I encounter many problems every day where I work. Some of them I can't find the answer to, and eventually some of them get posted on Superuser by myself.

Of course, I don't bother mentioning I'm actually finding the answer so I can provide "corporate IT support", but I've been wondering - why is that I must hide the fact my question is one that I have as a technician?

Or, maybe a different way of asking - what actually does make a question specific to corporate computers or corporate networks? Of course, questions that are related to servers/ADs/DCs belong on Server Fault, but what about other questions that are taking place in a corporate IT environment?

  • 1
    I can't ever remember VTCing a question cause it was corporate IT support specific - though I've on occasion asked sf if they wanted a question. In short, you don't need to, and if it isn't a question for SF, and it involves computers, hardware and software you didn't write yourself, it probably belongs here.
    – Journeyman Geek Mod
    Commented Nov 12, 2013 at 23:57

1 Answer 1


questions that are related to servers/ADs/DCs belong on Server Fault

Uh, no. Not always. Just those used in a professional environment.

E.g. I got a Dell poweredge R300. A nice 1U high 19 inch server with a Xeon CPU, full DRAC etc etc. It is a home playbox and thus is excluded by "and it is not about…" "Anything in a home or development environment"

Vice versa a iPod (either from apple or what the public identifies as a google based Ipad (android tablet) can very much be topic for [SF] when it is used in a coorporate setting.

So I would focus less on the devices and more on their context.

The same is true for Active Directory (AD)'s, Domain controllers, plain end user hardware (the desktops which you manage as admin) etc. etc.

Or slightly less concrete:

  • When on [SF] I assume that there are backups. And they those are tested. And that there is spare hardware or that new hardware can be replaced rapidly (E.g. due to 4h support contracts). I also assume time is a factor. Playing around for a day or two to get a setup working is not worth it if you can just toss a single new desktop at it.
  • When on [SU] or other sites this is usually the reverse. Time is cheap. Deadlines are often personal ones. Getting a old system working might not be economical but it might be fun (e.g. installing win98 on a P1 is fun, but insane for corporate environments). Or running XP is an option.

as to the "why is that I must hide the fact my question is one that I have as a technician?".

You do not need to hide it. If you, as a technician, have a problem in a professional context and you have taking the steps any professional would have then there is quite a good change that your question is valid on [SF].

  • I guess my question is what's the technological difference between my AD in my home office and the one in my server room at work? They both do the exact same thing, they are just scaled differently.
    – user201262
    Commented Nov 12, 2013 at 19:47
  • 2
    @Moses: There is no technological difference, but answers might (and should) factor in risks that are involved with the proposed solution. Also, approaches might differ depending on if you have only a single DC or an array of them. Commented Nov 12, 2013 at 20:23

You must log in to answer this question.