@notverypunny said in VP of Operations and Technology - Canada only:
Also consider that it's going to be STUPID cold there in the winter.... more or less halfway between Winnipeg (aka Winterpeg) and Regina.....
I welcome the stupid cold. It's the freezing rain then blizzard on ice covered roads that's worse.
@Dashrender said in VP of Operations and Technology - Canada only:
@flaxking said in VP of Operations and Technology - Canada only:
@scottalanmiller said in VP of Operations and Technology - Canada only:
@manxam said in VP of Operations and Technology - Canada only:
@scottalanmiller : It's also in a town of 3300 people and 3 hours away from a major city so I'd assume cost-of-living will be relatively low.
Gotcha. The real issue then is just the use of the term VP. The money and position and location all seem okay. But being a VP anywhere at that kind of salary is... misleading.
What are they supposed to do for a fancy title when all the C-level titles are already taken? :face_with_stuck-out_tongue_closed_eyes:
I believe you're being funny.. but why is there a need to us VP at all - just call them a director or manager. Though in some places director is higher than VP.
No idea
@scottalanmiller said in VP of Operations and Technology - Canada only:
@manxam said in VP of Operations and Technology - Canada only:
@scottalanmiller : It's also in a town of 3300 people and 3 hours away from a major city so I'd assume cost-of-living will be relatively low.
Gotcha. The real issue then is just the use of the term VP. The money and position and location all seem okay. But being a VP anywhere at that kind of salary is... misleading.
What are they supposed to do for a fancy title when all the C-level titles are already taken? :face_with_stuck-out_tongue_closed_eyes:
@manxam said in VP of Operations and Technology - Canada only:
@scottalanmiller : It's also in a town of 3300 people and 3 hours away from a major city so I'd assume cost-of-living will be relatively low.
Oil town on the #1 highway, so the cost of living isn't as low as it could be, but still relatively low.
@Obsolesce said in Engineer title alternative:
@scottalanmiller said in Engineer title alternative:
@IRJ said in Engineer title alternative:
@flaxking said in Engineer title alternative:
@Obsolesce said in Engineer title alternative:
IT Admin / Software Developer seems most accurate. What are you engineering in IT? Are you software engineering or developing?
In IT, I engineer production and test environments. I do administration if there is something that has to get escalated to me.
Software developer would probably be more accurate. Some projects I am mostly just a developer, on others I participate in the engineering.
It kind of sounds like DevOps more than IT admin
I got the impression that it was discrete roles. Writing code under one hat, doing IT under another.
That was my impression as well.
And that is true, for the most part.
@scottalanmiller said in VP of Operations and Technology - Canada only:
$70K for a VP? How small is this company?
I would expect $70K would be for the under qualified. I think they are under 100 employees, with clients in parts of 2 provinces. I don't expect someone would take the position as a lateral career move.
@IRJ said in Engineer title alternative:
@flaxking said in Engineer title alternative:
@Obsolesce said in Engineer title alternative:
IT Admin / Software Developer seems most accurate. What are you engineering in IT? Are you software engineering or developing?
In IT, I engineer production and test environments. I do administration if there is something that has to get escalated to me.
Software developer would probably be more accurate. Some projects I am mostly just a developer, on others I participate in the engineering.
It kind of sounds like DevOps more than IT admin
The problems with that is that
@Obsolesce said in Engineer title alternative:
IT Admin / Software Developer seems most accurate. What are you engineering in IT? Are you software engineering or developing?
In IT, I engineer production and test environments. I do administration if there is something that has to get escalated to me.
Software developer would probably be more accurate. Some projects I am mostly just a developer, on others I participate in the engineering.
In my job I do software development, as well as IT tasks such as the designing of environments and the occasional administration.
I found it easiest to list myself as a IT/Software Engineer. However Engineer is a protected title in Canada. Do I list myself as sysadmin/software developer, or is there a better alternative?
The data center is looking into getting QMTH, but I'm not hopeful. It's sounds like there is some kind of regular MS Office SPLA licencing that will be easier
@wrx7m said in Office 365 ProPlus in non-dedicated hardware hosted environment:
Per my VAR, shared activation is available on any ProPlus subscription (ProPlus, E3 or E5). All users that are going to use the shared system have to be licensed with a ProPlus subscription for it to work. I am going to have to go this route to use RDS for our ERP software, which requires Microsoft Excel for exporting certain reports/info. Since we have business premium for 99% of our users, we will need to "upgrade" to E3 for all users that need access to the ERP software via RDS server. Currently 32 users.
Shared activation is available, but if not used on hardware dedicated to the organization, the hosting company has to be a QMTH
https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/CloudandHosting/licensing_sca.aspx
This seems to say that Shared Computer Activation is not valid in a multi-tenant hardware environment except by authorized partners.
@DustinB3403 said in Office 365 ProPlus in non-dedicated hardware hosted environment:
What is non-dedicated hardware in this scenario? Would the RD server up and disappear and be rebuilt elsewhere?
As in, other organizations have VMs running on that host
Assuming all of the licensing issues with RD are handled (1 license for every possible user) than the "hardware" would be the VM that is running RD Services for this business.
That's not true, the physical hardware still matters for licencing. We've gotten in trouble for mixing and matching different OS licencing type on the same physical host in our own infrastructure (the scenario in question is not our servers)
@DustinB3403 said in Office 365 ProPlus in non-dedicated hardware hosted environment:
@flaxking said in Office 365 ProPlus in non-dedicated hardware hosted environment:
Does anyone know if non-VL Office 365 ProPlus is exempt from such restrictions?
Do you mean like purchasing Retail O365 at $12/month?
Without actually seeing a license on the product I can't say for sure.
I assume the use case is you're not wanting to purchase bulk licenses for remote or freelance employees and just have them login to the suite as needed on their own equipment with credentials provided by you.
Yes, the use case is one organization has Office365 ProPlus licences for their users and are paying a third-party for a RD server on non-dedicated hardware. Can shared activation be used for those users to use Office on that server?
I was thinking yes, but then someone with VL Office365 ProPlus brought this document forward, and I was wondering if there is something similar for non-VL or if this is just because it's VL.
This document shows that when Office 365 ProPlus is acquired via Volume Licencing, it has to be on hardware dedicated to the organization when on a third party server (exception for Azure)
http://download.microsoft.com/download/3/d/4/3d42bdc2-6725-4b29-b75a-a5b04179958b/licensing_office365_proplus_in_volume_licensing.pdf
Does anyone know if non-VL Office 365 ProPlus is exempt from such restrictions?
We still develop in VB6 and we use CI. I know large organizations resist change, but CI seems like a necessity.
I really like Pluralsight. The Udemy courses I've taken have been okay, but haven't really been designed in a way to optimize learning.