My experience is completely different. Their PHBs are just as bad as ours, which is the reason the developers are made to look stupid. The PHBs get in the way and screw everything up.
When you outsource, you not only have to cope with trying to manage your own PHBs not to destroy your project, but you have to manage their PHBs too, to get to their engineers... who are just like us, only younger and less experienced (to keep costs down to maximise profit).
Since there are only two of you and you will be outsourcing "monkey work" your are very unlikely to succeed.
Speaking as someone who was transferred to an outsourcing company (see my journal for the gory details), you will not have enough time, effort and patience to run a project like that.
As other posters have noted, the fact that your boss uses the term "monkey work" sets alarm bells ringing. He considers this work to be trivial in complexity (possibly because he doesn't understand Software Engineering) but maybe great in size.
Outsourcing is cheap because the people you are given to do the work are young and inexperienced. They will be given very little time by their PHBs to understand your existing code base and to take on your working practices. Their PHBs are looking to cut as many corners as possible to make the biggest profit on the deal. Their staff will be told to smile, nod and say "yes" to everything you ask of them whether they understand it or not.
As a result, you are going to spend inordinate amounts of your time training, coaching, explaining, hand-holding, testing, debugging, complaining, waiting, testing and debugging again, restating specifications and requirements, arguing over the bill, wondering where the deadlines went etc. etc.
Large corporations that move slowly can hide the disaster for 3 or 4 business quarters, but small companies can not.
If you need to look at the source of everything every time you use it, you have a case of horrendously tight coupling,
Correct, and much of the C++ code I've worked on suffers from this very badly, partly due to poor design but also because of the politically-correct misfeatures of C++ used in a misguided attempt to meet some sort of "best practice" standard...
Have you ever actually tried to parse a declaration reliably using regular expressions?
That's overkill. I find that for C source, a couple of very simple greps usually suffice, especially if the source is "nice". I don't do C++ any more, I managed to escape from that hell a few months back.
You're right though, a tokenising parser is ideal, but they are very difficult to get right for certain languages (i.e. C++) and most IDE's implementations are buggy around the edges. I don't use an IDE.
I'm quite content to work in vi (elvis) or vim with many xterms open with a different file in each. I don't need a "goto definition" since it's easy enough to grep through the files and have an xterm with vi/vim fired up ready to go.
My code is very modular and my files are small, so it works.
whereas now people are moving to BSD-style licenses with no such benefits.
This is symptomatic of PHB/MBA thinking: short term gains/benefits that mortgage long term growth.
In a couple of years time, there will be a proliferation of different, incompatible versions of CLang/LLVM that will be increasingly expensive to maintain. Furthermore, I can foresee vendors making incompatible changes to the code produced by CLang, subtle ABI breakage and the like. The upper levels will suffer too : vendor A's version will not be able to compile source code with vendor B's extensions and vice versa.
Then in come the patents, and to compile certain code on a certain platform (OS version and hardware) you'll need vendor C's compiler with some new super-duper patented feature that no one else is allowed to implement.
This sounds like the 1980s/ealy 1990s all over again. Unix wars, balkanisation, and one dominant vedor... Microsoft, although this time it'll be google.
The problem with that, as in all forms of politics and "sociological" experiments is separating and controlling the variable enough to be able to make an objective judgement.
I might counter by saying that the sort of prejudiced employer you describe is probably of the sort of character that is likely to try all sorts of dirty tricks (and illegal practices) to get ahead of the competition at all costs i.e. in spite of the demographic of the workforce.
As another poster goes on to say, Libertarians are the sort that end up on pitch forks come the revolution...
Here's a radical idea: why not buy stock in your own company? That way you're getting paid twice if you're doing a good job.
You see, the thing is, the Lords and Masters on the board and executive VP level are too smart.
They make sure they pay you just enough to get by. If you're luck, and you save your pennies, you might be able to buy a token gesture amount of company stock through an Employee Share Purchase Plan at a modest discount. After tax, and if the stock price doesn't fall, you might make 5% on your investment in your employer.
These days, it's very rare for stock prices to rise significantly. The 1980s and early 1990s are long gone, unless you invest in a Chinese or Brazilian company...
