Ask HN: Is control over your work computer important for you? | Hacker News Reader

Ask HN: Is control over your work computer important for you?

2 pointsisoprophlex5 comments

How important is it for you to have control over the computer and operating system you use for work?

Are you happy to accept a token closed-down Windows box that's managed for you, or do you prefer to run and maintain your own customized win/mac/linux machine?

Do you feel that your preference gives you a definite productivity or ergonomy boost, or do you think you could do your job either way?

I'm asking because at work, the security office is overhauling a long-standing set of security practices, which might force a group of ~40 data engineers and scientists to abandon their mac and linux laptops. This is causing annoyance for many, including myself.

I'm curious to learn if I'm being unreasonably spoiled in my desire for owning and controlling my work machine. I would be interested in learning other's opinion on balancing corporate security demands against personal preferences.

View on HN

I try to be dispassionate about such things.

If I don't own shared or options in the company, and the company wants to hinder it's developers in the name of security, I'll voice my concerns, and then adapt to the new rules. If I own stock or options in the company, this lost productivity will factor into my long-term expectations for the company. If I think that the diminished developer productivity is going to sink the company, I'll jump ship to a new company.

Another factor is personal growth. If a company brings in security restrictions that make it impossible to do my job, such that I'm sitting around all day waiting for IT to approve my IDE installer, then I might feel that I'm not able to advance my career, as I'll have no projects to show off.

On the other hand, if everyone at the company is equally hindered by security restrictions, then it might be an opportunity to get really efficient at jumping through hoops, and delivering productivity where others fail.

Thanks for the thoughtful reply...

If this goes through, I'm hoping we'll be able to retain enough good people that are willing to jump through hoops like you say. It's a nice way of framing the problem, thanks for that.

My 2c: resign.

Many companies fail to appreciate that developers have different needs for their computer.

It starts with the platform: everyone has to run the standard OS. And then the group policies start locking everything down so it's easier for IT to manage a 1000 instances of the same thing. You lose administrator access, and can only install approved applications. Then you get the standard hardware, with minimal RAM, minimal screen real-estate, and cheap storage. And then you get moved to a cloud-hosted standard PC image with a Wyse thin client.

If you can stop it now, do. Otherwise, polish your resume. Life's too short.

(Bitter? Moi? Nah ...)

Thanks for sharing your thoughts, this is exactly the prevalent sentiment. Nice to know we're not alone in our fears of getting locked down handicapped machines.

That your company wants to control your PC is understandable.

What is less understandable is that they are not making you happy.

They should deliver you a controlled laptop until you agree to work with their configuration, not the other way around.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com