What will IT look like in 10 years?

UnixGuy

Forsaken_GA wrote: »

Doesn't matter how many years pass. Users and less capable technicians will still break stuff, and companies will still pay me large amounts of money to clean up the mess, and maybe make it a little better.

plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose

This sums it all up.

Turgon

UnixGuy wrote: »

+1

I agree, data centers are getting bigger and more complicated, so one has to be competent enough to handle big setups and new technology

The organisation has to be competant as opposed to the indivdual. With standardization and virtualization a lot of scalar problems keeping things holding together will become less reliant on as many operational specialists.

UnixGuy

Turgon wrote: »

The organisation has to be competant as opposed to the indivdual. With standardization and virtualization a lot of scalar problems keeping things holding together will become less reliant on as many operational specialists.

Even with virtualization, I see more room for people to mess things up. The growth of data & date centers in general is fast, and keeping things in place *I think* isn't as easy as it used to be. Implementing standards and processes should increase efficiency...

Turgon

UnixGuy wrote: »

Even with virtualization, I see more room for people to mess things up. The growth of data & date centers in general is fast, and keeping things in place *I think* isn't as easy as it used to be. Implementing standards and processes should increase efficiency...

There will be plenty of room to mess things up that's for sure. But the management position will be that we should have right first time and if it isn't happening someone is failing somewhere. There will be investment in automation methods provided by vendors. There will be more rigerous change control and more pressure on operational teams.

UnixGuy

Turgon wrote: »

There will be plenty of room to mess things up that's for sure. But the management position will be that we should have right first time and if it isn't happening someone is failing somewhere. There will be investment in automation methods provided by vendors. There will be more rigerous change control and more pressure on operational teams.

That's very true, I agree

Turgon

UnixGuy wrote: »

That's very true, I agree

There will be more people on the streets ready to do the work as the rationalization drive continues. There will be internal pressure to hire fewer people. The operations wages for most support Professionals will be steadily driven down. Fun.

instant000

Turgon wrote: »

There will be more people on the streets ready to do the work as the rationalization drive continues. There will be internal pressure to hire fewer people. The operations wages for most support Professionals will be steadily driven down. Fun.

Yeah, the more intelligence you can put into the equipment.

I'm waiting for the day that all of the end user devices can become a mesh, and torrent style networking would be used to perform file transfers, with devices meshing to each other.

I think it would work as an opt-in type of thing, where you could choose to mesh your portable/handheld device, with other portable/hand-held devices out there.

I'm not talking about bluetooth, I'm speaking of something on the scale of P2P networking, wirelessly, where end users can form meshes that are off the internet backbones.

As it is now, current wireless standards have many users connecting to single network entry points ... what about if the users devices just connected directly to each other?

Is there an app for that already? it would seem to work best in populous areas.

I know that some might have issue with how could the service providers "meter" this access, and profit from it, but you'd still need a backup route to go through the providers network, for content that wasn't available in your public meshes. ...

I think this leads to the logical marrying of content providers and service providers. AOL/Time Warner was basically WAAAY ahead of its time.

Microsoft WebTV was also ahead of its time, relatively speaking

Turgon

instant000 wrote: »

Yeah, the more intelligence you can put into the equipment.

I'm waiting for the day that all of the end user devices can become a mesh, and torrent style networking would be used to perform file transfers, with devices meshing to each other.

I think it would work as an opt-in type of thing, where you could choose to mesh your portable/handheld device, with other portable/hand-held devices out there.

I'm not talking about bluetooth, I'm speaking of something on the scale of P2P networking, wirelessly, where end users can form meshes that are off the internet backbones.

As it is now, current wireless standards have many users connecting to single network entry points ... what about if the users devices just connected directly to each other?

Is there an app for that already? it would seem to work best in populous areas.

I know that some might have issue with how could the service providers "meter" this access, and profit from it, but you'd still need a backup route to go through the providers network, for content that wasn't available in your public meshes. ...

I think this leads to the logical marrying of content providers and service providers. AOL/Time Warner was basically WAAAY ahead of its time.

Microsoft WebTV was also ahead of its time, relatively speaking

I know what you mean. One of the challenges when I looked at this briefly years back was wireless switching. Im not current on where we are with that.

Firecell

Does everyone agree Cisco is declining and Cloud computing is increasing?

What certifications and additional steps are necessary to prepare for the next 10 years of IT, which will be surrounded by Cloud?

tpatt100

Firecell wrote: »

Does everyone agree Cisco is declining and Cloud computing is increasing?

