Wirt wrote:
>
>John Norbut writes:
>
>> >I am new to the HP 3000 administrator in my office. Pls. let me know the
>>  >commend to stop users logging in to the system. This is required specially
>>  >when backing up the system.
>>  >
>>  >rgds
>>  >Chalaka
>>
>>  Yikes.....System Admin....and doesn't know the limit command.
>>  Who did the hiring in this place??
>
>As opposed to yesterday, let me be both frank and curt in this instance, but
>John's comment is wholly inappropriate. The HP3000 is nearly the ideal
>business machine. It is simple to use -- and reliable enough where a great
>deal of knowledge of its administration is not necessary to keep it running
>for years flawlessly.

Yes, but a certain amount of basic knowledge IS required and this is
not the appropriate venue to get it. Hiring someone to run a system,
of any type, on which you base a business and then not training that
person is pure folly. It indicates company management thinks every
computer is the same and that if you know how to run a PC you should be
able to run a mainframe.

>
>In a great many of our customer sites, the system administrator is the person
>whose desk just happened to be next to the HP3000. No other qualification is
>necessary. As I tell all of our customers, if you can run a Micro, you can run
>a 997. There is no difference between the machines, other than the size of the
>lease payments.

True, but conversely if you can't run a Micro then you sure can't run
a S/997-800.

>
>I've grown to love these customers and we actively seek them out. These people
>have proven themselves to have a strong predisposition to use their HP3000s
>for business purposes and not as technical toys.
>
>Secondly, it's extremely important to remember that everyone who comes to
>computers was dead ignorant on his first day, no matter how much of a guru he
>may be now. Ignorance is never a sin, especially if you make honest, valid
>attempts to find out what you don't know. But the same can't be said for
>arrogance. It is never appropriate.

I agree with the arrogance part. But, I don't think John was being
arrogant at all. He was merely expressing his disbelief that a company
would hire a person to control their computer system and then not
give them the most basic level of training. And I agree with him on this
point. I see it every day and it is very sad. These operators are being
set up to fail in their new jobs.

I don't know how many times I have been involved with down systems, the
recovery of which was hampered greatly by the operator's inability to
perform even the most basic tasks. Then their management suddenly wants
to get involved, after the fact, demanding explanations why it took so
long to get the machine back up. These people are legally, contractually
required to have a specific level of training and yet they don't
receive it and it makes them look bad. It also makes the HP3000
system look bad, and, by extension, HP in general. If there were a way
to remedy it I would be all for it.
>
>Wirt Atmar
>


--
                 --Pete Crosby  ([log in to unmask])
                   HP Atlanta Response Center