• (cs) in reply to Someone You Know
    Someone You Know:
    flaquito:
    The real WTF is that the KVM was so cheap that it didn't indicate to the server that a keyboard was hooked up even when the KVM was switched to a different server. A good KVM should always show a valid keyboard/mouse/display to a machine, no matter what the active input is.

    I'm more confused about how exactly he saw the error message on the screen if the KVM switch was switched to another computer. Shouldn't the monitor be showing the output from the computer the KVM switch is switched to?

    I assumed that they switched the KVM to the correct server after it failed to boot properly.

  • Dan (unregistered) in reply to SuperousOxide
    SuperousOxide:
    flaquito:
    The real WTF is that the KVM was so cheap that it didn't indicate to the server that a keyboard was hooked up even when the KVM was switched to a different server. A good KVM should always show a valid keyboard/mouse/display to a machine, no matter what the active input is.

    And a good BIOS shouldn't fail to boot just because there's no keyboard there.

    Maybe, but Windows (2000 and possibly beyond) will not load a keyboard or mouse driver (and therefore no mouse pointer either) if it doesn't detect them at bootup. So you're still stuck with a mostly nonfunctional computer.

  • Dan (unregistered) in reply to mrs_helm
    mrs_helm:
    It's possible the Sr. Tech WAS that much of a slave... But when I've seen people being jerks about the process over something this small, it was because they were trying to prove a valid point about how stupid their company's particular interpretation of/adherence to the process was. They just wanted to create as big of a stink as possible, and then blame it on the process, in the hopes the process would be repealed (or at least amended) so that they could do their job.

    What stinks is that so many other people suffered, and the company probably lost money, for him to prove this point.

    Hey, everybody else was salaried in the the company. Besides, if The Company instituted The Process, then The Company should pay for it.

  • Nutmeg Programmer (unregistered)

    I say the only way it can be true was if the Senior Tech (so-called) didn't recognize the error for what it was and thought it was an actual ERROR, and just a notification that the bios couldn't read from the keyboard.

    This is on about the same level finding the lights are off, and it being too dark to read in The Process whether you can turn them on.

  • Mickey the Brain (unregistered)

    With the KVM Switch set to the right position, why not just reboot the server again?

    HPC, my back side.

  • Manic Mailman (unregistered)

    General Border Gave the order. Major Scott Brought the shot. Captain Bammer Brought the rammer. Sergeant Chowder Brought the powder. Corporal Farrell Brought the barrel. Private Parriage Brought the carriage.

    But Drummer Hoff fired it off.

  • Jay (unregistered) in reply to x
    x:
    It's "apprentice" or, better, "protégé".

    People who say "mentee" are the same morons who think "guestimate" and "confuzzled" are valid words too.

    Personally, I prefer the term "minion".

    I used to have a young lady working for me who I once referred to as my "henchman". She objected that she was not a "henchMAN". So I said, "Okay, how about 'henchbabe'?" She thought it was great fun, but the very liberated woman in the next cube found it highly offensive. Which of course encouraged us to use the term more often. (In retrospect I probably could have been sued for some form of political incorrectness.)

  • (cs) in reply to danixdefcon5

    I've worked at managed service providers where pressing F1 would most certainly have been an issue. It would have collided up against the issue that the SLA was flying out the window as the minutes of downtime passed, but merely hooking up a keyboard and pressing a key could be problematic.

    I've since vowed never to work for places like that again. Places like that and the government. If you hate shenanigans like The Process, working for Uncle Sugar will slowly drive you insane.

  • (cs) in reply to Dan
    Dan:
    SuperousOxide:

    And a good BIOS shouldn't fail to boot just because there's no keyboard there.

    Maybe, but Windows (2000 and possibly beyond) will not load a keyboard or mouse driver (and therefore no mouse pointer either) if it doesn't detect them at bootup. So you're still stuck with a mostly nonfunctional computer.

    That may or may not be a problem (if you're running it as a server, you don't need a keyboard or mouse when things are working properly). The BIOS should let the OS deal with the problem.

  • (cs) in reply to Dan
    Dan:
    SuperousOxide:
    flaquito:
    The real WTF is that the KVM was so cheap that it didn't indicate to the server that a keyboard was hooked up even when the KVM was switched to a different server. A good KVM should always show a valid keyboard/mouse/display to a machine, no matter what the active input is.

