Well motivated, focused, and intelligent people can make masterpieces in the shittiest environment
This much is true. But you know what? Having those tools, especially version control, makes things sooooooooo much easier. And since they're so easy to set up, why the fuck would you want to bother without them?
You are alerted to bugs sooner. You know exactly when a regression bug get added, and can fix them sooner. However, remember, CI tests are only run when stuff is checked in to the trunk, or certain branches.
Most places simply accept that not using those types of tools helps the bottom line
Any place that thinks not using Version Control, or many of the other tools, especially when low cost or no cost solutions are available, is run by incompetent idiots.
It's not a common misconception. It's very accurate. If they aren't doing these basic things, then what else are they doing wrong? What else are they burdening their developers with unnecessarily?
While it might be very possible that great programmers could overcome that, why the fuck would you want to?
You have two choices: You can either push them to start adopting some better tools, ESPECIALLY VERSION CONTROL, or you can leave. Pushing these things will take quite a bit of effort, and it's quite possible that you will not be successful in your efforts. However, if you are, and can demonstrate to everyone what tangible improvements they bring, you'll be a hero. But remember, I said tangible improvements. You need to be able to communicate actual improvements that will come, in terms of bugs fixed earlier, number of crises prevented, stuff like that. You can't just say, "We should be using this stuff because it's good!"
The other choice, is simply to leave. Sad as it may be, there are a lot of places out there that are not doing these necessary things. And most of them don't see any need for them, as they don't easily translate to benefits for the customer. Places like this don't care about the developers, and would have no problem sending you on a multiple month death march. If you are not able to convince them to adopt these tools, drop them like a bad habit. Make sure they know that you are leaving because of their refusal to adopt these practices.
Good thing this isn't the real world. And being humiliated, while it can be motivating, it can also cause someone to drop out altogether and stop trying, because they can't face the humiliation.
Hiring and promotions should not be based on loyalty, but on their ability to do the job. I, for one, think that most workplaces would be far better if they dropped this whole "We're a family!" bullshit, and embraced the idea that their employees are probably not going to stay there forever. Realize that your employees will eventually leave, and you'll probably be far better in planning, and won't be as disrupted when they do leave. Furthermore, they will probably be far more proactive in making sure their things are ready for someone else to pick up.
If the only reason they can't match the salary is because they can't afford it, they might be willing to offer alternatives in order to get you to stay.
As an IT manager, I would be pissed if someone came to me with leverage.
Because you want your underlings to have no power at all at the bargaining table, right? You need all the power for yourself. How dare they try to balance that out a bit.
If they can't afford it in outright cash, but they still want you on board, they might still try to get you extra compensation in other ways. More time off, more telecommuting time, etc.
I think your story isn't so much about being "loyal" as it is making sure not to burn any bridges. You took care to leave while still on very good terms (the fact you had an understanding and good boss also helped), and so later, they didn't remember you flipping everyone off and Xeroxing your buttocks, but they remembered you as being a hard worker and a professional. That point is very important to make.
I can understand, and support, the very same throttling at the ISP level.
I can't. That is them saying they should have more control over MY traffic than I do. If I want to prioritize shit, I'll get Tomato and do it my own damn self.
The ISP sold me a pipe with a rated upload and download speed. Therefore, I should be able to use at least 80% of that speed at any given time, for as long as I want. Anything less, and they have deceived me.
So, don't complain about the entity that is actually doing this shit?
Fuck that, they are completely responsible for their actions. If they aren't, then they shouldn't have any rights whatsoever, and should be regulated up the ass.
Companies just do their part of the deal: to get as much money as possible for as little effort as possible... and get away with it without losing customers.
This is NOT a good thing. Not for consumers, and definitely not for employees. And this is NOT an excuse for the behavior they've been exhibiting.
Customers should switch to another company if the current internet provider seems a bad deal.
Hey, that sounds awesome! I'll just look up at what ISPs are in my part of Orange County, CA. Looks like there's Cox, whom I have already, and.... Cox.
The main reason I don't want a netbook is the tiny keyboards. Hell, I had a 13" Macbook for a couple years, and while I got used to it, as soon as I went back to a full sized laptop keyboard (15"), my hands felt sooooo much better. I understand this is more of a personal thing, and may not be an issue for you, but it definitely one for me, especially on a device that I'd like to use for a few hours at a time.
Slashdot Mirror
There is no rational basis for not using version control. None.
Well motivated, focused, and intelligent people can make masterpieces in the shittiest environment
This much is true. But you know what? Having those tools, especially version control, makes things sooooooooo much easier. And since they're so easy to set up, why the fuck would you want to bother without them?
You are alerted to bugs sooner. You know exactly when a regression bug get added, and can fix them sooner. However, remember, CI tests are only run when stuff is checked in to the trunk, or certain branches.
Most places simply accept that not using those types of tools helps the bottom line
Any place that thinks not using Version Control, or many of the other tools, especially when low cost or no cost solutions are available, is run by incompetent idiots.
It's not a common misconception. It's very accurate. If they aren't doing these basic things, then what else are they doing wrong? What else are they burdening their developers with unnecessarily?
