
Ask HN: IT Director is forcing Microsoft in, how to stop? - stop_themadness
Please hear me out before you dismiss this as a Microsoft hate piece, it is not. I have no problems with companies that chose to use Microsoft for their needs. That&#x27;s not what is happening here.<p>The problem is, this particular individual is trying <i>really</i> hard to force it in the building.  The reason I am suspicious is I had this exact situation like this happen at my previous large corp, where the CTO received kickbacks from IBM in order to switch us to 100% full IBM tech stack.<p>Similarly, Microsoft really seems like it is being forced in, against many of the developers wishes, most of us are using Macs and open source software to do our development (the primary tools are NodeJS, Go, and our legacy is in PHP). This also has the side effect of killing our company culture. Our DevOps team was used to deploying easy, prebuilt binaries (in the case of Go), or familiar with our PHP deployment strategies, and we used AWS for our infrastructure and now we have complicated Windows Server and  .NET deployments. We have had a rush of .NET Contractors come in and implement things then hit the door (I am assuming so this director can build the case of -- &quot;Look we have all this software now that relies on .NET!&quot;) and we also have noticed some sketchy behavior in editing Developer&#x27;s HR profiles on what languages they originally said they were proficient in -- Many developers are now all of a sudden &quot;proficient&quot; in C# -- I noticed this too on my profile (again, nothing against C#, but I specifically removed C# from my LinkedIn and Resume so I would stop getting .NET-related jobs)<p>TL;DR: I am 90-99% sure that a higher-up IT Director is most likely also receiving kick-backs from Microsoft for bringing all these Microsoft tools in the building (over the course of months, we went from almost no Microsoft products to half our dev teams are now using the full suite of Microsoft dev + biz tools). Is there anything I can do I stop this?<p>Thank you
======
matt_s
Kickbacks are most likely not the case. Why would a billions of dollars a year
in profit company need to pay people to adopt tech? It is highly unethical and
probably a fire-able offense for a sales person at a US company to bribe (aka
kickback) potential customers to buy their stuff. Think about that for a
minute.

Just like you and your peers have a culture of liking Open Source, macs, etc.
he/she likely has a strong bias (culture?) towards Microsoft solution stack.

See if you can get some time on the persons calendar and ask open ended
questions about the shift in technology. Rewriting an entire product or
changing an IT stack from one tech to another is costly, even more so if 50%
of the staff turn-over.

* Does management see this as cheaper?

* Do they value having a vendor they can call and an SLA support contract? Lots of large companies like this - "you can't be wrong in picking IBM" is a joke phrase for a reason.

* Is there some vision they have where they were convinced some tech will enable it? I've seen this too, they get convinced of some new way of doing things by consultants for a company, which comes along with using that companies tech stack. But mgmt doesn't care about the tech stack they care about how it can help the business.

* Does this person view Open Source tech like Node, Go, PHP as "amateur hour"? They could have a strong bias of using stuff from name brand companies.

It probably boils down to the IT Director having a different world-view than
you and other devs.

~~~
le-mark
> Kickbacks are most likely not the case. Why would a billions of dollars a
> year in profit company need to pay people to adopt tech?

A lot of comments here echo this sentiment and yeah, it's not Microsoft, but
there are plenty of shady Gold Partners and Solutions Providers out there, as
well as shady execs purchasing tech for companies.

I saw a company once hire a VP of IT who came in, fired most all the java devs
(it was a java shop) and mandated .net. That was a dumpster fire, spectacular
failure, company went under. The company was in trouble anyway, and .net
transition was part of a bid to turn it all around. I always suspected that
guy got kickbacks for the ms server and sql server licenses, but never knew
for sure.

~~~
matt_s
Ok so something like a buddy has a "Gold Partner" reseller license or
something, IT exec is partnered behind the scenes financially. Then goes to
JavaShopCo, becomes IT Director and mandates .Net, from the reseller they have
a financial stake in, and profits from it.

That's shady and probably violates JavaShopCo's ethics rules, but people that
would do that won't care.

------
gesman
Single vendor driven solution for all stacks (at least with Microsoft being
the vendor) is more scaleable and easier to manage and support than shuffling
multitude of open source fragments and solutions all over the enterprise.

