Re: not enough real programmers? (was Re: Byte Magazine: 18 Vintage issues, 1985-1986)

[hshubs@mindspring.com (Howard S Shubs)]

In article <x7n1w0vc3e.fsf@dumbcat.snafu.org>, Marco S Hyman
<marc@snafu.org> wrote:

>This was a real issue in the days I was hiring.  More than once an offer
>was declined because the candidate didn't like the processor used
>in our embedded system.  The fact that it was the most cost effective
>solution for our "widget" wasn't important to these people.

For me, it's a combination of "what will I have to show from this job
other than cash", and "how much satisfaction will I get from this job". 
If I find your widgets boring, but the technical challege interesting,
I'll be interested in the job.  If I find the widgets interesting but the
technical challenge boring, I won't be interested.  I might be able to
convince myself to do it anyway, because I need the experience, though.

I recently stopped an interview process after it turned out that while the
widgets were mildly interesting, the technical challenge was minimal and
the likelyhood for gaining experience in something useful was minimal. 
What it comes down to for me is not the widgets, but what I'm spending my
days doing.  The widgets are more of an after-thought.  I may not even use
the widgets.  A widget discount could be a useless benefit, as it would
have been at this particular position with a company you've heard of.  I
considered it briefly anyway, because it would have been POS experience.

That may sound bad, but think of it this way: there I am working in IT.  I
keep the users happy by writing and maintaining code.  My code doesn't
make the widgets, or maybe it does.  It doesn't matter, as my code does
what my -boss- wants it to do.  If that tracks widgets, fine.  If that
spews Postscript code to a printer for Accounts Payable, fine.  The
widgets themselves aren't important to me directly.

My most recent contract was with an electric utility.  I never did
anything having to do with electricity.  How did the widget matter to me? 
I did, OTOH, have something to do with "widgets" in the sense of keeping
the engineering group I was working with happy.  They were my "boss". 
Their widgets were nuclear reactors.  Did I do anything with their
widgets?  Hell no, I'm no nuclear engineer.  I just made their programs
work properly.  Made the programs give answers the users said were
correct.  I was interested in -their- widgets, but I stood no chance of
learning a significant amount about them to be helpful on my own.  The
widgets were not directly significant to me.  The fact that I even got to
-see- their widgets was unusual.
-- 
Howard S Shubs      hshubs@mindspring.com    hshubs@bix.com
The Denim Adept     Is this the right room for an argument?
SPAM: uce@ftc.gov   postmaster@[127.0.0.1]   abuse@[127.0.0.1]