    And a good BIOS shouldn't fail to boot just because there's no keyboard there.

    Maybe, but Windows (2000 and possibly beyond) will not load a keyboard or mouse driver (and therefore no mouse pointer either) if it doesn't detect them at bootup. So you're still stuck with a mostly nonfunctional computer.

    And yet another reason to leave Microsoft out of the picture.

  • Crabs (unregistered) in reply to Potatoboy
    *cough* *cough* Lockheed Martin *cough* *cough*

    The process really isn't as bad as people say it is. Yes, it's there, yes it's slow. What I've realized is that it's designed so that no one has to worry about anyone but themselves. The problem is that IT folks rarely think like this, as usually they're looking to fix things for others. Easiest way to deal with it is to remember your job is not to fix IT problems. Your job is to be a drone, and follow the process until the problem gets fixed. Yes, its boring, repetitive, and sometimes unnecessary. Hopefully your whole life is not your job, or else you're going to end up very dull.

    Trust me when I say that having a process is much better than having no process. No process is by far the worse option, as while you can get things done quickly, there's no filter. CEO wants the screen blue? Okay, done. 2 hours later, he wants it green. Heads will roll! Why was it changed to blue? Okay, changed to green. VP of marketing says "Green sucks! Change it to red!"...ad nausaeum. At least with the process, and knowing that changes take time to make through this process, people are less likely to waste your time in this manner.

  • Disgruntled DBA (unregistered)

    Definitely a union shop.

  • TRWTF Troll (unregistered)

    The real wtf here is that this article is complete bullshit.

  • tehdev (unregistered)

    Definitely EDS. I have to suffer from this crap on a daily basis.

  • Dan (unregistered) in reply to Crabs
    Crabs:
    Trust me when I say that having a process is much better than having no process. No process is by far the worse option, as while you can get things done quickly, there's no filter. CEO wants the screen blue? Okay, done. 2 hours later, he wants it green. Heads will roll! Why was it changed to blue? Okay, changed to green. VP of marketing says "Green sucks! Change it to red!"...ad nausaeum. At least with the process, and knowing that changes take time to make through this process, people are less likely to waste your time in this manner.

    There's a difference between a process and The Process.

  • ChrisN (unregistered) in reply to SuperousOxide

    A good bios should give you the choice.

    If your OS is of the sort that requires a reboot to recognize a keyboard, the BIOS better be able to halt the boot process until one is present.

    In other words. There are many places to fail, and each part should be able of coping with the others.

  • TInkerghost (unregistered) in reply to Jay
    I used to have a young lady working for me who I once referred to as my "henchman". She objected that she was not a "henchMAN". So I said, "Okay, how about 'henchbabe'?"
    I have been advised that the use of $peon is not acceptable when referring to people without administrative access.
  • (cs) in reply to TInkerghost
    TInkerghost:
    I used to have a young lady working for me who I once referred to as my "henchman". She objected that she was not a "henchMAN". So I said, "Okay, how about 'henchbabe'?"
    I have been advised that the use of $peon is not acceptable when referring to people without administrative access.
    I've been advised that the use of "morons" is not acceptable when referring to the user community.
  • Gup20 (unregistered)

    What can be learned from this madness? That "it is better to ask forgiveness than permission". He should have pressed F1 while the Sr Network Tech watched in horror... trying to fathom which form to fill out for unauthorized action taken on a server.

    Probably would have come under disciplinarian review for unauthorized server action, ultimately resulting in a promotion to Jr VP. They like that Go Get Em spirit.... now sit in your new office and do what your told.

  • ltburch (unregistered) in reply to danixdefcon5

    Indeed, they should be commended that it only took them a day. I can think of some organizations where something like this could languish for days while ill informed people bicker about it.

  • Simina (unregistered) in reply to Anon
    Anon:
    Anon:
    Anon:
    Rip the cord out of the key board and quickly put together my own circuit that will send the equivalent of the F1 single to the server.

    Sorry, signal

    There put a typo in your post and there is no edit facility. What do you do now?

    You put another typo in your post correcting the last typo. The customer is angry. Now what?

