The Joel on Software Discussion Group (CLOSED)

A place to discuss Joel on Software. Now closed.

This community works best when people use their real names. Please register for a free account.

Other Groups:
Joel on Software
Business of Software
Design of Software (CLOSED)
.NET Questions (CLOSED)
Fog Creek Copilot

The Old Forum

Your hosts:
Albert D. Kallal
Li-Fan Chen
Stephen Jones

Am I "toast" as a developer?


I'm an experienced developer. I am wondering if I am losing the essence that makes one able to call themself a developer.

After a considerable hiatus (layoff+extended job search), I have an opportunity to use .Net on a new contract project. I don't *have* to use .Net, but I am a Windows C++ and Delphi guy who stayed on the workstation while everyone else moved onto web applications, so I see .Net as critical to ensuring my future employability as a developer.

I looked over .Net (this is a web project) and installed and messed with a couple of reference projects in order to get up to speed. My general feeling is CRIPES, what a waste of needless complexity. This feels like an enormous learning curve. Going to Windows felt nothing like this.

I've done some web work with Apache and Perl type solutions and even though the GNU stuff doesn't seem to be highly marketable in a developer sense (used more for sys admins and ISP work) I feel much more in control of the LAMP stuff.

I've been in the field a long time (since the mid 1980s) and .Net just "feels wrong".

Is my diminished interest in learning something new similar to a "canary in a coalmine" effect? That is, is this indicating that I should transition to another line of work? Or is it indicating that I have some decent judgement about tools and I have summarily judged the tool by past experience?

Discussing this with friends has been circular. I've tended to get exhorted on religious grounds to embrace .Net. My only criteria for this project is what I can use to most likely satisfy the customer.

Right now, I have no passion to learn .Net. I'll do it if I have to, but I really don't want to. If the project comes in late, the client won't care about the geewhiz factor. 

No trolls, please. There are some highly experienced people here and I value the opinions.
Toasted oaties Send private email
Tuesday, December 14, 2004
It seems more likely that you just don't trust abstractions which are wide, thick and opaque.  Many of the best developers don't.
Eric Sink Send private email
Tuesday, December 14, 2004
I find these two statements, together, rather funny:

"My general feeling is CRIPES, what a waste of needless complexity..."
"Going to Windows felt nothing like this."

I couldn't ever get the Windows API into my head.  I've done VisualBasic applications, and most of those called plenty of Win32 API functions.  I've written COM controls in C++ (although most of that is generated code I never did understand).  But actually writing a pure Windows application in C++ (even with MFC) totally escaped me.  I just couldn't get over the awkwardness of it all.

I know quite a few platforms; I've coded for Symbian (weird weird platform -- but more logical than Win32) and Linux (and Solaris, etc, etc), and now I do most of my work in LAMP, but the Windows API eluded me.  Maybe it's because I never really needed to learn it, I don't know.

.NET actually feels pretty good to me.  I've played around with it a little bit.  It basically feels like VB smushed together with C++ with a Java-like class library -- I can handle that.  It's not too different from what I'm used to and my brain can wrap itself around it.  I'm actually hopeful that Win32 will be essentially obsolete -- so I never have to learn it.

You can only hold so much _active_ information in your brain at once.  Whenever I switch between projects on different platform it takes days before I'm up to speed -- it takes a real mental switch.  Learning a new platform from scratch requires creating that mental switch.  It's not a easy thing.  It's like starting from scratch as a programmer sometimes.
Almost Anonymous Send private email
Tuesday, December 14, 2004
You arent alone. I've spent years working with the Win32 API. After developing custom frameworks for my own work and having "complete" control and understanding of exactly what is going on in my apps, I just cannot accept .Net without hesitation.

On the other hand, the power of the WinForms in Visual Studio is beyond impressive. So, it is difficult to just look away and ignore the cool stuff that is associated with it.

