I'm curious about what you consider "qualified". Most companies want people with very specific experience that is unlikely to be obtained in college. Sure, they want candidates with college degrees, but that requirement doesn't relate directly to the specific requirements of the job.
For most positions, the average candidate with a BS degree and 5 years experience is more qualified than the average PHD with no experience.
Re:book smarts vs real world smarts
on
Network Warrior
·
· Score: 1
On the other hand, I'm not that amused when I type "there" instead of "they".
Re:book smarts vs real world smarts
on
Network Warrior
·
· Score: 1
I have an engineering degree and have always worked as a developer for companies that make technology products. It always amuses me how my engineering colleagues would complain about how stupid the IT staff was because there didn't have the same level of education as we did. They always assumed that they could do a better job.
The fact is that the two job areas are very different and the typical developer wouldn't last a week working in IT. The same could be said for IT types working as developers, but they'd probably last longer since you can fake it longer as a developer.
Re:What value DO the entry level certs have?
on
Network Warrior
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Clearly a certification is less evidence of competency than 5 years of experience (assuming you can actually verify that the experience is relevant), but often when choosing between candidates with limited experience the only difference you can determine is that one passed a test and the other never took one. All things being equal, I'd choose the one who has objectively demonstrated some level of knowledge.
If I recall corectly the Internet Protocols don't divide the layers all that neatly. Isn't there some dicking around with data on adjacent layers? Is that your understanding? Does the OSI Model allow that?
In theory, yes. But mentioning MS gives you a bit of an excuse (Slashdot's story title is evidence of that) and do customers really care what the detailed reason was? All that's important is that they're fixing the code.
I'm sure they won't sue anytime soon, if ever. Nevertheless, no conrract has been signed. A change in ownership and a down-turn in business could always trigger a change of heart. The opinions of the rank-and-file would matter little in such a scenario.
Perhaps it would be good insurance for the "free" software community to stop bashing them. You don't want to put them in a nothing-to-lose situation.
I agree that nobody is perfect. I was just mocking the daily WTF mentality. The real software crisis has more to do with ego than with the quality of code.
Well, the powers that be decided that they wanted you to use CSS so they didn't bother to enhance the "goodness" of HTML tags and attributes. Still, not everybody believes that making every page on a site uniform in appearence is a good thing.
"What we are seeing here is quite simple - the old client-server fat desktop model of development is dying, and EVERYBODY wants to get in on web apps."
You're right. Web apps are a major fad and many people want to replace their fully functional in-house client-server system with slightly less functional web app equivalent. It's a waste of money, but it does help developers' keep marketable.
Obviously if C# really was Java than it wouldn't matter which you use. Java fans hate C# because they know it isn't Java but does compete with it. Very few languages created in the last 25 years incorporate truly new ideas. Java's only unique feature was checked exceptions and C# didn't include it. To some that is a great liability, to others, a great improvement.
Once again the alleged evidence is not particularly convincing.
To scientifically establish these claims of productivity we need a comprehensive definition of what productivity is, a way to measure it in the real world, and studies that follow standard scientific practices.
Of course, if you're in the homework business, perhaps Joel's analysis has some value.
As has been discussed before, there's no guarantee that the GPL will be held 100% enforceable or 100% unenforceable. Thus some terms of the license could be held unenforceable without triggering a copyright effect. Not a likely scenario, but a quite possible one.
My point is that enthusiasm and a positive attitude won't get the desired results if you ignore reality. If a magazine's only purpose is to be a cheerleader, it should be called LinuxFanboy or MSKissAss.
The GP was just saying that the evaluation was an unscientific effort. That doesn't require him to do it better. Just because something might be the best that can be done from a practical point of view, doesn't mean it has any objective value whatsoever.
"What I have seen is that those who make money or save the company money are the most valued. An example are salesmen who get paid a ton of money and programmers who get outsourced to India since they provide no value(the ones that can't sell themselves or what they do)."
That would be like giving a raise to egg salesman and killing all the hens because they provide no value. Of course, there are some salesman out there who excel at selling non-existent products.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm curious about what you consider "qualified". Most companies want people with very specific experience that is unlikely to be obtained in college. Sure, they want candidates with college degrees, but that requirement doesn't relate directly to the specific requirements of the job.
For most positions, the average candidate with a BS degree and 5 years experience is more qualified than the average PHD with no experience.
On the other hand, I'm not that amused when I type "there" instead of "they".