The very smart board members will keep salaries flat in an environment of 4-5% inflation, thus giving you a pay cut in real terms, despite your hard work delivering a profit for the company and a return for the "investors." There will also be redundancies and restructuring (5% or so a year, every year) to keep the pressure up. But these are "difficult decisions" and you'll have to refocus, do more with less and be more than you've ever been.
Then, to squeeze even more juice out of the already shriveled lemon, you'll be outsourced to India...
If you're interested in some more in-depth bitching and ranting, have a browse back through my journal.
The difference is that with the government, if you trip one of their triggers, they really will have you personally identified and tracked. For practical purposes though, you are very, very likely not to be one of those people.
As the megalomaniacs in charge (politicians, secret service chiefs, police chiefs, defence etc.) become more paranoid, their desire for power and control increases and they realise they can automate much of it, things will get much worse.
However, this is an ideal time to invest in storage, server, network and database companies.
Then, we just need to write some scripts to generate thousands of pretty pointless emails a day to each other containing semi-random "trigger" text and sit back as the share prices sky rocket and the security people buy more and more kit...
Slashdot Mirror
And the 1802 guy standing by, smiling.
Surely you mean the 6809?
Old beetles were that bad and lots of people bought those.
The styling was also by Adolf Hitler, and that didn't stop people (even all those peace-loving flower-power types) for buying them.
Maybe his beliefs are ignorant, but it's a safe bet he knows how to defend them.
When the ignorant and stupid are great in number and they get to "defend" their beliefs with firearms, democracy has a problem.
But hey lets attack him because he is in the 'tea party'.
Anyone who associates themselves with the Tea Pary, and Libertarians are automatically marked down in my opinion. They're worse than Republicans.
But, hey, I'm a pinko-Eurocommie, so what does my perspective matter?
Here we have proof that attending MIT does not make one immune from ignorance and stupidity.
That's just racist bigotry.
My experience is completely different. Their PHBs are just as bad as ours, which is the reason the developers are made to look stupid. The PHBs get in the way and screw everything up.
When you outsource, you not only have to cope with trying to manage your own PHBs not to destroy your project, but you have to manage their PHBs too, to get to their engineers... who are just like us, only younger and less experienced (to keep costs down to maximise profit).
Since there are only two of you and you will be outsourcing "monkey work" your are very unlikely to succeed.
Speaking as someone who was transferred to an outsourcing company (see my journal for the gory details), you will not have enough time, effort and patience to run a project like that.
As other posters have noted, the fact that your boss uses the term "monkey work" sets alarm bells ringing. He considers this work to be trivial in complexity (possibly because he doesn't understand Software Engineering) but maybe great in size.
Outsourcing is cheap because the people you are given to do the work are young and inexperienced. They will be given very little time by their PHBs to understand your existing code base and to take on your working practices. Their PHBs are looking to cut as many corners as possible to make the biggest profit on the deal. Their staff will be told to smile, nod and say "yes" to everything you ask of them whether they understand it or not.
As a result, you are going to spend inordinate amounts of your time training, coaching, explaining, hand-holding, testing, debugging, complaining, waiting, testing and debugging again, restating specifications and requirements, arguing over the bill, wondering where the deadlines went etc. etc.
Large corporations that move slowly can hide the disaster for 3 or 4 business quarters, but small companies can not.
Yet another good reason to avoid C++.
If you need to look at the source of everything every time you use it, you have a case of horrendously tight coupling,
Correct, and much of the C++ code I've worked on suffers from this very badly, partly due to poor design but also because of the politically-correct misfeatures of C++ used in a misguided attempt to meet some sort of "best practice" standard...
Have you ever actually tried to parse a declaration reliably using regular expressions?
That's overkill. I find that for C source, a couple of very simple greps usually suffice, especially if the source is "nice". I don't do C++ any more, I managed to escape from that hell a few months back.
You're right though, a tokenising parser is ideal, but they are very difficult to get right for certain languages (i.e. C++) and most IDE's implementations are buggy around the edges. I don't use an IDE.