If it's not a mom-n-pop shop trying to save pennies and dimes - it makes sense
from CTO standpoint.

~~~
stop_themadness
I've read multiple articles here describing single stack solutions as being a
pipe dream. In the rare cases where they were successful, you need majority
company buy-in. This is clearly not the case here, where this ramming-in of
.NET and VS and Windows servers are causing massive fractures with our senior
devs. Many are now resorting to doing P.O.Cs to show we are just fine without
the Microsoft products.

Additionally, this actually harms our recruiting efforts, because the majority
of senior C# devs are accounted for in this town, as they work for the larger
3 corps in the city's downtown district.

------
SirLJ
If you have SLAs with your customers, it would be pretty much mission critical
to have SLAs with your vendors as well, open source is great until you are
stuck in the middle of the night with a major system down and no vendor
support...

~~~
quickthrower2
You could pay for some kind of 24/7 linux / nodejs infrastructure support if
needed I'm sure.

And if you are talking about bugfixes. Microsoft? That .Net or OS bug ain't
gonna be fixed in a hurry just for your lil' shop.

~~~
SirLJ
You might be surprised about what the big corporations will do for their
preferred clients...

------
paulcole
The fastest solution is to publicly accuse a higher up of receiving kickbacks
from Microsoft with no proof. I 100% guarantee you won't have the problem of
working at a company where Microsoft is being forced in any longer.

~~~
stop_themadness
ok smart alec, how do you get proof? should I hire a P.I?

~~~
paulcole
No, you either keep your mouth shut or find a new job.

------
zunzun
I worked at a large natural gas company in the US where the MS sales reps had
accurately analysed the IT director to have Imposter Syndrome causing
professional insecurity. By taking the IT director out to lunches - away from
everyone else - and letting this person know what a smart choice they were
making, how wonderful the .NET platform was, etc. they were able to persuade
the company via this person to redesign _all_ internal software from scratch
using MS's UML design and coding tools. You might be in a similar situation,
where the kickbacks are social and emotional rather than financial.

~~~
gesman
Separating decision maker away from distracting and legacy-invested
lieutenants is wise approach and a win by itself to have a focused
conversation.

------
UK-AL
I doubt its a kickback.

It's probably a more strategic decision to standardise on one stack.

------
rakshithbekal
I don't think this is how businesses work. Its like trying to get a teacher to
not teach a certain lesson because you don't want to learn it. Aren't they
paying you to do a job? Not the other way around. If you have problems
adapting they might consider someone else who'd do your job instead, is it
worth putting your career at risk because youre not comfortable with change?

~~~
stop_themadness
You completely missed the point of the post. In no way shape or form do our
dev's, including I feel like we couldn't use C# if we had to. The problem is
the having to part seems abnormal, and against our company culture, and
counterintuitive. We deal with change on a constant basis, so no, I am fine
with change. I want the change to be rational, however.

------
eip
Time to find another job.

------
cm2012
It's almost certainly not kickbacks driving this.

~~~
stop_themadness
Then why are shady tactics being resorted to?

------
NetStrikeForce
Very strong accusations here. If you have any proof, let Microsoft know. They
don't take fraud and corruption kindly.

------
29052017
Could it be that this is all a figment of your imagination?

Think about it. Can you prove that your current CTO is getting kickbacks? If
not, then is it fair for you to talk aloud without having any evidence for
your case?

Imagine what would happen if you start this kind of Gossip in your office. May
degrade the culture that you value so much.

Now, the CTO seems to be doing what he is supposed to do. I am sure if you
were the CTO, you would have wanted your favorite stack to be adopted by as
many people under you as possible. Or it could be just that in the grand plan,
eventually everyone in your company would have to move on to a single stack.

Maybe your reluctance to MS Stack comes from lack of sufficient knowledge of
the stack and the resulting fear of unknown if you are forced onto the stack.

My simple advice to you my friend is this : Don't spread rumors in your
workplace based on biases or prejudices and if you don't like the way in which
company is headed, you should look elsewhere for places where you will feel
better in line with company's vision and its policies.

~~~
ajmurmann
"I am sure if you were the CTO, you would have wanted your favorite stack to
be adopted by as many people under you as possible."

I find this to be a very dangerous attitude and inappropriate for a mature
professional like you would expect a CTO to be. Every technology stack had its
pros and cons and which one is right for the job depends on so much context a
large part of which is what your team is experienced with and what you already
have in place. To move to a entirely different stack that the team is not used
to requires do pretty solid reasons. Personal preference especially by someone
who doesn't even touch the code should not be one of those.

