Will You Bring Your Own PC To Work?
from the changing-times dept
People often have emotional attachments with their computers, even if that computer is supplied by their employers. Going one step beyond the concept of telecommuting and the so-called commoditization of IT, some are wondering if a few years from now, people will be expected to bring their own computers to work, the same way they're expected to drive their own cars to work. And, if that's the case, what will it mean for the traditional role of the IT staffer who used to have to get you set up with your computer and help you troubleshoot when things weren't working properly? The article suggests it may mean fewer IT jobs, since they won't have to manager purchasing new machines and applications. However, it could mean a shift of those jobs towards the new problem: making all of those different PC configurations work together properly. Of course, that seems like an opportunity as well. If things really do progress in this manner, there will be a greater need for automation tools that can help configure a machine to work within a specific corporate network environment.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
why?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: why?
This doesn't make any sense.
I don't bring my own telephone or other equipment requirement to do my job to work.
My brother is required to travel extensively for Eastman Kodak ... they provide him a company car for his transportation needs.
And as aNonMooseCowherd points out, the cost of supporting a multitude of different PC's that the employees choose will make this cost prohibitive.
When my employer pays for my laptop then he can install his shitty software packages.
Until then, my computers, paid for by me will not be used for the companies benefit.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No Subject Given
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: No Subject Given
Also, if more applications become web-based (as they are), then it shouldn't much matter what kind of computer people use, as they'll just need a web browser to connect.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Good Idea, but too soon.
This is already happening with mobiles...some people get a company-issued one and some people use their own for both.
Thus I think what will drive this is the further power/convergence of mobiles and PCs. And that will take more than five years.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No Subject Given
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
We're getting there. Sort of.
256MB Flash drive
USB Hub (for said flash drive, she was out of USB ports)
PCCard for 802.11B access.
She had been making backups of data on CDRW, but the speed of the media and the drive meant that it was slow going. Plus, every now and then she'd have to reformat the CDRW to start over again. Not so with the flash drive. It was fast enough to be a usefull media, not just backup.
And the PCCard was used mostly at home, but considering the amount of work that she did with it, I'm quite surprised that they didn't buy one for her.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: We're getting there. Sort of.
Bryan,
With all due respect, they did not buy her one because she was willing to purchase one herself.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No Subject Given
I think whoever wrote this article took one to many hits from the utopian IT pipe.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: No Subject Given
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
we do
I suppose if I were wiser, I would set up an ethernet segment that was firewalled from the main network specifically for untrusted machines to connect to.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Its not the computer.
Businesses would LIKE to shift the cost center that is IT onto someone else, but software costs, possible violations of the firewall, employees taking data home, and then the 'waste of employers time' stuff on machines will all be factors making such a prediction the exception and not the rule.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
So am I behind the times or ahead of the curve?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's starting
This way, you are responsible for your own device, and the company no longer has to support it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
exactly the problem
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: exactly the problem
Once the hosts can fend for themselves, and once I have a mechanisim to ensure that every host has this (anit-vir soft or whatever) before it's allowed fully on the network, then I no longer care...
So, say this: To connect to BigXYZ corp network, you must have:
1) XYZ anti-vir with sig files of date x or above.
2) Browser level XYZ or above
3) A citrix client of XYZ or above
4) Email client that uses protocol X
and, of course, the proper authentication credentials for the various back end systems. Beyond that, I could care less where you PC comes from; if it came from Corporate IT, then you can get support from Corp; if not, you're on your own (once connectivity is verified).
Simple. Clean. Makes everybody happy. Doesn't require Corp to do anything they shouldn't already be doing (not just building, but als verifiying proper level on hosts).
So, what's the debate again?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: exactly the problem
It's hard enough securing managed assets, but when you have systems where users have full administrative access it's impossible to adequately safeguard them because all they care about is "ease of use," not "security of corporate infrastructure." And that attitude goes all the way to the top.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]