Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Businesses Communications Technology

Managing Personal Electronics and Software In the Workplace 387

Posted by timothy
from the sterility-vs.-chaos dept.
darien writes "Last night Symantec hosted a round-table discussion on the topic of consumer devices in the workplace. John Brigden, Symantec's senior VP for EMEA, pointed out that regardless of the policies businesses may lay down, individuals will always try to use their favorite gadgets and websites at work. Reminds me of when I worked in IT support: no matter how many times we told users they weren't allowed to install ICQ, or to connect their personal laptops to the corporate network, they insisted on doing it. Frequently they even asked us to help them do it."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Managing Personal Electronics and Software In the Workplace

Comments Filter:
  • ISeekYou (Score:4, Funny)

    by negRo_slim (636783) <mils_oRgen@hotmail.com> on Tuesday September 30, 2008 @12:06PM (#25205603)

    No matter how many times we told users they weren't allowed to install ICQ

    Ahhh, 1998 was a great year, wasn't it?

  • Hmm (Score:3, Funny)

    by LizardKing (5245) on Tuesday September 30, 2008 @12:09PM (#25205645)

    Looking around my desk I see the following electronic widgets that are mine rather than the companies:

    A pair of DEC Shark computers.
    A Sparc based luggable.
    Coffee percolator.
    Blender.

    As long as I got them checked out for electrical safety the system support people here were fine with it, and this is nothing as compared to some of the stuff I saw at a big dot.com that likes exclamation marks. One guy had a pinball machine in his cube, and another had a large tropical fish bubbling away while percolators were everywhere.

  • by khasim (1285) <brandioch.conner@gmail.com> on Tuesday September 30, 2008 @12:17PM (#25205765)

    And resisting it is mostly just frustrating everyone.

    Now, I'm not saying you have to support every oddball app on the planet. I would recommend you have an 'approved software' list, and back that software up with support. Saying 'that is not supported, use this' is far better than locking things down, from my experience.

    Good luck with that.

    Since you seem to believe that setting one limit is unenforceable, why do you believe that setting a different limit is enforceable?

    You cannot use IM app X because:
    a. You are not allowed to use IM at work.
    b. You are only allowed to use IM app Y (which does not connect to the service you want to use).

    And, from TFA:

    Unless companies are prepared to lock down their systems in unprecedented ways - or otherwise radically reconceive their computing operations - this accelerating, unmanaged influx of new devices and services is going to force IT departments into a reactive role.

    Why do so many people see "No" as "reactive"? You can evaluate new technology and new products and determine that they present security issues that outweigh their benefits.

    In just about every other aspect of business this would be a non-issue. You don't allow people to replace the phone system with their own phone that is incompatible with your PBX but it's okay because they can just call the phone company and run a POTS line to their cubicle.

    While they wait for that, they'll fire up a deep fryer in their cubicle and make up a batch of donuts for everyone.

  • DEC, Sparc? (Score:3, Funny)

    by NotQuiteReal (608241) on Tuesday September 30, 2008 @12:18PM (#25205781) Journal
    Damn, your userid is old too.
  • by ccguy (1116865) * on Tuesday September 30, 2008 @12:56PM (#25206303) Homepage
    Please click here. [wikipedia.org]
  • by nabsltd (1313397) on Tuesday September 30, 2008 @01:47PM (#25207017)

    I assume the 20 minutes you spent writing this post was on your break and not listed on your timesheet as "continuing technical education".

Those who can, do; those who can't, simulate.

Working...