If you haven't decided this before going in to college you are probably not a likely candidate for the real world of programming. In my experience at least.
As far as the good job, I always like to warn new people that such a thing doesn't exist. I find the people that burn out are the ones like you. I'm not trying to be insulting, I just don't want you to have any false hopes.
The other guys may not get what they want, but the work ethic derived from that desire will get them something decent. They will also be highly experienced in the skill of bouncing back from smashed dreams, and so will be more able to cope moving from job to job when their previous job loses funding or has cut backs: and having those dreams will help carry them through it. Because that is the reality of this field.
Meanwhile when the same realities hit you what will you do? I suggest you prepare yourself to have plans for that eventuality now. Start training to make yourself more effective and agile. That watch you earn for seniority.. it rarely gets passed out anymore.
I'm a Senior Programmer myself, I've been in the business for over 16 years, and I find myself doing a lot of hiring as well.
One of the things I've found most valuable is to ignore the college credentials altogether. I look at previous jobs and look for consistency in what they are working on over the past few years or so. If they are focused on narrow range of tech that is relevant to what I'm hiring for, and that focus has a span of a certain amount of years then I will interview them. Otherwise they get put at the bottom.
In reality most of my best hires have not been college students at all. These are the people that usually learned there stuff early in life and went directly in to pragmatic use of that knowledge. Most of them are either influential in the Open Source community or are Self Employed and loving it.
I've rarely seen any good work come from a college grad. I usually have to spend at least a year to get them up to speed on how this job really works - how to learn the tech they need to know, what it takes to solve the many problems they will continue to face at random, and simply give them the bare tools and knowledge to do the job they were hired to do. In this field you are doing yourself a grave injustice to go to college instead of working. In the years you've spent learning you have lost the good positions to your peers who decided to get a jump on you and are now holding enough experience to make enough to pay for college out of pocket in one year -- yes even in this economy.
I do have one slight caveat to my speech here. I am a business owner as well. I run my own company so that I can get the jobs I want to work in. In essence I work for myself but without the freelancer label:). Oh, and I've never been to college a day in my life. I wasted some money on a correspondence course in Hardware Repair for a few months while I watched computers being outdated by the day it seemed, and I coded because it's what I've done since I was 12. I'm 30 now.
I also run the big projects out there. The ones that IBM, AT&T, Cisco, and Williams F1 Racing hire for. Those are just some of my clients. I'm not trying to be cocky, just trying to point out that this really works -- and it takes a lot of time and effort to get there, so don't waste it in college.
So to summarize, look for the applicants that have enough stable experience in the tech you are looking to use, college grads will probably disappoint you for the first few years but with enough effort on your part with anyone you can apprentice the type of worker you need and they will be what you need indefinitely.. college is a waste of time unless you are already working and don't give up any work experience while learning.
Wtf? The guy was complaining about the competency of a hire and the competency of his manager. As I recall free market economics only come in to play if he chooses to vote with his feet.
Shit.
Well this man is moving to Africa. It's been nice knowing you guys in America. I'll have an internet connection there but no taxes, the ability to fight for my life with a gun, etc... My fortress will be well made.
Skeptical. But after trying the demo, and seeing how I would improve on it by making a few more actions common, I became addicted. I would use this over expose' any day IF a few changes were made to make it more cohesive.
Such changes would include:
The ability to fold windows without dragging an item. For example grabbing a corner and folding it.
Spring loaded restore (bringing it back from a minimized state)of windows and folders
Variable time for fold collapse. this means the time when the window decides you don't want to fold. I'd prefer it to stay folded longer so that people know they can interact with it; this would also help learn how to use it.
That's the short list. Not much to satisfy me; even though I'm a mac user diehard. I shunned windows for over 5 years because they have not innovated beyond 3.1 . I've used a mac for the last 3 delightful years and actually used their innovations to increase my work and product. Innovate or die.
This is the easiest part. Just follow their current practice of using open source software and adding their own touches to it. For instance take part in the open source pearpc project. In fact if they had considered a switch, more than likely their already on this and probably would announce it at the same time as the switch announcement.
Pretty damn insightful. Good luck trying to get the majority of programmers to follow that though. I've tried, as a fellow programmer, to get other project team members to formalize; they'd much rather build, test, and then come back to me later to ask what went wrong.
