Kind of ethical question?
-
That's kind of a bad title but I don't know what it should actually be. The question I have is how much thought do you put into making things simpler for other IT people who work in the SMB field? For example, using a Synology vs a bare CentOS with an NFS or SMB share. Or using a hardware RAID controller vs using software RAID. Documentation is obviously key. But if they don't read it thoroughly it won't help. How simple (probably not the right word) do you make it for SMB shops?
This isn't anything that's going on right now and examples are hypothetical, just asking the question.
-
I attempt to make things as simple as possible, and I also tend to apply the KISS(Keep it simple stupid) methodology. Not only because I have to work on the system for the foreseeable future, but when I leave a company, I still want the company to be able to function.
Hurting the company by convoluting your practices and systems will only hurt you in the long run.
-
I definitely agree with the don't convolute something for the sake of convoluting it.
But then I don't consider your examples a form of overly complex setup. Use what is right for the situation, or finances allow. The choice between a Synology and a file servering CentOS box have more to do with cost in my mind. If you need a 2 bay device, then Synology is a great, decently priced option. But once you move past 2 drives, you seriously need to consider other options as 4+ NAS devices are very pricey for what they are. Sure CentOS takes a little more to manage, but I don't consider it so much more as to possibly outweigh the potential cost savings of loaded box from Xbyte.
-
@Dashrender said:
I definitely agree with the don't convolute something for the sake of convoluting it.
But then I don't consider your examples a form of overly complex setup. Use what is right for the situation, or finances allow. The choice between a Synology and a file servering CentOS box have more to do with cost in my mind. If you need a 2 bay device, then Synology is a great, decently priced option. But once you move past 2 drives, you seriously need to consider other options as 4+ NAS devices are very pricey for what they are. Sure CentOS takes a little more to manage, but I don't consider it so much more as to possibly outweigh the potential cost savings of loaded box from Xbyte.
One thing I've been realizing also is that the area I am in, does not appear to have an abundance of support companies who can (or will) manage a Linux device or other things of that type. So while I believe in this hypothetical situation that it's better for the customer to have a CentOS server, are you hurting them by giving them something that someone else later might not be able to manage (even though they should be able to since it's not hard and documented everywhere).
-
@johnhooks You're not convoluting the clients setup. If you document everything as you set it up. Anyone should be able to come in and manage it easily enough.
-
@DustinB3403 said:
@johnhooks You're not convoluting the clients setup. If you document everything as you set it up. Anyone should be able to come in and manage it easily enough.
Even if it's managed remotely.
-
@johnhooks said:
One thing I've been realizing also is that the area I am in, does not appear to have an abundance of support companies who can (or will) manage a Linux device or other things of that type.
No, there is no shortage of support, especially for a service that has no need for local support. Remember, never hire local. You should never feel that you lack support no matter where you are. That would be purely an impression only.
-
@johnhooks said:
So while I believe in this hypothetical situation that it's better for the customer to have a CentOS server, are you hurting them by giving them something that someone else later might not be able to manage (even though they should be able to since it's not hard and documented everywhere).
There are great arguments for why the opposite is true. You are making it far easier for them to select the next IT person why not allowing them to simply hire the completely random Windows/Cisco ever "Tom, Dick and Harry" IT guys. Just because people know or claim to know Linux does not make them experts, of course, but it weeds out something like 90% of the worst shops immediately and has been argued makes finding qualified people far easier.
-
I don't want complexity just for the sake of complexity but, I don't avoid complexity when it's a better solution.
-
One could easily argue that NAS and other appliances are the antithesis of simplicity as they are so complex that you require the vendor to support them rather than being able to support them yourself.
I'm not saying that I agree, only that it is a valid point and needs to be considered. Appliancization is not an automatic move to simplicity on its own.