What certifications and additional steps are necessary to prepare for the next 10 years of IT, which will be surrounded by Cloud?

People skills imo. Tech will continue to consolidate and service roles will be required as almost everyone will be required to use tech in one form or another and they will always need service.

know_nothing

Firecell wrote: »

Does everyone agree Cisco is declining and Cloud computing is increasing?

What certifications and additional steps are necessary to prepare for the next 10 years of IT, which will be surrounded by Cloud?

Are there any recommended certifications that we should pursue to demonstrate proficiency in Cloud Computing?


know_nothing

"Never confuse faith that you will prevail in the end — which you can never afford to lose — with the discipline to confront the most brutal facts of your current reality."
— Admiral Jim Stockdale

Slowhand

know_nothing wrote: »

Are there any recommended certifications that we should pursue to demonstrate proficiency in Cloud Computing?

I'm not familiar with any certs that focus on cloud-computing right now. My prediction, though, is that since there isn't a standard for how to 'put things in the cloud', this will be something that each vendor will handle independently as the practice becomes more wide-spread. Cisco will probably have some kind of cert for their products/services, Microsoft will probably have something for theirs, etc.

blargoe

Turgon wrote: »

There will be more people on the streets ready to do the work as the rationalization drive continues. There will be internal pressure to hire fewer people. The operations wages for most support Professionals will be steadily driven down. Fun.

I guess the $64,000 question is... in which IT discipline will wages be steadily driven up (or at the very least, maintain steady when adjusted for inflation and COLA)?

blargoe

Slowhand wrote: »

I'm not familiar with any certs that focus on cloud-computing right now. My prediction, though, is that since there isn't a standard for how to 'put things in the cloud', this will be something that each vendor will handle independently as the practice becomes more wide-spread. Cisco will probably have some kind of cert for their products/services, Microsoft will probably have something for theirs, etc.

I would think that you'd default to the what the current market leader (VMware) is offering today and branch out onto whatever new is offered in the next couple of years (be that a vendor-neutral cert, a viable vendor alternative, or even new technology that may surface). Adjacent to that would be things like cloud storage (I know EMC has a Cloud Architect cert, for example), and network security (will never go away, just might trend more toward outsourcing).

powerfool

Don't get scared.... just be the best and lead the change. Honestly, I am not sure what the next ten years will hold. There has been flip-flopping to and from the cloud (Software as a Service - SaaS, Application Service Provider - ASP, whatever) for a long time. Citrix was essentially built on this idea... they failed miserably until in 1993 they purchased Netware Access Server and turned it into WinView, which became WinFrame, MetaFrame, MetaFrame XP, Presentation Server, and finally XenApp. For over ten years, I have learned of this company and how it really pushed the bar. Companies have tried this entire time to take this technologies, and others like it, and move them from the remote/central datacenter approach for the enterprise to a service-based model.

I think the big battle being fought is going to be between VMware and Microsoft for the next few years. Microsoft keeps improving Hyper-V, but VMware keeps advancing ESX and it keeps a fair amount of distance from Redmond. VMware is going to have to keep innovating with new products and lower the costs of its flagship products over time to remain competitive. The open source products will stay alive, but I just see them not getting much traction as companies like Amazon will leverage them for their use as a service provider, but others will not find the same utility because they won't be as ready to make investments into them.

As far as networking goes... we are going to see wired connectivity for a while, I imagine. Wireless is going to keep pushing the boundaries and will gain increasing marketshare, surpassing wired connections. However, "big data" is going to keep wired connections alive unless wireless to the premises can sustain increasing video streaming capabilities; as we are finally getting to the point where wired connections can support multiple HD streams... but what about streaming 3D HD (you will need at least twice the frame rate... doubling the requirements, if not more)... and then SuperHD is about to emerge. These advancements in quality will eliminate physical media, by and large, as a means of standard distribution. But, as these requirements increase, we are going to get closer and closer to requiring 1Gbit to the home just for residential usage; is wireless going to be an option for this soon? Maybe nearing the end of that ten year mark... but that is probably pushing it. It certainly won't be available on the 2.4Ghz or 5Ghz frequencies, especially if you expect it to support full neighborhoods... the spectrum just cannot support it. It will be proprietorial frequencies and the "tower" density will have to dramatically increase with a much lower distance being supported by each tower... this will mean more wired connectivity from the towers... at some point does it make sense to have wireless WAN be the primary option out there? The density will be so high that they will nearly need to wire to your residence and set you up with your own wireless router... which is pretty much what we already have. It reminds me of this fisherman story that I frequently read at Jimmy Johns... Essentially, an American tourist visits a coastal Mexican fishing village and meets a fisherman who catches enough fish to feed his family each day, and then relaxes the rest of the day. The American inquires as to why he doesn't catch a few extra fish and eventually save up enough to buy a bigger boat and hire a crew to catch even more fish... eventually, he will need to open a cannery to can the fish himself, and then he will need to move to New York City where he will take his company public. The fisherman asks the American what he would do after all of that, and the American replies with retiring to a small Mexican coastal village and relaxing with his family. So, if we are going to come full circle, why do we waste our efforts on that journey when we can focus them on something else that will be more beneficial?