    Nothing, because there is no server. I'm not even sure there's a customer, either.

  • z (unregistered) in reply to x
    x:
    People who say "mentee" are the same morons who think "guestimate" and "confuzzled" are valid words too.

    What's wrong with that? They're all perfectly cromulent words.

  • Adam (unregistered)

    The Process is your friend. Any deviation to The Process is considered treason and any such deviant will be summarily executed. The Process be praised!

  • (cs)

    hey it's the guy from the Mike Cohn article in this month's Better Software:

    http://www.nxtbook.com/nxtbooks/sqe/bettersoftware0708/

    I always wondered what cave Alex dug this whackjob stock photography out of.

  • wesley0042 (unregistered) in reply to Sebastian
    Sebastian:
    The real WTF is that pressed F1 instead of requesting authorization for pressing DEL, than changing the BIOS settings to skip keyboard errors.

    If the server allows it. I had a 2000ish Dell server that had no provision for disabling "stop on error." (The problem was a fan that wasn't reporting its speed, causing the BIOS to see it as "failed.") It also never timed out, so the server could never be rebooted remotely.

  • Stiggy (unregistered) in reply to flaquito
    flaquito:
    Someone You Know:
    flaquito:
    The real WTF is that the KVM was so cheap that it didn't indicate to the server that a keyboard was hooked up even when the KVM was switched to a different server. A good KVM should always show a valid keyboard/mouse/display to a machine, no matter what the active input is.

    I'm more confused about how exactly he saw the error message on the screen if the KVM switch was switched to another computer. Shouldn't the monitor be showing the output from the computer the KVM switch is switched to?

    I assumed that they switched the KVM to the correct server after it failed to boot properly.

    Not judging by the article text:

    the article:
    Probably either "find a keyboard, plug it in, hit F1" or "turn the KVM switch, hit F1."

    Besides, what kind of cheap-ass KVM doesn't provide emulation these days? Where did they buy it? The 99c store?

    I call shenanigans!

  • (cs) in reply to Sebastian
    Sebastian:
    The real WTF is that pressed F1 instead of requesting authorization for pressing DEL, than changing the BIOS settings to skip keyboard errors.

    you'd think that a "key server" would have been properly configured in the first place to ignore keyboard errors anyway. I work in a DC, and I see this error a few times each month... rather then hit F1 I generally enter bios and just set it to ignore keyboard errors myself... but then I suppose I don't have an ignorant "senior" tech looking over my shoulder every ticket I do...

    I find it shocking just how apathetic some people can be when setting up key parts of their companies infrastructure... it's crazy almost. But hey, my job is to fix servers, that's what I do =/, i'll fix that little bit of configuration that people should have set themselves before making their servers live...

  • senoJ mailliW (unregistered) in reply to bd

    if you would like to see the very same in action...I can show you...this is all too common when someone thinks they can control everything everyone does...the controllers know they are the only ones who understand everything...so much so that they know what they do not understand...

  • (cs)

    OK, I just can't believe that someone would say "The Process be praised". Was he joking? If yes then that means he can think enough for himself that he would have just pressed F1 and be done with it. The rest would be believable I guess

  • asdasdafsdfgasdg (unregistered) in reply to IBMer with a brain

    Yes, that sounds totally like IBM

  • peon (unregistered) in reply to danixdefcon5

    You haven't worked for the government, have you?

  • Pepatti (unregistered) in reply to danixdefcon5

    I completely concur with danixdefcon5. I worked at a financial institution where a typo on the webpage had to be reported by programmers. I couldn't report it I was just a mere customer tech support rep. I notified the website programmers, and after they notified their team manager, it would go thru the Compliance department to make sure that correcting the misspelled word or typo did not some how violate some Financial law. Compliance would approve it in writing, which may cause the approval to make the correction to go thru Corporate Law who would return it to compliance who would notify the programmers that it was ok to make the corrected changes. Any correction had to be extremely specific due to all the traveling thru all these departments. Each of these departments for security & legal reasons are physically cut off from the other department, so simply finding the correct person and getting physical signatures would be far less complicated, since you could only deal with each department thru phone conversations, forms and email. Granted typos and misspelled words don't cause the tremendous waste of man hours described, but enough for each typo that slipps past editing, because we know all typos (like sex instead of six) are caught before websites are published.