A lack of interest in .Net doesn't equate to one losing the essense of a developer. You found your niche with previous tools, and there is nothing wrong with that. But you may want to learn atleast some basics of .Net. You may find that it's worth the extra effort in the future.
Juan Salazar Send private email
Wednesday, December 15, 2004
Perhaps you're seeing the same ennui that a master woodcrafter who spent 20 years working with hand saws and chisels would feel upon starting in an all-power-tool woodshop?

That may be an apt comparison - both methods have their merit, and both can produce quality furniture. Hand tools will always take longer (though the craftsman will deny it), but there are some things you simply cannot do with power tools (though the power-tool craftsman will deny it)

C++ is a tool. .Net is a tool. Each has strengths and weaknesses. Don't look at it as replacing your tool kit; look at it as adding a new tool.

Does that help?

Philo Send private email
Wednesday, December 15, 2004
.NET isn't just a tool though, its a worldview and somewhat all encompassing.  You can't just use a little bit of .NET, you're all the way pregnant.
Simon Lucy Send private email
Wednesday, December 15, 2004
He he. If you think .NET's bad for that, try J2EE.
John Topley Send private email
Wednesday, December 15, 2004
Yeah....go to J2EE for a couple weeks, .NET will look a lot simpler.  Honestly though, Eric got it right when he said your not trusting the abstraction.  Its something I went through.  I know I'm a big J2EE cheerleader on these boards, but believe me, when I first started working with it, I thought it sucked big time.  It was way too complex.  But...after time... it grew on me.  I suspect the same will occur for you and .NET

Also, don't doubt your design abilities either.  I wouldn't be suprised if the sample applications were overly complex just to showcase a lot of features.  Use what you need, and don't worry about the rest.
Vince Send private email
Wednesday, December 15, 2004
"Look there's a new fad! If you don't learn it you'll be obselete!"
Mr Jack
Wednesday, December 15, 2004
The C programmers laughed at C++ and Visual Basic in much the same way.  And the COBOL and Fortran programmers laughed at C before them.  And the machine-code-on-punched-cards guys laughed at Fortran for being too abstract and inefficient.  I don't know about you, but I don't see many job adverts asking for punched-card experience these days.

Sometimes what looks like a fad really *is* the next big thing.
Mr Jack Knows Jack
Wednesday, December 15, 2004
I believe the software 'frameworks' (J2EE, .NET) are continuing to get more and more complicated.  On the good side, .NET was created by the guy who created Delphi.  Microsoft hired him away from Borland (with a multi-million dollar bonus) to do so.

However, I understand .NET IS a 'step away from the machine' -- as another said, wide, deep and opaque.  I've resisted stepping in to these waters myself -- though I know Perl, C, C++, VB6, and some of the Win32 API.

I don't think you're 'toast' as a developer.  I think you have a natural reaction to needless increasing complexity.

Unless you're over 50.  Then you probably are toast.
Wednesday, December 15, 2004
Look around, Knows Jack, and you'll find plenty of pure C jobs still out there and plenty more employers who're too stupid to tell the difference between C and C++. Not knowing .NET may be a problem in ten years time but it won't be next year, or the year after.
Mr Jack
Wednesday, December 15, 2004
Yes - ASP.Net is very complicated, and it incourages people to write unreusable, dificulte to maintain, and bugy code.

Tear away most of aspx(System.Web.UI.Page), and write your own IHttpHandler's.
Gary van der Merwe Send private email
Wednesday, December 15, 2004
I don't think you can expect to jump into the .NET paradigm overnight for someone with your background.  It is one thing to learn the syntax but another to get used to a new way of thinking.  Since I come from a Java background, .NET make perfect sense to me and is easy to pick up.
I think the issue is more of being "set in your ways" than capacity to learn.  Give it some time before you write yourself off.
Bill Rushmore Send private email
Wednesday, December 15, 2004
Toasted oaties,

Welcome to the "club" - the "club" being we developers who have been sold a bill of goods with .NET and the belief that the browser is actually a good platform for writing applications.  Perhaps you're finally realizing that the Internet itself, regardless of what programming tools you're using, eventually all de-volves down to HTML and JavaScript.  In other words, the whole Internet is the BIGGEST f'ing kludge ever invented!  And J2EE?  I'd rather clean toilets for a living than tackle that nightmare.  Complexity = developer's worst enemy.

