Well, at least those people in Europe have not allowed their employers to take total advantage of them. And their employers think it would be a bad idea if they did!
When I last worked in Europe (2000), I had 25 days annual leave + statutory holidays, a decent pension scheme, a decent health scheme, use of a company car and I didn't have to work more than 37.5 hours a week. In reality I did a lot of on-site work and worked a 45-50 hour week when on site. The on-site work was overseas so the company car didn't get much use.
Oh, and I loved my job because I loved the product.
Now I live in NZ and work for a progressive company. I have a 37.5 hours week (lunch breaks not included) and 20 days holiday plus stats. No pension, no healthcare, no company car. However, I am healthier, generally work 9-5 and don't think that my work is totally my life. I don't "love" my job anymore but neither do I "hate" it.
Shit, I'm 40 and still programming. Looks like I've only got 5 years left and they're running out fast.
What did I do wrong?
1. Too late.
2. Ah, always preferred small companies, the work is more interesting.
3. Got that wrong too.
4. Screwed that one up by moving to NZ I think.
5. Wish I could have.
6. Got that right.
7. Well, I've done a bit of pre-sales work but I reckon that doesn't count here.
8. I tend to do that, unless seduced by technical perfection - it doesn't happen often, but it still does.
9. I have always understood the difference, even if those around me did not.
10. Well I do tend to reflect a lot but I have a bit of a problem with feedback when it isn't constructive. "You made a mistake and I think this is where you wnet wrong" works for me; "you scrwed up big time", does not.
Just the usual stuff from Joel along with an ad for his company. Well done.
The article is full of common sense; and he's right about India. If you are just a programmer, you are not adding much value to your company; if you are a developer, it is highly unlikely that you will be seeing your job head off to India.
I live in New Zealand which is hardly the centre of the developmental universe. Here in Christchurch we have a thriving electronics industry working on radio communications (Tait Electronics), ethernet switching (Allied Telesyn), innovative laboratory instruments (Syft Technologies), navigation (Trimble and Navman); that means a lot of room for developers. We tend to create products here, but manufacture offshore. Only Tait Electronics manufactures here in Christchurch. Everyone else uses a contract-manufacturer, here or overseas.
Having said that, it's a small market so don't expect to skip from one job to the next. This place got hit by the last economic downturn just like everyone else. It took me two months to find my current job after my last redundancy.
Even though my previous position was made redundant, that position did not got to India; the company refocused it's business on hardware instead of consultancy. You need to be a certain size to do consultancy/services and we weren't that big. You can be a lot smaller if you generate your own IP.
Also, I'm not sure that doing a CS is the right way to get into software. Yes, you will get a wonderfully structured introduction to CS theory but you might find the introduction a bit academic withoput sufficient grounding in reality. Frankly, the people I have had trouble working with since I sterted full time employment back in 1989 have had CS backgrounds. The people that I've always got on with started out as engineers, physical scientists or mathematicians. I started out as a Natural Philosopher (i.e. physicist) before being seduced by the computer and, in particular, by the embedded side of things.
Mind you, I am a practical person. I don't find much beauty in abstract theories and multiple layers of abstraction. Perhaps this is why I find CS people a bit hard to work with. Also, the embedded world is full of real-world things that require controlling. I find this fun. I do not find the innards of an enterprise level web server to be as attractive to me.
I have not found the GIMP UI to be intuitive. I have, over time, developed an ability to use it but I still consider it very poor. It just doesn't work how I (personally) think a paint/image-manipulation program should work.
Having said that I use The GIMP a lot to touch things up.
I agree totally with the issue relating to running GIMP on Windows. It looks ok, but do something wrong and a command window can popup and start speaking gibberish to you.
Frankly, it would be a helluva lot better if The GIMP has used Qt. Qt is wonderfully cross-platform and has a great object model to work with. Unfortunately, Qt/Windows does not have a open source license hence that likelyhood of The GIMP moving to Qt is close to zero. A pity that, it is an excellent toolkit. I wonder if someone could persuade Trolltech to make an exception for The GIMP?
