I've done the dual sysadmin/developer thing for a small company, and the problem I experienced there was completely incompatible working modes.
Sysadmins must deal with interrupts (requests, crises, things driven by external schedules etc) and then in the rest of their time build systems to manage or reduce the interrupts. Developers are expected to produce work on a predictable schedule. This is disrupted by interrupts and obliterates the schedule for proactive work unless your management is very good at making it a priority.
The "prevention of information services" problem is certainly real though. Perhaps it could be addressed by embedding the sysadmins in the dev teams rather than having a department of their own, but then you have to fight org hierarchy.
I had exactly the same experience at a previous employer, almost word-for-word.
Having said that, the central assertion is still correct: the absolute best developers I've ever worked with were also top-tier sysadmins (or linux experts, depending on what you want to call it).
AMEN!!! In my current job, I am wearing both hats, and while I like that there is a certain variety in my work, users calling for help is highly disruptive when programming or doing some other stuff that requires deep focus.
The upside that in a three-person IT department there is very little bureaucracy to fight, just the odd "organically grown" legacy system.
As an aside, did you know that the word "Amen" actually is a acronym in the Jewish language that means "El melekh neʾeman" (or AMN) which translates to "God, trustworthy King". (source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amen)
I figured the etymology of that word was rather interesting. But yeah, I get the whole SysAd/Dev dual job. They're tough to balance and do effectively. SysAds are firefighters. When the nag(ios) alarm rings, we come a-callin.
> As an aside, did you know that the word "Amen" actually is a acronym in the Jewish language that means "El melekh neʾeman" (or AMN) which translates to "God, trustworthy King". (source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amen)
The fact is that nobody really knows. Talmud was written in ~200 BC and is an exegesis. Egypt is the elephant in the room of Hebraic history. It is possible it is an Egyptian loan word just like Moses -- "born" from water -- is an Egyptian name.
I've been in this situation for a long time; The worst part is every so often you get assigned a PM who wants you to accept responsibility for meeting artificial development deadlines.
Developers IMO benefit greatly from having the general engineering experience. This helps understand how the part they build fits in a full product, where the narrow spots are, what is likely to break first, where formal documentation is insufficient / contradictory / wrong, etc.
Sysadmins, who often manage crises, acquire this experience way or another (e.g, by researching options to fit a square peg in a round hole without leaks), so developers with sysadmin experience tend to all have it. I think though that the key part is the "engineer" part and it can be acquired and used without sysadmin-imposed hassles (interrupts, crises, being underappreciated).
Sysadmins must deal with interrupts (requests, crises, things driven by external schedules etc) and then in the rest of their time build systems to manage or reduce the interrupts. Developers are expected to produce work on a predictable schedule. This is disrupted by interrupts and obliterates the schedule for proactive work unless your management is very good at making it a priority.
The "prevention of information services" problem is certainly real though. Perhaps it could be addressed by embedding the sysadmins in the dev teams rather than having a department of their own, but then you have to fight org hierarchy.