effekted

IT will not be around in 10 years...remember 2012 is the end of the world! /end sarcasm

Forsaken_GA

Firecell wrote: »

Does everyone agree Cisco is declining and Cloud computing is increasing?

What certifications and additional steps are necessary to prepare for the next 10 years of IT, which will be surrounded by Cloud?

I'm not sure I'd say Cisco is declining, in the sense you mean it. Cisco as a compay, maybe, but they're far from irrelevant, and they still have a bunch of kit. Networking as a whole? declining? Not a chance. All this new crap we can do still needs to talk to each other, making networking, especially large scale internetworking, far from in decline.

I also think that cloud computing for the enterprise is a fad. It will certainly always have it's niche, but people are beginning to wake up to the need for properly securing their data, and cloud providers just have way too many question marks in that regard. Let me give you an example -

Cisco acquired ScanSafe, and one of their services is that they provide is content filtering for web browsers, as a SaaS service.

Weeks after the diginotar hack, they *still* hadn't revoked Digitnotar's SSL cert, and since they're also doing SSL interception in order to inspect those streams, it meant that even though the cert was revoked in our browsers, due to the SSL interception, the fact that it was still active through ScanSafe meant that potentially all of our SSL traffic could have been compromised. Since this was a cloud based service, there was literally nothing we could do on our end except yell at the vendor or implement another solution. Those are seriously crappy choices. Cloud services can be a truly badass service, but the amount of faith and trust you have to put in the provider of that service is unreal.

RobertKaucher

Forsaken_GA wrote: »

... Since this was a cloud based service, there was literally nothing we could do on our end except yell at the vendor or implement another solution. Those are seriously crappy choices. Cloud services can be a truly badass service, but the amount of faith and trust you have to put in the provider of that service is unreal.

The cloud model is so new I think we are just in that phase where it's still not working as well as it should. I believe that over the next 3 years we are going to see these sorts of issues getting sorted out and it will be more stable and more secure.

demonfurbie

i dont see cisco or router work declining in the near future, in fact i see it expanding they will still need a network to connect to the "cloud" and they will need support for the desktops and servers that need to be on site

Forsaken_GA

RobertKaucher wrote: »

The cloud model is so new I think we are just in that phase where it's still not working as well as it should. I believe that over the next 3 years we are going to see these sorts of issues getting sorted out and it will be more stable and more secure.

I'm sure growing pains is some of it, but the bottom line is that in order for cloud services to work, the customer has to trust the provider to do the right thing. As data security becomes a bigger focus, giving up that kind of control can become a huge risk, especially if your enterprise is primarily data driven.

Then you also get into some murky legal stuff when it comes to data export laws with certain types of data.

So yeah, cloud services will make a good sized splash for smaller business, but I'm willing to bet that large enterprise will opt for keeping their infrastructure in house.

Turgon

I think large enterprises will look at cloud. The implementation is immature at the moment but the Harvard MBA will push for it, because if he doesn't someone else will and what are the company paying him for? We will see a lot of infrastructure move to cloud over the next few years. There will be many failed projects and a lot will move back out, only to move back in when the reasons not to offered by technologists are overriden by commercial leaders, many of whom are less technocratic these days. Same for safe havens like secure shops. To save costs legislation will be tweaked to allow more things to move out.

RobertKaucher

Forsaken_GA wrote: »

I'm sure growing pains is some of it, but the bottom line is that in order for cloud services to work, the customer has to trust the provider to do the right thing. As data security becomes a bigger focus, giving up that kind of control can become a huge risk, especially if your enterprise is primarily data driven.

Then you also get into some murky legal stuff when it comes to data export laws with certain types of data.

