Except that when they eat up the budget "addressing" non-existent risk, you
remain very open to real risks.

It is worth it to try to manage that discussion in a way that will get you
some more leverage and better allocation of funds.

-ASB: http://XeeSM.com/AndrewBaker


On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 2:15 PM, Steven Peck <[email protected]> wrote:

> Risk is what your management decides it is.
>
> On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 10:44 AM, Jeff Cain <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > I don’t think it’s worth it, especially if you’ve had little to no issues
> in
> > the past.
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> >
> >
> > Jeff Cain – [email protected]
> >
> > Technical Support Analyst
> >
> >
> >
> > Sunbelt Software, part of the GFI Software family
> >
> > www.sunbeltsoftware.com
> >
> > Tel: 1-877-757-4094
> >
> > Fax: +1 727-562-3402
> >
> >
> >
> > From: Holstrom, Don [mailto:[email protected]]
> > Sent: Monday, July 19, 2010 1:40 PM
> > To: NT System Admin Issues
> > Subject: RE: Do you all like fewer or more servers?
> >
> >
> >
> > I have liked SuperMicro blades for the past six or seven years but I am
> > being told to go with Dell for the warrantees and the like. I know Dell
> is
> > two or three times more expensive, is this worth it?
> >
> >
> >
> > From: Ziots, Edward [mailto:[email protected]]
> > Sent: Monday, July 19, 2010 11:27 AM
> > To: NT System Admin Issues
> > Subject: RE: Do you all like fewer or more servers?
> >
> >
> >
> > Maybe get rid of the “CISCO” apps. We are using blades with ESX and its
> > working quite nicely… Actually the blades are performing as good if not
> > better than the stand alone DL 580’s we have for other ESX servers.
> >
> >
> >
> > Z
> >
> >
> >
> > Edward E. Ziots
> >
> > CISSP, Network +, Security +
> >
> > Network Engineer
> >
> > Lifespan Organization
> >
> > Email:[email protected] <email%[email protected]>
> >
> > Cell:401-639-3505
> >
> >
> >
> > From: Maglinger, Paul [mailto:[email protected]]
> > Sent: Monday, July 19, 2010 11:25 AM
> > To: NT System Admin Issues
> > Subject: RE: Do you all like fewer or more servers?
> >
> >
> >
> > We tried to go with server consolidation years ago (before VM was
> popular)
> > and kept running into issues with applications fighting with each other
> on
> > the same machines (particularly Cisco products).  Now that we’re playing
> > with VM and looking into blade servers, we’re looking at it again.  Not a
> > surprise, we find that there are yet Cisco applications that they
> recommend
> > stay on their own blade. *sigh*
> >
> >
> >
> > From: Holstrom, Don [mailto:[email protected]]
> > Sent: Monday, July 19, 2010 8:54 AM
> > To: NT System Admin Issues
> > Subject: Do you all like fewer or more servers?
> >
> >
> >
> > I only have a hundred users. Been doing this for about 12 years. I always
> > thought it was better to have more or less one major server per service.
> > That way, if one of our services came down or needed work, I wouldn’t be
> > taking down the entire system. I have a buddy with fewer users than me
> and
> > he has 20+ servers. Some in the air (virtual), some on the ground. I have
> > seven servers running. Both of us host our web services at an outside
> firm.
> > Both of us use Exchange. An outside firm says we should go with only a
> > couple of servers. That sure would make things easier, but…
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ...
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
> ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/>  ~
>
>

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/>  ~

Reply via email to