On the other hand, you'd have to learn a hell of a lot of systems to just start formallizing your code. There are so many destablizing factors in systems you are dependant on, that it's nearly impossible to not have a testing period.
All I can say is to make sure that your system can be depended on once it's done... that's the only way to break the chain of failures.
I can think of one reason why you might want a bluetooth enabled weapon: bigger caliber. Just think about it, stand behind the blast shields, point, click, and boom!
Of course this could be useful for fireworks and a multitude of other reasons.
There's a reason that sailors didn't "hold" their cannons on their shoulders;).
You know what this means don't you? Open source is so far ahead of the curve now that it is being copied, so the real innovation is now in Open Source software, and open to the public before corps can stop it!
Do you really want to pay someone FOREVER again and again, so you can listen to your repertiore of favorite songs whenever and wherever you want? Record your favorite songs from the radio for free and then they'll never cost you any more after that to listen.
Absolutely not, but that's us. Other people will not mind doing so, because they don't understand the technology nor the options.
Also, Other people do watch a video, and more often a tv program, several times over, when the mood strikes them. Enter the rental business. Also you don't have to watch a movie from beginning to end in one showing. With scene mapping you can easily start where you last left off, or skip around.
Given that the technology exist, that you don't have to pay for a monthly subscription to a channel (or block of channels) to get the shows you want, when you want them, what's the compelling reason to pay a monthly charge and not own the show/movie versus paying a one time fee for the same and being able to own it, not to mention having freedom of choice to chose what you want to watch and when?
Owning is a valid point, but that's only because there is no TV publisher willing to sell shows to the public right now. They are more interested in grabbing as many people to watch their channel.
The reason for this is because of their business model. They have an advertisement based business model (for the most part) so they have a stake in user ratings and density. If they took a different model and starting distributing to the public, would that change your perception? It's not like this is out of the question.
However, with the advent of vcr's, computers, tivo, and the like, it's not impossible to record the programs and then distribute them or save them for later. It's not like this option is out of your, the consumers, hands.
It's just a mind set.
I'm setting up a TV VOD for an entire city right now through their utilities department. We are using a different business model not reliant on advertising. Shows will be sold piece meal via downloads an at a monthly fee. The customers of this entire city will have this option; the same as music.
The world is changing. Can you give me a clear reason why TV is different from music now?
That is true about the iPod part, and I've posted so earlier on this subject. However it is not necessarily true on the part of electronic music distribution. And now that I think about it, there is a conflict here that will have to battle itself out: let them download music to the popular player and keep the music, or go with the streaming model. This in the end is probably why the iPod is unsupported; they want to go with the streaming music model and buck the current trend.
I think everyone replying to this thread is missing one key point so I'm replying to the parent.
Consumers, in general, as compared to us techs and those used to technology, versus those who are well trained into consumerism, will buy a subscription based listening experience, not thinking about owning the music, hook, line, and sinker. Does anyone know how many people already subscribe to such services, both consumer and business, in other technologies? Think satellite radio, cable radio stations, sky angel, et cetera...
To those that don't understand the nature of the beast, understanding what can be done with a computer, it is already standard practice for them in other markets. Why would this market be different to them? They'll want to listen to music on their computer, they'll find a service based on those that are shoved at them, some call this advertising, picking the most shoved one, to try first, and not think twice about it.
Not that it should be that way, but that is the nature of consumerism. The herd will always go that way. Businesses know how to capitalize on it. We have been trying to teach the herd and stop them for a while. So why do we try?
Well, I would say it's time to pull ourselves away from them. We have the ability, all of our talents combined, to make music, videos, programs, biology, space craft, et cetera, as a community. Why should we care about the rest of the people if they don't care themselves?
Let's start in honesty the revolution that can change the world. We don't need the help of anyone else but ourselves!
That's exactly right mr. CEO; you are to old to get it...
You have a service, you want people in the market to use it, people in the market love the iPod, so why excluded it? Your just shutting yourself out of the market.
Slashdot Mirror
If you haven't decided this before going in to college you are probably not a likely candidate for the real world of programming. In my experience at least.
I agree. I forget when I have a Dvd sitting at home.
That joke wasn't half bad.
As far as the good job, I always like to warn new people that such a thing doesn't exist. I find the people that burn out are the ones like you. I'm not trying to be insulting, I just don't want you to have any false hopes.