While it might be very possible that great programmers could overcome that, why the fuck would you want to?
You have two choices: You can either push them to start adopting some better tools, ESPECIALLY VERSION CONTROL, or you can leave. Pushing these things will take quite a bit of effort, and it's quite possible that you will not be successful in your efforts. However, if you are, and can demonstrate to everyone what tangible improvements they bring, you'll be a hero. But remember, I said tangible improvements. You need to be able to communicate actual improvements that will come, in terms of bugs fixed earlier, number of crises prevented, stuff like that. You can't just say, "We should be using this stuff because it's good!"
The other choice, is simply to leave. Sad as it may be, there are a lot of places out there that are not doing these necessary things. And most of them don't see any need for them, as they don't easily translate to benefits for the customer. Places like this don't care about the developers, and would have no problem sending you on a multiple month death march. If you are not able to convince them to adopt these tools, drop them like a bad habit. Make sure they know that you are leaving because of their refusal to adopt these practices.
Most of the evidence-based ideas on how to best run an educational system back up the idea of promoting the model of "hard work leads to success"
The problem with that model is that, as we've seen lately, hard work does not lead to success in the real world.
Good thing this isn't the real world. And being humiliated, while it can be motivating, it can also cause someone to drop out altogether and stop trying, because they can't face the humiliation.
I'm going to guess, based solely on my knowledge of royalties from the record industry, that at 99c a book, the author is getting maybe 5c, if that.
Hiring and promotions should not be based on loyalty, but on their ability to do the job. I, for one, think that most workplaces would be far better if they dropped this whole "We're a family!" bullshit, and embraced the idea that their employees are probably not going to stay there forever. Realize that your employees will eventually leave, and you'll probably be far better in planning, and won't be as disrupted when they do leave. Furthermore, they will probably be far more proactive in making sure their things are ready for someone else to pick up.
If the only reason they can't match the salary is because they can't afford it, they might be willing to offer alternatives in order to get you to stay.
The headliner on the list of job duties for "manager" is "making decisions".
That just means he has to make them. It doesn't mean that they have to be pleasant to make.
As an IT manager, I would be pissed if someone came to me with leverage.
Because you want your underlings to have no power at all at the bargaining table, right? You need all the power for yourself. How dare they try to balance that out a bit.
Well, you can attempt to bargain all you want. Doesn't mean that the company is going to listen.
If they can't afford it in outright cash, but they still want you on board, they might still try to get you extra compensation in other ways. More time off, more telecommuting time, etc.
I think your story isn't so much about being "loyal" as it is making sure not to burn any bridges. You took care to leave while still on very good terms (the fact you had an understanding and good boss also helped), and so later, they didn't remember you flipping everyone off and Xeroxing your buttocks, but they remembered you as being a hard worker and a professional. That point is very important to make.
You know, if they actually delivered what they sold you, then you wouldn't have to worry about that.
I can understand, and support, the very same throttling at the ISP level.
I can't. That is them saying they should have more control over MY traffic than I do. If I want to prioritize shit, I'll get Tomato and do it my own damn self.
The ISP sold me a pipe with a rated upload and download speed. Therefore, I should be able to use at least 80% of that speed at any given time, for as long as I want. Anything less, and they have deceived me.
So, don't complain about the companies.
So, don't complain about the entity that is actually doing this shit?
Fuck that, they are completely responsible for their actions. If they aren't, then they shouldn't have any rights whatsoever, and should be regulated up the ass.
Companies just do their part of the deal: to get as much money as possible for as little effort as possible... and get away with it without losing customers.
This is NOT a good thing. Not for consumers, and definitely not for employees. And this is NOT an excuse for the behavior they've been exhibiting.
Customers should switch to another company if the current internet provider seems a bad deal.
Hey, that sounds awesome! I'll just look up at what ISPs are in my part of Orange County, CA. Looks like there's Cox, whom I have already, and .... Cox.
Capitalism was never meant to give industry ownership of everything.
Yeah, it kinda was. It was designed so that consolidation would happen.
Yeah, we owe the corporations a profit
The fuck we do. We don't owe them shit. They owe us for their continued existence.
And if you think that even for a second, then you must agree that they owe us jobs, and therefore should not be able to fire anyone at will.
See, the thing is, while they might have "larger" keys, they're still going to be squished incredibly together, and that's what my hands don't like.
The main reason I don't want a netbook is the tiny keyboards. Hell, I had a 13" Macbook for a couple years, and while I got used to it, as soon as I went back to a full sized laptop keyboard (15"), my hands felt sooooo much better. I understand this is more of a personal thing, and may not be an issue for you, but it definitely one for me, especially on a device that I'd like to use for a few hours at a time.
Because the only people who get harassed by debt collectors are those in debt. Nobody ever gets mistaken for someone else.
And even if the person does owe the debt, that's no reason to harass them at all hours of the night for something like this.
Campaign finance reform is a joke, since it has to be passed by the people who benefit from its absence.
You'd think all those Tea Party types would have been all over this. Guess they don't care either.