    So to answer you 'no way', sorry Yes Way it sooooo could be true. I know, sad, but true.

    Keep in mind it's idiots who bring down networks by doing stupid things without thinking that cause the need for 'The Process'

  • Dan (unregistered)

    This would make the Vogons proud.

  • 5|i(3_x (unregistered)

    I can't believe the VP would want his golf game interrupted with such a trivial concern.

  • Jeff (unregistered)

    Well at least their process is documented, we have a Change Control Manager that seriously can not configure her own email. When she got divorced she made us set up a new login for her rather than just simply renaming her old one. Anyway our process for out changes while vaguely documented change on her mood. One time the 4 on my team, our leader had pissed her off. All four of our change controls were rejected they all needed more approvals from places having nothing to do with the change.

  • (cs) in reply to TRWTF Troll
    TRWTF Troll:
    The real wtf here is that this article is complete bullshit.

    Shouldn't you be playing WoW or something?

  • Russ (unregistered) in reply to Dan
    Dan:
    SuperousOxide:
    flaquito:
    The real WTF is that the KVM was so cheap that it didn't indicate to the server that a keyboard was hooked up even when the KVM was switched to a different server. A good KVM should always show a valid keyboard/mouse/display to a machine, no matter what the active input is.

    And a good BIOS shouldn't fail to boot just because there's no keyboard there.

    Maybe, but Windows (2000 and possibly beyond) will not load a keyboard or mouse driver (and therefore no mouse pointer either) if it doesn't detect them at bootup. So you're still stuck with a mostly nonfunctional computer.

    BS. A lot of computers in hosting facilities don't have a keyboard hooked up. Although probably not running anything as ancient as win2k, but still. There's a bios setting in most (all?) BIOSes that tell sit to ignore keyboard errors. It probably just wasn't set here.

  • Russ (unregistered) in reply to wesley0042
    wesley0042:
    Sebastian:
    The real WTF is that pressed F1 instead of requesting authorization for pressing DEL, than changing the BIOS settings to skip keyboard errors.

    If the server allows it. I had a 2000ish Dell server that had no provision for disabling "stop on error." (The problem was a fan that wasn't reporting its speed, causing the BIOS to see it as "failed.") It also never timed out, so the server could never be rebooted remotely.

    You did have the server under warranty right? In that case you should've called them and have them swap out the fan and the motherboard for good measure.

  • Corey (unregistered)

    I think the real WTF must be that the BIOS says essentially keyboard missing - press a key to continue.

    I could be convinced that the computer should not start without some sort of input device, but not if this is a server room.

    Or maybe the real WTF is that the KVM switch/computer interface doesn't act as if a keyboard is connected when the switch is set to a different machine.

  • Brandon M (unregistered)

    When I was in the USAF in the mid-90's I worked at a base that had a custom-built GIS-like app on top of our mapping system. HPCs created the system, and it was approved by the PHBs, but it was a total POS. Luckily, one of the structural engineers in our building loved to pror, so it was rewritten entirely by a structural engineer with a lot of free time who liked to program. Any changes we wanted him to make required the approval of only a few people who actually used the system.

    Despite the fact it had been originally created by someone else, our engineer took a lot of pride in breathing life into this project. It gave him a new found sense of purpose and pride that can be hard to find in government service. He was happy for several years...

    ...until some PHBs snagged it in an initiative to identify and protect major information system resources by burying them deep within The Process. What used to be enjoyable weekly coding exercises for him turned into pure frustration. The Process demanded justification for every minor change. The meetings were held monthly by people who had never even seen the application. Because it wasn't fun or practical anymore, development completely stopped.

    The sad part is that the real resource wasn't the application at all... it was the person behind the scenes who made it work, kept it functional and relevant, gave it life. He bowed out of the development process and focused his attentions back to calculating loads on columns and beams.

    The Process: 1 Humans: 0

  • v.dog (unregistered)

    You thinks that's bad, you should hear their poetry. It's the third worst in the universe.

