all around.
Refurbs aren't bad, but new NICs are around $250-300 and if you use SFP then it's even more.
We just use SFP+ switches in the server rack and SFP card, with SFP+ Cooper 10GB cables. Then you can just use fiber uplinks from the rack switches (we use 40GB QSFP+ uplinks) No point in doing Fiber to the server.
-
@stacksofplates said in Time to gut the network - thoughts?:
@scottalanmiller said in Time to gut the network - thoughts?:
If someone presents you with a recommendation that is so obviously a copy of what general marketing or bad practice suggests you would get when getting screwed,
This is what I'm talking about. These people don't know what bad practice is or what general marketing is. You still haven't supplied how these people are supposed to find what bad practices are.
Everyone knows what general marketing is. Everyone. Even little kids.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Time to gut the network - thoughts?:
@stacksofplates said in Time to gut the network - thoughts?:
@scottalanmiller said in Time to gut the network - thoughts?:
If someone presents you with a recommendation that is so obviously a copy of what general marketing or bad practice suggests you would get when getting screwed,
This is what I'm talking about. These people don't know what bad practice is or what general marketing is. You still haven't supplied how these people are supposed to find what bad practices are.
Everyone knows what general marketing is. Everyone. Even little kids.
No they don't. And you still haven't showed how these people are supposed to find what bad practices are.
-
@stacksofplates said in Time to gut the network - thoughts?:
@scottalanmiller said in Time to gut the network - thoughts?:
If someone presents you with a recommendation that is so obviously a copy of what general marketing or bad practice suggests you would get when getting screwed,
This is what I'm talking about. These people don't know what bad practice is or what general marketing is. You still haven't supplied how these people are supposed to find what bad practices are.
I feel like you are suggesting that business people who own companies don't know what a magzine ad is or something like that. I'll accept that if you feel business people are that dumb and clueless that absolutely nothing will save them.
But I'm giving advice to people who can breath on their own here, not people who aren't sure which is the television show and which is the commercial. You can theorize that there are people that stupid out there, but even if they exist that doesn't mean that we should stop giving good advice just because there is someone that won't or can't take it.
-
@Jason said in Time to gut the network - thoughts?:
@stacksofplates said in Time to gut the network - thoughts?:
@travisdh1 said in Time to gut the network - thoughts?:
@travisdh1 That said, I don't know what the price difference actually is myself. For servers and backbone it might be worth the upgrade all around.
Refurbs aren't bad, but new NICs are around $250-300 and if you use SFP then it's even more.
We just use SFP+ switches in the server rack and SFP card, with SFP+ Cooper 10GB cables. Then you can just use fiber uplinks from the rack switches (we use 40GB QSFP+ uplinks) No point in doing Fiber to the server.
Oh, I just meant it's more because you have to buy the modules. If you use 10Gb base-t it's not anything extra for the modules
-
@stacksofplates said in Time to gut the network - thoughts?:
@scottalanmiller said in Time to gut the network - thoughts?:
@stacksofplates said in Time to gut the network - thoughts?:
@scottalanmiller said in Time to gut the network - thoughts?:
If someone presents you with a recommendation that is so obviously a copy of what general marketing or bad practice suggests you would get when getting screwed,
This is what I'm talking about. These people don't know what bad practice is or what general marketing is. You still haven't supplied how these people are supposed to find what bad practices are.
Everyone knows what general marketing is. Everyone. Even little kids.
No they don't. And you still haven't showed how these people are supposed to find what bad practices are.
I did... marketing. If they've heard of it, they should be wary of it. I'm just repeating myself here.
Why does SAN sound reasonable to non-technical people? Marketing. Why do non-technical people know CIsco? Marketing.
-
Somehow we are missing each other. I feel like I'm being condescendingly obvious and you feel like I am being obtuse. Which part of "if you have heard of it" you should watch out is complex? Let me explain it in audio to my wife and see what I say when describing it.
-
This is what I said to my wife and she said that it was so obvious that she wasn't sure how I could make it more clear....
If someone is giving you advice (that you pay for) and that advice reflects things that you feel seem reasonable partially because you have seen that product or idea in an ad or commercial that you should be wary of the advice because the advisor may be leveraging the fact that you have seen that marketing to influence you into accepting that advice.
I read the above to her and she said that it makes sense.
-
Remember....
- Not questioning the vendor, they are not the ones giving the advice.
- Not questioning the product.
- Not questioning the idea.
- Questioning the advice itself or the advisor giving it (this is roughly the same.)
- Questioning means to look deeper to see if it is reasonable
-
@scottalanmiller said in Time to gut the network - thoughts?:
@Dashrender said in Time to gut the network - thoughts?:
@scottalanmiller said in Time to gut the network - thoughts?:
@Dashrender said in Time to gut the network - thoughts?:
@scottalanmiller said in Time to gut the network - thoughts?:
@Dashrender said in Time to gut the network - thoughts?:
Well then I have to assume that the continued chorus line of "we recommend you put the VOIP phones on their own VLAN for QoS" is showing that they are uneducated in modern networking, no?
This falls into the same general category of "The average of any market is poor. The average business will fail. The average system deployment is expensive, slow and insecure. The average advice is just a sales pitch, not good advice. And on, and on."
Nothing should ever be considered "good" because it is popular. If anything, the popularity of an idea, product or concept should put it under more scrutiny, not less.