Is Win32/desktop app dev going away anytime soon?  No way.  Develop in whatever tools get the job done the quickest and easiest - you're customer will love you, for they care not about what programming tools "get you off."
Wednesday, December 15, 2004

"You can't just use a little bit of .NET, you're all the way pregnant."

This hits on the essence of something that leads a lot of people astray with .NET - the belief that .NET development entails nothing less than an entire paradigm shift of development, and that you need to embrace all of .NET and convert your religion otherwise it's not worthwhile. This simply isn't true. This is something that the more intelligent, less religious Microsofties have been trying to say for a while (as opposed to the brainless zombies marketing droids) - In fact .NET itself is really a thin veneer overtop of a huge volume of Win32 code, and the real brains behind .NET don't hide this.

In other words you can fully make use of .NET components amongs your Win32 and ASP (one project I had for a client was to make an app that would extract resized and watermarked sample frames out of videos or single images for their ASP shop. I made a simple little class in .NET using the extraordinarily easy GDI+ classes as well as a little bit of COM interop to some Directshow functionality and created what was an enormously powerful little component in a laughably small amount of time. Stuck it in a com-callable wrapper, and voila the power of .NET gave a powerful solution to a COM/ASP shop), and vice versa. I currently have a large project that has the bulk of processing code in "classic" Visual C++ Win32, and the orchestration/core in .NET. Works like an absolute champ, and it gives me the best development environment in each.

More specifically to your example, there is absolutely nothing stopping you from building webpages using the "printf" style, or from handling form elements and query strings manually - you don't have to use servercontrols or auto postbacks or heavy abstractions if you don't want to, and anyone who pushes this is a religious zealot. Use what feels comfortable, and the more you learn the more you'll see how some of the value-adds of the framework might help rather tha hinder.
Dennis Forbes
Wednesday, December 15, 2004
Guys, thanks for the many perspectives.

I have been fighting back burnout for many years. The comment that Dot Net is a "world view", not just a tool, certainly resonates and is kind of what I suspected. But the comment that Dot Net may not merely be a fad has also been in the back of my mind. 

I've learned and embraced new tools and new world-views when they represented the only reasonable way to solve a class of problems. For what I am doing, though, Dot Net seems excessive and introducing unnecessary risk.

I just wish programmers would control the religious evangelism when it comes to selecting tools. I've had several people tell me already that I "owe it to myself" to use Dot Net on this thing. Even though it turns a straightforward project (which I MUST get done) into a "maybe".
Toasted oaties Send private email
Wednesday, December 15, 2004
BTW: When I say "Microsofties" above I'm referring to actual bonafide Microsoft employees astroturfing and spreading the religion. On the one hand you have the employees who pooh-pooh at the idea of "pure .NET', and encourage and advocate intermixing .NET as one part of a solution, revealing that of course without Win32 there would be no .NET (i.e. it's pure only to the point of a .NET framework call in most cases). On the other hand you have the Microsofties who declare it nothing less than a schism that is all or nothing, and you'd better embrace it or be left in the cold when Microsoft turns off the Win32 bit.
Dennis Forbes
Wednesday, December 15, 2004
I work with a number of people who use .NET.  What troubles me is that they don't really seem to know .NET as much as they know how to use Visual Studio, i.e. they know that if they drag certain components onto a web form they can get the behaviour they want but they don't really know how the code works.  This is a big contrast to my work in Java where even though I am using JBuilder I am always working directly with code and not through a visual interface to the code.  I am just not able to make the switch to working as the .NET folks do here.
Mike Send private email
Wednesday, December 15, 2004
Toasted oaties,

.Net has it's place, and it isn't in the realm of Win32/C++/Shrinkwrap software, and that is a Good Thing :)

When is .Net a no-brainer ? If you're still hacking around in the wasteland of classic ASP/VB Script then you probably need your head read if you're not using .Net.