I have an engineering degree and have always worked as a developer for companies that make technology products. It always amuses me how my engineering colleagues would complain about how stupid the IT staff was because there didn't have the same level of education as we did. They always assumed that they could do a better job.
The fact is that the two job areas are very different and the typical developer wouldn't last a week working in IT. The same could be said for IT types working as developers, but they'd probably last longer since you can fake it longer as a developer.
Clearly a certification is less evidence of competency than 5 years of experience (assuming you can actually verify that the experience is relevant), but often when choosing between candidates with limited experience the only difference you can determine is that one passed a test and the other never took one. All things being equal, I'd choose the one who has objectively demonstrated some level of knowledge.
If I recall corectly the Internet Protocols don't divide the layers all that neatly. Isn't there some dicking around with data on adjacent layers? Is that your understanding? Does the OSI Model allow that?
In theory, yes. But mentioning MS gives you a bit of an excuse (Slashdot's story title is evidence of that) and do customers really care what the detailed reason was? All that's important is that they're fixing the code.
I'm sure they won't sue anytime soon, if ever. Nevertheless, no conrract has been signed. A change in ownership and a down-turn in business could always trigger a change of heart. The opinions of the rank-and-file would matter little in such a scenario.
Perhaps it would be good insurance for the "free" software community to stop bashing them. You don't want to put them in a nothing-to-lose situation.
Atari games contain very ugly code, but how many people can say they wrote code that sold over 100,000 units at a penny per byte?
Given the fact that I was mocking the whole "coding Gods" idea, any grammar mistakes I made are ironically appropriate.
I agree that nobody is perfect. I was just mocking the daily WTF mentality. The real software crisis has more to do with ego than with the quality of code.
code sucks but I (and the 90% of programmers who make this claim) are in the remaining elite 10% that are coding Gods.
Well, the powers that be decided that they wanted you to use CSS so they didn't bother to enhance the "goodness" of HTML tags and attributes. Still, not everybody believes that making every page on a site uniform in appearence is a good thing.
"What we are seeing here is quite simple - the old client-server fat desktop model of development is dying, and EVERYBODY wants to get in on web apps."
You're right. Web apps are a major fad and many people want to replace their fully functional in-house client-server system with slightly less functional web app equivalent. It's a waste of money, but it does help developers' keep marketable.
Obviously if C# really was Java than it wouldn't matter which you use. Java fans hate C# because they know it isn't Java but does compete with it. Very few languages created in the last 25 years incorporate truly new ideas. Java's only unique feature was checked exceptions and C# didn't include it. To some that is a great liability, to others, a great improvement.
Once again the alleged evidence is not particularly convincing.
To scientifically establish these claims of productivity we need a comprehensive definition of what productivity is, a way to measure it in the real world, and studies that follow standard scientific practices.
Of course, if you're in the homework business, perhaps Joel's analysis has some value.
As has been discussed before, there's no guarantee that the GPL will be held 100% enforceable or 100% unenforceable. Thus some terms of the license could be held unenforceable without triggering a copyright effect. Not a likely scenario, but a quite possible one.
My point is that enthusiasm and a positive attitude won't get the desired results if you ignore reality. If a magazine's only purpose is to be a cheerleader, it should be called LinuxFanboy or MSKissAss.
"I'm generally for accuracy however 90% of success comes from enthusiasm and a positive attitude."
Tell that to Harold Stassen who ran for president of the US unsuccessfully 9 times. Sometimes objectivity is useful.
The GP was just saying that the evaluation was an unscientific effort. That doesn't require him to do it better. Just because something might be the best that can be done from a practical point of view, doesn't mean it has any objective value whatsoever.
"What I have seen is that those who make money or save the company money are the most valued. An example are salesmen who get paid a ton of money and programmers who get outsourced to India since they provide no value(the ones that can't sell themselves or what they do)."
That would be like giving a raise to egg salesman and killing all the hens because they provide no value. Of course, there are some salesman out there who excel at selling non-existent products.
MS-DOS is hardly the popular command-line tool used by Windows sysadmins today for scripting and configuration.
would consider 90% of the business market to be a "niche".
Newsflash: Having a name for the excuses businesses have for screwing their customers doesn't make the behavior ethical.
iPhone sales increased infinite percent as the first phone was purchased.
So you believe that if a large corporation wanted to buy 10,000 iPhones, Apple would turn them down?