🚀 go-pugleaf

>> to the "difficulty I'm having hiring Mac programmers." On the other hand,
>> I have a publisher friend who says he is still being flooded with resumes.

This discussion has all the earmarks of a real debate, because so far it seem
to be glossing over the real issue while going solidly for the peripheral
aspects.

The question is, what is a programmer?  Or what is a software engineer?  And
most importantly, what do we expect of our universities?

If we are using universities as trade schools, then we would expect them to
turn out people who are qualified to do one particular thing.  If we expect
our universities to be educational in nature, we would expect them to teach
the underlying concepts and some skills exemplary of the knowledge base being
imparted.

The difference carries over to the marketplace.  If a company is expecting to
get a person with DIRECT experience on a hot new system, they are going to have
to wait in line.  However, the person with direct experience may have a very
limited scope, and know only that one thing.  On the other hand, they may go
instead for a person with a deeper background, and accept someone who may not
have experience that directly relates, knowing that the demonstrated performance
in other environments indicates a minimum learning curve in their environment.

If you've been out of school for more than 5 years or so, you know very well
that everything has changed since you graduated.  You also know that you are
more experienced in the practical application of theory than you were when you
first graduated.  In short, you represent more value to your employer.  He has
paid for your increased value.

If an employer cannot see that good experience elsewhere does not solve his
needs, he is being short sighted.  I did some early Mac programming, and found
the entry effort and learning curve to be about typical; more involved than
some environments, but not as much as some real doozies I've been involved in.
Yes, it's more complex than a simple bare-bones system, but that's only because
a huge part of the environment (and the product you're building) is already
there.  It seems that the overhead that an employer would need to grow their
own is not especially odious.  The fact that some are not willing to do so
indicates that, as soon as your specialty is worn out, you may find yourself
out on the street, should you actually be experienced in their hot discipline
of the moment and accept their job offer.

There is a lot of talk about retraining workforces and such now.  How do you
make "information technologists" out of steelworkers, etc.  But if business is
not even ready to do their share of something so close as making experienced
programmers into the experienced Mac programmers they need, there is no hope
for progress.  The individuals can only do so much, by taking coursework and
keeping their skills up to date.

Fortunately, the marketplace will soon disabuse reluctant employers.  If they
want their products out, they'll take what's available eventually.

Whenever I've hired professionals, I've looked for professionals.  I don't care
that their experience isn't with compiler xyzzy on system foo, I want demon-
strated performance in some aspect of their discipline, and demonstrated ability
to creativly solve problems.

Anything else is fooling myself.

-- 
-Brian Diehm     (SDA - Standard Disclaimers Apply)
Tektronix, Inc.
briand@tekig4.TEK.COM   or  {decvax,cae780,uw-beaver}!tektronix!tekig4!briand