The other guys may not get what they want, but the work ethic derived from that desire will get them something decent. They will also be highly experienced in the skill of bouncing back from smashed dreams, and so will be more able to cope moving from job to job when their previous job loses funding or has cut backs: and having those dreams will help carry them through it. Because that is the reality of this field.
Meanwhile when the same realities hit you what will you do? I suggest you prepare yourself to have plans for that eventuality now. Start training to make yourself more effective and agile. That watch you earn for seniority .. it rarely gets passed out anymore.
I'm a Senior Programmer myself, I've been in the business for over 16 years, and I find myself doing a lot of hiring as well.
One of the things I've found most valuable is to ignore the college credentials altogether. I look at previous jobs and look for consistency in what they are working on over the past few years or so. If they are focused on narrow range of tech that is relevant to what I'm hiring for, and that focus has a span of a certain amount of years then I will interview them. Otherwise they get put at the bottom.
In reality most of my best hires have not been college students at all. These are the people that usually learned there stuff early in life and went directly in to pragmatic use of that knowledge. Most of them are either influential in the Open Source community or are Self Employed and loving it.
I've rarely seen any good work come from a college grad. I usually have to spend at least a year to get them up to speed on how this job really works - how to learn the tech they need to know, what it takes to solve the many problems they will continue to face at random, and simply give them the bare tools and knowledge to do the job they were hired to do. In this field you are doing yourself a grave injustice to go to college instead of working. In the years you've spent learning you have lost the good positions to your peers who decided to get a jump on you and are now holding enough experience to make enough to pay for college out of pocket in one year -- yes even in this economy.
I do have one slight caveat to my speech here. I am a business owner as well. I run my own company so that I can get the jobs I want to work in. In essence I work for myself but without the freelancer label :). Oh, and I've never been to college a day in my life. I wasted some money on a correspondence course in Hardware Repair for a few months while I watched computers being outdated by the day it seemed, and I coded because it's what I've done since I was 12. I'm 30 now.
I also run the big projects out there. The ones that IBM, AT&T, Cisco, and Williams F1 Racing hire for. Those are just some of my clients. I'm not trying to be cocky, just trying to point out that this really works -- and it takes a lot of time and effort to get there, so don't waste it in college.
So to summarize, look for the applicants that have enough stable experience in the tech you are looking to use, college grads will probably disappoint you for the first few years but with enough effort on your part with anyone you can apprentice the type of worker you need and they will be what you need indefinitely .. college is a waste of time unless you are already working and don't give up any work experience while learning.
Wtf? The guy was complaining about the competency of a hire and the competency of his manager. As I recall free market economics only come in to play if he chooses to vote with his feet.
Any startups suffering can always hire me :).
Shit. Well this man is moving to Africa. It's been nice knowing you guys in America. I'll have an internet connection there but no taxes, the ability to fight for my life with a gun, etc... My fortress will be well made.
Such changes would include:
- The ability to fold windows without dragging an item. For example grabbing a corner and folding it.
- Spring loaded restore (bringing it back from a minimized state)of windows and folders
- Variable time for fold collapse. this means the time when the window decides you don't want to fold. I'd prefer it to stay folded longer so that people know they can interact with it; this would also help learn how to use it.
That's the short list. Not much to satisfy me; even though I'm a mac user diehard. I shunned windows for over 5 years because they have not innovated beyond 3.1 . I've used a mac for the last 3 delightful years and actually used their innovations to increase my work and product. Innovate or die.Why duplicate the information you already have with the social security numbers and mandatory draft registration?
Exactly what I was going to say. Glad you got mod'ed insightful.
This is the easiest part. Just follow their current practice of using open source software and adding their own touches to it. For instance take part in the open source pearpc project. In fact if they had considered a switch, more than likely their already on this and probably would announce it at the same time as the switch announcement.
Pretty damn insightful. Good luck trying to get the majority of programmers to follow that though. I've tried, as a fellow programmer, to get other project team members to formalize; they'd much rather build, test, and then come back to me later to ask what went wrong. On the other hand, you'd have to learn a hell of a lot of systems to just start formallizing your code. There are so many destablizing factors in systems you are dependant on, that it's nearly impossible to not have a testing period. All I can say is to make sure that your system can be depended on once it's done... that's the only way to break the chain of failures.