If your background or preference is Win32/C++ I really can see no reason at all to move to .Net.

Microsoft may be punting .Net as the next big thing but take a look at the environments it is being aimed at: corporate enterprise line-of-business apps. That's where .Net will thrive and that's where Microsoft wants it to be.

I also can't see Microsoft halting development on the Win32 API or MFC for that matter. It just won't be done with all the fanfare surrounding .Net.

Sure, xcopy installation in .Net is great - pity you need a whopping big 22 MB "runtime" before you can use it.

In essence, you need 22 MB of bloat before you can say "Hello, World!"...

Why .Net wasn't included as part of XP SP2 eludes me.
OneFlew Send private email
Wednesday, December 15, 2004
Well. I have to admit that I'm a huge fan of .NET. Probably because the environment I was using before that was ASP and COM. .NET didn't have to work hard to be better than ASP (though IMNSHO it did work very, very hard and succeeded wonderfully).

Look, it sounds like you have a choice of developer technologies here - your company isn't going to lock you into a platform. That's a tremendous freedom, isn't it? Use what, in your honest, reasoned opinion (adding in your gut feeling with appropriate weight), would be the best solution to solve the customer's problem.

No amount of marketing hype can take the place of a good developer's gut feeling.
John Christensen Send private email
Wednesday, December 15, 2004

DO NOT switch your way of working!  Those people are just programming by coincidence.  See "The Pragmatic Programmer" tip 44.
Bill Rushmore Send private email
Wednesday, December 15, 2004
"On the good side, .NET was created by the guy who created Delphi."

I think Anders had some help! ;-)
John Topley Send private email
Wednesday, December 15, 2004
"What troubles me is that they don't really seem to know .NET as much as they know how to use Visual Studio, i.e. they know that if they drag certain components onto a web form they can get the behaviour they want but they don't really know how the code works."

There are lots of those people out there, but note that the VS drag & drop stuff is completely optional. Personally I prefer creating Windows Forms controls in code, for instance.

"I also can't see Microsoft halting development on the Win32 API or MFC for that matter. It just won't be done with all the fanfare surrounding .Net."

Microsoft has already stated that the current MFC/ATL release is the final one, except for fixes and minor new features. And Avalon will be a .NET only API.
Chris Nahr Send private email
Wednesday, December 15, 2004
"Microsoft has already stated that the current MFC/ATL release is the final one, except for fixes and minor new features. And Avalon will be a .NET only API. "

Do you have a source on this so I can read more?
Mr. Analogy {ISV owner} Send private email
Wednesday, December 15, 2004
Dennis Forbes
Wednesday, December 15, 2004
'I've been in the field a long time (since the mid 1980s) and .Net just "feels wrong".'

Time to try Lingo ( ) - everything I put in the language was in order to reduce complexity!
William Rayer Send private email
Wednesday, December 15, 2004
Chris Nahr has a point - I've long since given up trying to design HTML pages using Visual Studio's designer: it makes ugly, ugly, UGLY HTML code. Nowadays, I stay the hell away from that tab when editing html and aspx pages - I add server tag references to the code-behind class by hand (generally, I don't add a lot of these. Its amazing how far you can go just defining the right set of properties in your code-behind class and relying on DataBinding) and I add my own events by hand (I hate Visual Studio's naming convention for events - I'd rather the event handler's name be something related to the type of event raised: not m_submit_command(object sender, CommandEventArgs e) but instead HandleSaveInputToDatabaseEvent(object sender, CommandEventArgs e).

If I find a good .NET IDE that integrates a compiler and debugger as well as VS.NET does, I may very well switch over to that if I can convince work.