I'm quite content to work in vi (elvis) or vim with many xterms open with a different file in each. I don't need a "goto definition" since it's easy enough to grep through the files and have an xterm with vi/vim fired up ready to go.
My code is very modular and my files are small, so it works.
grep
Corporate shill/anti-Free Software mods.
whereas now people are moving to BSD-style licenses with no such benefits.
This is symptomatic of PHB/MBA thinking: short term gains/benefits that mortgage long term growth.
In a couple of years time, there will be a proliferation of different, incompatible versions of CLang/LLVM that will be increasingly expensive to maintain. Furthermore, I can foresee vendors making incompatible changes to the code produced by CLang, subtle ABI breakage and the like. The upper levels will suffer too : vendor A's version will not be able to compile source code with vendor B's extensions and vice versa.
Then in come the patents, and to compile certain code on a certain platform (OS version and hardware) you'll need vendor C's compiler with some new super-duper patented feature that no one else is allowed to implement.
This sounds like the 1980s/ealy 1990s all over again. Unix wars, balkanisation, and one dominant vedor ... Microsoft, although this time it'll be google.
The problem with that, as in all forms of politics and "sociological" experiments is separating and controlling the variable enough to be able to make an objective judgement.
I might counter by saying that the sort of prejudiced employer you describe is probably of the sort of character that is likely to try all sorts of dirty tricks (and illegal practices) to get ahead of the competition at all costs i.e. in spite of the demographic of the workforce.
As another poster goes on to say, Libertarians are the sort that end up on pitch forks come the revolution...
Like the health care and food issues that face the world
With American-style political dogma and human nature, these issues will never be solved. Never.
They may be mitigated and small adjustments might be made, but they will be with us as long as there is a human race.
America will fall before it solves its health care and poor problem.
You, sir, are a party pooper.
Just think what damage would be done to the world if Al Qaeda collected royalties on the use of Arabic numerals!
STS didn't need to have air intakes that hang out in the breeze... that simple difference makes the engineering problems a whole lot more difficult
Couldn't they just have a pop-up umbrella to cover the air intakes on the way down? It'll keep the British weather out of the engines too.
or world beating.
Don't the biggest bankers' bonuses in the world count?
I'll get my coat...
X-37B?
What do you reckon?
Here's a radical idea: why not buy stock in your own company? That way you're getting paid twice if you're doing a good job.
You see, the thing is, the Lords and Masters on the board and executive VP level are too smart.
They make sure they pay you just enough to get by. If you're luck, and you save your pennies, you might be able to buy a token gesture amount of company stock through an Employee Share Purchase Plan at a modest discount. After tax, and if the stock price doesn't fall, you might make 5% on your investment in your employer.
These days, it's very rare for stock prices to rise significantly. The 1980s and early 1990s are long gone, unless you invest in a Chinese or Brazilian company...
The very smart board members will keep salaries flat in an environment of 4-5% inflation, thus giving you a pay cut in real terms, despite your hard work delivering a profit for the company and a return for the "investors." There will also be redundancies and restructuring (5% or so a year, every year) to keep the pressure up. But these are "difficult decisions" and you'll have to refocus, do more with less and be more than you've ever been.
Then, to squeeze even more juice out of the already shriveled lemon, you'll be outsourced to India...
If you're interested in some more in-depth bitching and ranting, have a browse back through my journal.
Ursula Burns, is that you?
That's what companies are for. Making money.
Here's a radical idea: why does all of that money have to be made for shareholders? Why can't some of it also be for the people doing the work?
Divide by 7.
The difference is that with the government, if you trip one of their triggers, they really will have you personally identified and tracked. For practical purposes though, you are very, very likely not to be one of those people.
As the megalomaniacs in charge (politicians, secret service chiefs, police chiefs, defence etc.) become more paranoid, their desire for power and control increases and they realise they can automate much of it, things will get much worse.
However, this is an ideal time to invest in storage, server, network and database companies.
Then, we just need to write some scripts to generate thousands of pretty pointless emails a day to each other containing semi-random "trigger" text and sit back as the share prices sky rocket and the security people buy more and more kit...
Everyone's a winner.