  • Brandon M (unregistered) in reply to Brandon M
    Brandon M:
    Luckily, one of the structural engineers in our building loved to pror, so it was rewritten entirely by a structural engineer with a lot of free time who liked to program.

    WTF? Edit failed. Retrying...

    Fixed:
    Luckily, one of the structural engineers in our building loved to program.
  • Likin' Languj (unregistered) in reply to x
    x:
    The senior tech returned to talk to Clyde, who he now thought of as his mentee.
    God damn.

    It's "apprentice" or, better, "protégé".

    People who say "mentee" are the same morons who think "guestimate" and "confuzzled" are valid words too.

    Ain't lernin' 'bout langwage the most funnest!

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonce_word Nonce words frequently arise through the combination of an existing word with a familiar prefix or suffix, in order to meet a particular need (or as a joke). The result is a special kind of pseudoword: although it would not be found in any dictionary, it is instantly comprehensible. If the need recurs, nonce words easily enter regular use (initially as neologisms) just because their meaning is obvious.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudoword

    An' prolly most importantly for you: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joke

  • arrrrgggggg! (unregistered)

    i'd resign

  • Mr. Mentor (unregistered) in reply to x
    x:
    The senior tech returned to talk to Clyde, who he now thought of as his mentee.
    God damn.

    It's "apprentice" or, better, "protégé".

    People who say "mentee" are the same morons who think "guestimate" and "confuzzled" are valid words too.

    http://www.answers.com/mentee

  • Mr.'; Drop Database -- (unregistered) in reply to Disgruntled DBA
    Disgruntled DBA:
    Definitely a union shop.
    Yep. This kind of beauracracy is a work-avoidance technique put in place by unions.
  • Frolicious (unregistered) in reply to danixdefcon5
    You haven't worked in big-iron sites, have you?

    Some of these "change requests" sometimes involved trivial things like "service something stop; service something start", but nothing is allowed to be done outside the change process.

    Process doesn't have to mean an absence of common sense.

    I work at a place with a heck of a lot of big iron, and indeed most changes require half a mile of red tape and the signatures of six upper managers. That is, changes to working code. If something breaks, though, we have this wonderful thing called a "retrospective change request", which means that the admins can go ahead and implement simple fixes, and worry about the bureaucracy later.

    I thought it was like that everywhere. Are there really places that institutionalize stupidity?

  • MadJo (unregistered)

    Actually I'm not surprised by this story... Recently I had something similar. For a program I needed to test I had to put an empty text file on a server. Turned out I didn't have authorization to that server, so I asked the designer, who didn't have write access. Then I went to the developer of the code that checked for that file in that location, he didn't have write access to it either. Went to the maintenance guys, they too could not put the file there. Went to server hosting, surprisingly they too could not put files in that specific location.

    It had to be done by an outside company. But before I had found that out, I had wasted a lot of my own time... now the check is done in a database, where we do have write access. The designer hadn't considered file rights issues when he designed it, and the developer didn't feel the need to check.

  • pmv (unregistered)

    I think they left of the part about having to file a bug showing that a key press could not be generated by staring at the screen, and suggesting a business analysis of company wide keyboard use needed to be done to access 'keypress impact'.

    Once that was done and approved by 1 director and at least 1 vp (from any department), a change order for keyboard use could be filed with accounting to take into account when calculating depreciation schedules for said hardware. This would then spawn a change order taken up at the weekly change order review meeting (with a subsequent request to elevate the change order to an emergency change order), along with 2 more rounds of approval.

    Finally the change could be scheduled on a following weekday, noc consulted to monitor the reboot, the change order closed, the bug marked fixed, and the machine whose only job it was to index change orders in the local database rebooted. Unphased by the process, the tech who finally flipped the kvm switch entered rehab 6 months after completing the various departmental post-mortem reviews that led him/her to start experimenting with heroin.

    Process is a life sucking vehicle that should be used sparingly or not at all.

  • pmv (unregistered) in reply to Mr.'; Drop Database --

    No offense but you do know programmers and it staff can't unionize don't you? I believe they're still considered 'munitions' much like air traffic controllers and defense contractors. Unless congress has rescinded that law , but I don't think so.

Leave a comment on “Slaves to The Process”

Log In or post as a guest

Replying to comment #:

Log Out

« Return to Article