Perhaps that's a case for corporate Windows 8. Metro for corp-email/documents
Regular Windows for doing actual dev work They can control my Metro environment all they like. It's already basically locked down. On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 10:42 AM, Grant Molloy <[email protected]> wrote: > I think putting dev's in vm's is a bit a55 about. I work in them at > current and also in previous job, and have always been issues, mainly > having to wait for vm. > > They gave me a nice big pd with a quad core with 8gb of ram. Then they > installed the corporate image on it. Windows XP 32 bit.. Thanks! Money > well spent! > > Server services commissioned the vm with soe server image, and said "there > you go. We'll do support until you install anything on it!". So you crack > it open, install notepad++, and you're not supported. > > I've always argued for the soe as a vm, and let me as a developer use the > hardware you've paid for. After all the soe is for email and office > documents! Give me Norton Ghost and some storage and my physical pc setup > will be just as convenient as a backed up vm image. > On 21/11/2011 11:57 AM, "Ken Schaefer" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> A virtualised environment, or separate physical environment, can be used >> for development purposes. Though I would still hesitate to give developers >> full admin rights on their actual "work" PC. I.e. you have a regular user >> account for handling email, browsing the web etc., but then you have access >> to separate environment (or set of machines) that you can have admin >> privileges on for doing development work. >> >> Cheers >> Ken >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] >> On Behalf Of Arjang Assadi >> Sent: Saturday, 19 November 2011 5:36 AM >> To: ozDotNet >> Subject: Re: [Friday OT] unstoppable force meets an immovable object, >> >> Damn good counter point. I guess the two cannot exist together, maybe >> having a separate physically isolated network only for developers to get >> the job done and then installing the result on the test machine can keep >> both happy. >> >> On 19 November 2011 01:06, Ken Schaefer <[email protected]> wrote: >> > On the other hand, you just head over to the sysadmin lists and see the >> admins complaining about how much time is consumed supporting developers >> who get their machines compromised or otherwise borked. Putting >> unauthorised networks into an environment is a huge no-no in my book. Most >> developers do not have the skills or the knowledge to secure a network, let >> alone know what regulatory/audit requirements the business has. Then, if >> there is a compromise and corporate IP is stolen, customer information >> stolen etc. due to ingress via an unauthorized network, who is going to >> take the rap? >> > >> >