Especially now that Microsoft is going to release VS 2k5 which, presumably, will have no support for Framework 1.1 code. This annoys me - I don't want to write 2.0 code right away. Besides, we're pretty invested in 1.1 right now, I don't want to have to upgrade that code - therey's no money in it for my company in doing that.

Just one more reason to never forget Fire & Motion, I guess.
John Christensen Send private email
Wednesday, December 15, 2004
I'm surprised none of the other Delphi people have piped up.  Have a look at Delphi 2005.  It is Delphi for both win32 and .net.  As such it may help bridge the gap in your understanding.

I have not yet tried it.  (Currently Delphi 7)

Wednesday, December 15, 2004
If you're just tired of all the "churn" -- well that's understandable.  Remember, though, that's why we have jobs (if we do).  It can't hurt to add something else to your resume.

I suspect, though, that some of your reaction to .Net may be a result of the MS documentation.  The .Net docs, esp. the MSDN docs that are included with VS, are just the worst crap I've ever seen.

It seems like they just ran the code comments through a help compiler, and that's what you get.  Absolutely no help with how to accomplish a particular task, much less why.

You might want to try some decent books (which of course cost $$$).  I can recommend:

Essential .Net, Vol 1 - Don Box & Chris Sells.  This is an architectural overview of .Net.  If you used to like reading CPU instruction manuals, this is for you.

Windows Forms Programming in .Net - Chris Sells.  A pretty good overview of how to actually build GUI applications.

C# and the .Net Platform - Troelsen.  A more in-depth version of Windows Forms, with a lot more material.

Also, try some of these URLs: (Windows Forms FAQ)

Good luck!
Wednesday, December 15, 2004
This is a bit off topic, but anyhow...

I'm a very experienced developer (MSCS, 20+ years, several languages, etc.)

A few years back I made two distinct attempts to learn Perl.  I badly needed a handy tool for simple text/file processing tasks, and Perl seems perfectly suited to the task.

Both attempts failed.  I just couldn't get into it, and got bored and frustrated trying the simplest of tasks.  It just seemed "wrong".

Then I read Eric Raymond's "Why Python?" essay (which is somewhat critical of Perl).  Yeah!  That's how I feel!  I tried Python, picked it up immediately, and started writing useful apps with it right away.

The point here is not a language troll, but to point out how sometimes a developer and a particular toolset just don't mesh.    Sometimes you need to find the write tool, or to wrap up the ones your stuck with into a format you can work with.
J. Peterson Send private email
Wednesday, December 15, 2004

Here, here!

I like Delphi 2005 as well.  At my previous job, I used Delphi extensively (Win32 versions 4 through 7).  I still think that Delphi is probably the easiest way to write fast GUI apps; no dependence on external libraries either, making deployment really simple.  Combining this with their .NET offering makes transitioning between the two very easy.

That said, at my current job, I write mostly C# code (we have a lot of data sitting on SQL servers here, and C#/ADO.NET make it quite easy to access and manipulate this data efficiently).  My advice to toasted_oaties is this:

Write a few simple C# console apps.  Do the same with Delphi 2005; both .NET and Win32 versions.  C# is very, very similar to Delphi.  As a previous poster noted, they were designed by the same guy.  Don't start with ASP.NET.  This gives you a warped view of writing .NET applications.  With ASP.NET you have to deal with the complexity of the web/IIS model, and you end up getting lost trying to understand the session model and the viewstate model and all these other things before you get a chance to appreciate C# as a beautiful language.

Implement a few standard algorithms in C#... play around with collections and regular expressions and stuff.  Then attack the WinForms and ASP.NET apps.