I find interviews fun. I would recommend that you accept the offer to interview candidates at face value. Assume that your employer places some value on your opinion and enjoy the process.
It does not matter if you are interviewing a prospective colleague, subordinate, or superior; the objective is the same. Will this person add, or subtract, from this company. The best candidate adds the most.
The best interviews, as far as I am concerned, do not follow a strict Q&A format, but flow, and develop, as a natural conversation would. In essence, the interview should feel natural, not forced.
Should you proceed with you own application? This is tricky and depends so much on your organisation and their ethos. How hurt would you feel if your organisation chooses an outsider instead of you? If you would feel terribly hurt then perhaps not applying is the best option. If, however, you trust your employer to find a good candidate for the position then perhaps you should still apply. You may not get the job but, because you trust your employer to get a good person, you should not feel too disappointed if another candidate is hired since, by definition, you trust your employer to do the right thing.
Note that by better I only mean better in the current set of circumstances. You may not be the best person for the job right now. You may be too focussed on the technical details; you may lack an interest in the big picture; you may prefer to hone your technical skills before moving into a management speciality. However, none of this precludes your from being the ideal candidate several months (or years) down the road. As we develop, our interests and focus change. You may be technically focussed now but may be looking for a big picture position later on.
In my case, I rose to the grand title of Technical Manager because, in part, I wanted to have more influence in the products' direction and be able to present my ideas at a higher level in the company. I have to admit that the team management aspects were not top-most in my mind. My team knew what it had to do, and how to do it. It did not need me to direct them on a day-to-day basis. It did, however, need an advocate for ideas on how to improve our products (we were an RTOS & development tools company) and how to reduce the complaints from the field.
The question you should ask youself is; why do you want to be the engineering manager? There is nothing wrong in saying that you want more money, no matter what others might say. There is nothing wrong in saying that the job title means a lot to you. There is nothing wrong in saying that you want to make sure senior management doesn't screw things up when they add an engineering manager. But, there is a lot wrong with not being honest in why you want the position; both with yourself, and others. Know thyself
Slashdot Mirror
Well, at least those people in Europe have not allowed their employers to take total advantage of them. And their employers think it would be a bad idea if they did!
When I last worked in Europe (2000), I had 25 days annual leave + statutory holidays, a decent pension scheme, a decent health scheme, use of a company car and I didn't have to work more than 37.5 hours a week. In reality I did a lot of on-site work and worked a 45-50 hour week when on site. The on-site work was overseas so the company car didn't get much use.
Oh, and I loved my job because I loved the product.
Now I live in NZ and work for a progressive company. I have a 37.5 hours week (lunch breaks not included) and 20 days holiday plus stats. No pension, no healthcare, no company car. However, I am healthier, generally work 9-5 and don't think that my work is totally my life. I don't "love" my job anymore but neither do I "hate" it.
Shit, I'm 40 and still programming. Looks like I've only got 5 years left and they're running out fast.
What did I do wrong?
1. Too late.
2. Ah, always preferred small companies, the work is more interesting.
3. Got that wrong too.
4. Screwed that one up by moving to NZ I think.
5. Wish I could have.
6. Got that right.
7. Well, I've done a bit of pre-sales work but I reckon that doesn't count here.
8. I tend to do that, unless seduced by technical perfection - it doesn't happen often, but it still does.
9. I have always understood the difference, even if those around me did not.
10. Well I do tend to reflect a lot but I have a bit of a problem with feedback when it isn't constructive. "You made a mistake and I think this is where you wnet wrong" works for me; "you scrwed up big time", does not.
The article is full of common sense; and he's right about India. If you are just a programmer, you are not adding much value to your company; if you are a developer, it is highly unlikely that you will be seeing your job head off to India.
