Are networking and system admin jobs usually looked down on as "slow status?" I've heard from someone, "business types don't respect network guys. They think that anyone pulling a cable must be a monkey and is worth 10 bucks an hour."
Any truth to this?
>>17596321
I'd respect them if they wouldn't be so fucking goddamn lazy pieces of shit.
My place it took them a fucking WEEK to set up a new associate's computer properly, and they couldn't even come to the room and do it proper but via phone and remote desktop.
Yet every time I walk in the IT office they just play vidya or watch the latest episode of whatever's "in" the moment.
I can count the number of decent IT personel on one hand.
I've heard that the problem with IT is that it's viewed as maintenance and companies grudgingly accepting it's needed, but are always looking for ways to cut costs or contract out the work because it doesn't "add value" to the company.
Depends on how modern the company is and how reliant they are on IT infrastructure, but yes they're typically bottom of the barrel.
If you don't like it then work for a Managed/Professional Services company. Instead of being a cost center you'll become the actual product.
i'm not an IT person, but what I hear is that networking people quit a lot because their jobs are hard and thankless. and if you're a non-network admin you're constantly forced to use software that dipshit non-technical management chose without having any clue what they're doing.
that's what keeps me away. management will always be frustrated that they need computer people, they don't understand why things won't "just work" (spoiler: it's their own fucktarded choice to use windows instead of redhat-like), but I don't perceive any particular disrespect.