<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Virtualization tightening the IT job market?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/server-virtualization/virtualization-tightening-the-it-job-market/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/server-virtualization/virtualization-tightening-the-it-job-market/</link>
	<description>A SearchServerVirtualization.com blog</description>
	<pubDate>Sat, 28 Nov 2009 10:36:24 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Scott B</title>
		<link>http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/server-virtualization/virtualization-tightening-the-it-job-market/#comment-1376</link>
		<dc:creator>Scott B</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Apr 2008 23:00:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://servervirtualization.blogs.techtarget.com/2008/03/31/virtualization-tightening-the-it-job-market/#comment-1376</guid>
		<description>This is a disaster waiting to happen.  Virtualization is about empowering your IT staff not to replace them.  If you think the reason you need IT staff is because the number of physical host servers you have, you are dead wrong.  Bakerman, especially, treating server-level applications as if they were desktops is doing his company a great disservice.  Is he not a specialist for &lt;em&gt;all &lt;/em&gt;applications running within his company?  I seriously doubt that to be the case.  Virtualization should not affect staffing in this way and I challenge &lt;em&gt;any &lt;/em&gt;company to show me a case where this is not a short-sighted, ill-fated business model.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is a disaster waiting to happen.  Virtualization is about empowering your IT staff not to replace them.  If you think the reason you need IT staff is because the number of physical host servers you have, you are dead wrong.  Bakerman, especially, treating server-level applications as if they were desktops is doing his company a great disservice.  Is he not a specialist for &lt;em&gt;all &lt;/em&gt;applications running within his company?  I seriously doubt that to be the case.  Virtualization should not affect staffing in this way and I challenge &lt;em&gt;any &lt;/em&gt;company to show me a case where this is not a short-sighted, ill-fated business model.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
<!-- dynamic -->