I live in New Zealand which is hardly the centre of the developmental universe. Here in Christchurch we have a thriving electronics industry working on radio communications (Tait Electronics), ethernet switching (Allied Telesyn), innovative laboratory instruments (Syft Technologies), navigation (Trimble and Navman); that means a lot of room for developers. We tend to create products here, but manufacture offshore. Only Tait Electronics manufactures here in Christchurch. Everyone else uses a contract-manufacturer, here or overseas.
Having said that, it's a small market so don't expect to skip from one job to the next. This place got hit by the last economic downturn just like everyone else. It took me two months to find my current job after my last redundancy. Even though my previous position was made redundant, that position did not got to India; the company refocused it's business on hardware instead of consultancy. You need to be a certain size to do consultancy/services and we weren't that big. You can be a lot smaller if you generate your own IP.
Also, I'm not sure that doing a CS is the right way to get into software. Yes, you will get a wonderfully structured introduction to CS theory but you might find the introduction a bit academic withoput sufficient grounding in reality. Frankly, the people I have had trouble working with since I sterted full time employment back in 1989 have had CS backgrounds. The people that I've always got on with started out as engineers, physical scientists or mathematicians. I started out as a Natural Philosopher (i.e. physicist) before being seduced by the computer and, in particular, by the embedded side of things.
Mind you, I am a practical person. I don't find much beauty in abstract theories and multiple layers of abstraction. Perhaps this is why I find CS people a bit hard to work with. Also, the embedded world is full of real-world things that require controlling. I find this fun. I do not find the innards of an enterprise level web server to be as attractive to me.
Having said that I use The GIMP a lot to touch things up.
I agree totally with the issue relating to running GIMP on Windows. It looks ok, but do something wrong and a command window can popup and start speaking gibberish to you.
Frankly, it would be a helluva lot better if The GIMP has used Qt. Qt is wonderfully cross-platform and has a great object model to work with. Unfortunately, Qt/Windows does not have a open source license hence that likelyhood of The GIMP moving to Qt is close to zero. A pity that, it is an excellent toolkit. I wonder if someone could persuade Trolltech to make an exception for The GIMP?
It does not matter if you are interviewing a prospective colleague, subordinate, or superior; the objective is the same. Will this person add, or subtract, from this company. The best candidate adds the most.
The best interviews, as far as I am concerned, do not follow a strict Q&A format, but flow, and develop, as a natural conversation would. In essence, the interview should feel natural, not forced.
Should you proceed with you own application? This is tricky and depends so much on your organisation and their ethos. How hurt would you feel if your organisation chooses an outsider instead of you? If you would feel terribly hurt then perhaps not applying is the best option. If, however, you trust your employer to find a good candidate for the position then perhaps you should still apply. You may not get the job but, because you trust your employer to get a good person, you should not feel too disappointed if another candidate is hired since, by definition, you trust your employer to do the right thing.
Note that by better I only mean better in the current set of circumstances. You may not be the best person for the job right now. You may be too focussed on the technical details; you may lack an interest in the big picture; you may prefer to hone your technical skills before moving into a management speciality. However, none of this precludes your from being the ideal candidate several months (or years) down the road. As we develop, our interests and focus change. You may be technically focussed now but may be looking for a big picture position later on.
In my case, I rose to the grand title of Technical Manager because, in part, I wanted to have more influence in the products' direction and be able to present my ideas at a higher level in the company. I have to admit that the team management aspects were not top-most in my mind. My team knew what it had to do, and how to do it. It did not need me to direct them on a day-to-day basis. It did, however, need an advocate for ideas on how to improve our products (we were an RTOS & development tools company) and how to reduce the complaints from the field.
The question you should ask youself is; why do you want to be the engineering manager? There is nothing wrong in saying that you want more money, no matter what others might say. There is nothing wrong in saying that the job title means a lot to you. There is nothing wrong in saying that you want to make sure senior management doesn't screw things up when they add an engineering manager. But, there is a lot wrong with not being honest in why you want the position; both with yourself, and others. Know thyself