So yeah, cloud services will make a good sized splash for smaller business, but I'm willing to bet that large enterprise will opt for keeping their infrastructure in house.

I know where you are coming from. One such issue is geolocation. I just don't think the US Gov or Mil is going to want to spin up random servers that are physically located in China. In fact my company would not want that. But I know cloud vendors are working on things like that. And trust is a huge factor. They, after all, have physical posession of the data and the systems they reside on. Am I to assume they are not going to be doing some sort of datamining on their customers? If the're doing that what other things are they collecting and how are they recording it.

erpadmin

RobertKaucher wrote: »

I know where you are coming from. One such issue is geolocation. I just don't think the US Gov or Mil is going to want to spin up random servers that are physically located in China. In fact my company would not want that. But I know cloud vendors are working on things like that. And trust is a huge factor. They, after all, have physical posession of the data and the systems they reside on. Am I to assume they are not going to be doing some sort of datamining on their customers? If the're doing that what other things are they collecting and how are they recording it.

That's why we, at my job, are involved in discussions for looking at hybrid solutions or "private clouds." However in 51 sovereign entities in the US (not counting US terrorities, and that's 1 federal government plus 50 state governments), the legality of government agencies going to the cloud have to get worked out first. One of my favorite anti-cloud arguments that I like to use is how Northrop Grumman f'ed up royally the Commonwealth of Virginia for a few days about a year or so ago...when folks couldn't get driver licenses and other state-provided services. A huge defense contractor...using EMC Symmetrix SANs that by design SHOULD NOT be f'ed up at all...

As you say, Robert, the cloud might be good or even great for startups. But for government IT...(or even companies that will be doing business with the federal government), not so much [at least right now.]

erpadmin

Well lookee-here, cloud-luv'ahs....

data sovereignty risks

Written five days after I wrote what was on the above for people that essential pay your salary (or have them paid.)

Even though you may feel that using the cloud to run your systems simplifies and decreases the cost of your IT deployments, remember that the underlying databases and files still end up being stored on servers, hard disks, and other computer systems in a data center somewhere on planet Earth. And keep in mind that the laws of the country where those servers and hard disks live would then apply to you.

Simplication of IT costs is not going to trump data compliance issues. Period.

RobertKaucher

erpadmin wrote: »

Well lookee-here, cloud-luv'ahs....

data sovereignty risks

Written five days after I wrote what was on the above for people that essential pay your salary (or have them paid.)



Simplication of IT costs is not going to trump data compliance issues. Period.

No, it's not you are right. But the fact is that everything eventually becomes what is. And the technology is simply not going to allow compliance to be an obstiacle for people to make a ton of money. There are already systems out there right now that are addressing the geo-location issue as well as the physical hardware issue. The problems are complex and the solutions are going to take a while. But you can't just look at an immature technology and assume it is never going to reach its full potential. Those who can move into the cloud initially will do it, those who cannot due to compliance issues will also because the economic tidal forces will pull them in that direction as smart people address the fundamental issues the a cloud or hybrid cloud system has. It's going to happen. If a problem exists preventing people from making money from a workable business model that problem will be surmounted. I don't think we are ever going to see a 100% full migration of every server to a cloud provider - but we will see more and more that the hybrid/private cloud is going to be the norm.

demonfurbie

im just gonna sit back and watch,

people move there servers over to the cloud

once they have gotten rid of most if not all the servers, then the isps will do what cell companies are doing charging per gig for bandwith (already happends in come places, even close to the states like canada The Cost of Bandwidth: Canada versus the World)

then it wont be near as cost effective, then they will have to move off the could and back on to servers

Forsaken_GA

demonfurbie wrote: »

im just gonna sit back and watch,
once they have gotten rid of most if not all the servers, then the isps will do what cell companies are doing charging per gig for bandwith (already happends in come places, even close to the states like canada The Cost of Bandwidth: Canada versus the World)

then it wont be near as cost effective, then they will have to move off the could and back on to servers

Not likely. Bandwidth has become a commodity, and the providers are only too willing to undercut each other to attract more customers (search for Cogents history of peering disputes, and the reasons they occurred)

onesaint

Forsaken_GA wrote: »

Not likely. Bandwidth has become a commodity, and the providers are only too willing to undercut each other to attract more customers (search for Cogents history of peering disputes, and the reasons they occurred)

Their an all Cisco house too, offering 100mbit lines for only a few dollars an Mbit.