I would mod this one up if I could, just because of the apache quip!
I can think of one reason why you might want a bluetooth enabled weapon: bigger caliber. Just think about it, stand behind the blast shields, point, click, and boom! Of course this could be useful for fireworks and a multitude of other reasons. There's a reason that sailors didn't "hold" their cannons on their shoulders ;).
More jobs for the men!... err Domestic Male...
Gee this would be great!... that is if Open Source community hadn't done the damn thing already.
You know what this means don't you? Open source is so far ahead of the curve now that it is being copied, so the real innovation is now in Open Source software, and open to the public before corps can stop it!
Also this article by an ISP that is doing it.
I'm surprised no one mentioned using an "alarm line" dsl system.
0 551.html
For instance: http://www.experts-exchange.com/Networking/Q_2107
Do you really want to pay someone FOREVER again and again, so you can listen to your repertiore of favorite songs whenever and wherever you want? Record your favorite songs from the radio for free and then they'll never cost you any more after that to listen.
Absolutely not, but that's us. Other people will not mind doing so, because they don't understand the technology nor the options.
Also, Other people do watch a video, and more often a tv program, several times over, when the mood strikes them. Enter the rental business. Also you don't have to watch a movie from beginning to end in one showing. With scene mapping you can easily start where you last left off, or skip around.
Given that the technology exist, that you don't have to pay for a monthly subscription to a channel (or block of channels) to get the shows you want, when you want them, what's the compelling reason to pay a monthly charge and not own the show/movie versus paying a one time fee for the same and being able to own it, not to mention having freedom of choice to chose what you want to watch and when?
Owning is a valid point, but that's only because there is no TV publisher willing to sell shows to the public right now. They are more interested in grabbing as many people to watch their channel.
The reason for this is because of their business model. They have an advertisement based business model (for the most part) so they have a stake in user ratings and density. If they took a different model and starting distributing to the public, would that change your perception? It's not like this is out of the question.
However, with the advent of vcr's, computers, tivo, and the like, it's not impossible to record the programs and then distribute them or save them for later. It's not like this option is out of your, the consumers, hands.
It's just a mind set.
I'm setting up a TV VOD for an entire city right now through their utilities department. We are using a different business model not reliant on advertising. Shows will be sold piece meal via downloads an at a monthly fee. The customers of this entire city will have this option; the same as music.
The world is changing. Can you give me a clear reason why TV is different from music now?
That is true about the iPod part, and I've posted so earlier on this subject. However it is not necessarily true on the part of electronic music distribution. And now that I think about it, there is a conflict here that will have to battle itself out: let them download music to the popular player and keep the music, or go with the streaming model. This in the end is probably why the iPod is unsupported; they want to go with the streaming music model and buck the current trend.
I think everyone replying to this thread is missing one key point so I'm replying to the parent.
Consumers, in general, as compared to us techs and those used to technology, versus those who are well trained into consumerism, will buy a subscription based listening experience, not thinking about owning the music, hook, line, and sinker. Does anyone know how many people already subscribe to such services, both consumer and business, in other technologies? Think satellite radio, cable radio stations, sky angel, et cetera...
To those that don't understand the nature of the beast, understanding what can be done with a computer, it is already standard practice for them in other markets. Why would this market be different to them? They'll want to listen to music on their computer, they'll find a service based on those that are shoved at them, some call this advertising, picking the most shoved one, to try first, and not think twice about it.
Not that it should be that way, but that is the nature of consumerism. The herd will always go that way. Businesses know how to capitalize on it. We have been trying to teach the herd and stop them for a while. So why do we try?
Well, I would say it's time to pull ourselves away from them. We have the ability, all of our talents combined, to make music, videos, programs, biology, space craft, et cetera, as a community. Why should we care about the rest of the people if they don't care themselves?
Let's start in honesty the revolution that can change the world. We don't need the help of anyone else but ourselves!
"Maybe I'm too old to get it"
That's exactly right mr. CEO; you are to old to get it...
You have a service, you want people in the market to use it, people in the market love the iPod, so why excluded it? Your just shutting yourself out of the market.
Two words: New Hamshire
If more people had nukes, the US wouldn't be so prone to bully around.
Plus it's about time we stop being hypocritical. We have nukes for the same reasons.