Now I'm just playing devil's advocate - how is a normal business person suppose to know that if their consultant suggest Cisco that they should really be scrutinizing that recommendation even more? They're probably lucky if they know the name Cisco (OK not really, but you get my point - he's a Shoe store owner, he doesn't know squat about computers).
This is SO easy. Go ask your mother if she has heard of Cisco or of Ubiquiti Networks.
If she's heard of Cisco, you know that you should watch out for people suggesting it. It's basically that easy. I'm not kidding. Once you advertise to the public for IT needs, you are going after this exactly problem.
LOL - so this life lesson you're talking about I think is something almost no one actually either A) understands, B) chooses to ignore or C) hasn't been taught or taken the time to understand.
Well this PARTICULAR life lesson is about IT. Chevy advertises to your mom because your mom buys cars. That's fine. Cisco advertises to your mom because it wants your mom to question the IT guy at work anytime something fails and ask if it's because they didn't buy Cisco. See the difference? Cisco wants the non-IT people (is your mom actually in IT?) to push their products based on things other than the business needs.
OK I see where you're going with this, but while I could care less about some random employee asking me about this, it is definitely a pain in the ass when your boss/CEO is asking this. I guess if push beyond just asking you to explain your reasoning to go with vendor A over vendor B, then they are showing that they don't trust you, and then at that point, why do they have you?
-
@scottalanmiller said in Time to gut the network - thoughts?:
@stacksofplates said in Time to gut the network - thoughts?:
@scottalanmiller said in Time to gut the network - thoughts?:
@stacksofplates said in Time to gut the network - thoughts?:
@scottalanmiller said in Time to gut the network - thoughts?:
If someone presents you with a recommendation that is so obviously a copy of what general marketing or bad practice suggests you would get when getting screwed,
This is what I'm talking about. These people don't know what bad practice is or what general marketing is. You still haven't supplied how these people are supposed to find what bad practices are.
Everyone knows what general marketing is. Everyone. Even little kids.
No they don't. And you still haven't showed how these people are supposed to find what bad practices are.
I did... marketing. If they've heard of it, they should be wary of it. I'm just repeating myself here.
That's obviously not true. Somehow some companies that market are exempt but not others.
Well this PARTICULAR life lesson is about IT. Chevy advertises to your mom because your mom buys cars. That's fine. Cisco advertises to your mom because it wants your mom to question the IT guy at work anytime something fails and ask if it's because they didn't buy Cisco
That's one of the most ridiculous things I've heard. You could make the exact same argument about Chevy. Cisco markets because they want people to buy their stuff.
Right, typical businesses will do things poorly. So assume that typical businesses will always be bad. So don't be typical if you are trying to do well.
And using this statement, Fortune 100's are not typical. Mose use Cisco gear, so by that logic you should use Cisco.
-
@Dashrender said in Time to gut the network - thoughts?:
@scottalanmiller said in Time to gut the network - thoughts?:
@Dashrender said in Time to gut the network - thoughts?:
@scottalanmiller said in Time to gut the network - thoughts?:
@Dashrender said in Time to gut the network - thoughts?:
@scottalanmiller said in Time to gut the network - thoughts?:
@Dashrender said in Time to gut the network - thoughts?:
Well then I have to assume that the continued chorus line of "we recommend you put the VOIP phones on their own VLAN for QoS" is showing that they are uneducated in modern networking, no?
This falls into the same general category of "The average of any market is poor. The average business will fail. The average system deployment is expensive, slow and insecure. The average advice is just a sales pitch, not good advice. And on, and on."
Nothing should ever be considered "good" because it is popular. If anything, the popularity of an idea, product or concept should put it under more scrutiny, not less.
Now I'm just playing devil's advocate - how is a normal business person suppose to know that if their consultant suggest Cisco that they should really be scrutinizing that recommendation even more? They're probably lucky if they know the name Cisco (OK not really, but you get my point - he's a Shoe store owner, he doesn't know squat about computers).
This is SO easy. Go ask your mother if she has heard of Cisco or of Ubiquiti Networks.
If she's heard of Cisco, you know that you should watch out for people suggesting it. It's basically that easy. I'm not kidding. Once you advertise to the public for IT needs, you are going after this exactly problem.
LOL - so this life lesson you're talking about I think is something almost no one actually either A) understands, B) chooses to ignore or C) hasn't been taught or taken the time to understand.
Well this PARTICULAR life lesson is about IT. Chevy advertises to your mom because your mom buys cars. That's fine. Cisco advertises to your mom because it wants your mom to question the IT guy at work anytime something fails and ask if it's because they didn't buy Cisco. See the difference? Cisco wants the non-IT people (is your mom actually in IT?) to push their products based on things other than the business needs.
OK I see where you're going with this, but while I could care less about some random employee asking me about this, it is definitely a pain in the ass when your boss/CEO is asking this. I guess if push beyond just asking you to explain your reasoning to go with vendor A over vendor B, then they are showing that they don't trust you, and then at that point, why do they have you?
Right, they are trying to get your CEO to push for a solution that they have heard of. Or, in many cases, to get the IT guy to accept the advice of someone based at least partially around the apparently popularity of that solution. POssibly because they simply feel this will make it easier to sell to their boss (which implies that that IT person doesn't respect their boss.)
-
@stacksofplates said in Time to gut the network - thoughts?:
I did... marketing. If they've heard of it, they should be wary of it. I'm just repeating myself here.
That's obviously not true. Somehow some companies that market are exempt but not others.
Why?