Being a C/C++ guy originally, I understand your disgust for many layers of abstraction.  Peel them away one by one, and I think in the end you won't mind them (and be glad that if you need to write something that is REALLY fast, you have the skills to go back and do so).
Michael Feldkamp Send private email
Wednesday, December 15, 2004
Go to Barnes and Nobles, read up on a different topic (history, comics, or something). Then before you know it you'll be back. Take it easy.
robtwister Send private email
Wednesday, December 15, 2004
Here's something to consider:  Take a look at the products Microsoft has on the shelf right now, like Office.  Now take a look at their committed support time.  That's how long your products will work using the same tools they did to make it, guaranteed.  You have at least that long before you are forced to switch to a different technology.

Sure, it makes sense to use the best tools at hand to solve a problem, but even after Microsoft stops supporting Windows XP, there will still be XP users for a long long time.

Which problem do you want to solve?  That, in part, dictates the tools you will use.  If the problem is "An app that works on many handheld PCs in addition to a lot of desktop PCs with no recompilation," then the answer is probably .Net - specifically the subset known as Compact.
Aaron F Stanton Send private email
Wednesday, December 15, 2004
Toasted oaties,

Pretty long thread here. My comments will probably go in the For What It's Worth Category.

I am a "classic" ASP programmer and javascript guru who switched to ASP.NET using C# about a year ago. The transition wasn't easy. Whichever language you happen to use to develop in .NET is trivial compared to learning the quirks of the IDE. In my opinion, it's buggy and too complex; I'm still learning new things about it all the time. A far cry from the C# language itself, which I handled in roughly eighteen seconds (I've done time in C++ and Java). But admittedly, the platform is also enormously powerful.

.NET is here to stay. 'Nuf said.

As far as your web application, choose the best solution to handle the problem. My recommendation: if the project specs out to a relatively small, simple solution, do it in .NET and bruise your shins on something easy. If the project is large and/or complicated, use something you know that will help you get the app out on time, within spec and under cost (blah-blah-blah).

You're not toasted as a programmer. Far from it. .NET is just a new wrinkle in the fabric of developer-dom. I bought a few, thin, introductory O'Reilly books on C# and .NET, and these helped me understand the guts of what was going on under the hood.

I suppose we all get a little tired of trying to stay on the leading edge of What's New. Hang in there: your prior experience is not wasted. You'll be fine.
Chris Send private email
Wednesday, December 15, 2004
People, here is a samurai medicine for your "funless" software development:


For windows developers, take the shortcut:

For the best MVC web framework you'll ever see in any platform:

Make sure you watch the short videos of this one and I promise you: you will get back the fun in your programming lives.

But, be warned: you probably will never want to go back to any .NET, J2EE, C++, etc.
Demetrius Nunes Send private email
Wednesday, December 15, 2004
.NET isn't that flabbergasting if you take it in pieces.

* The CLR is a very good virtual machine. It already has 5 or 6 commercial languages (C#, C++, J#, VB.Net, cobol, delphi).

* .Net the library, I don't know. It's as huge as Java-the-library, it seems. I don't like the freely-available documentation -- I'm used to Ruby or Python-level completeness and readability.

* .NET the web framwork. In the dark on this one. You wont need to learn it to make .Net desktop apps, though (but people dispute the viability of such apps)

* The varying languages, with C# a slightly different rehash of java, VB.Net a very strange beast (a statically-typed basic, wtf?!). One annoying thing is that the non pascal-typed languages developed at MS research (F# -- Hindley-Milner and IronPython -- dynamically checked) are, well, still research, not products.
Thursday, December 16, 2004
Re MFC/ATL: "Do you have a source on this so I can read more?"

In addition to the link posted by Dennis Forbes, here's a relevant interview with Nick Hodapp, Visual C++ Product Manager:

"Especially now that Microsoft is going to release VS 2k5 which, presumably, will have no support for Framework 1.1 code."

I heard that you can set the current beta to compile against 1.1, even though Visual Studio itself needs 2.0. No idea if they'll retain this feature in the released product, though.

Agree about Microsoft's "helpful" wizards and designers. That's just another case where I wish MS software had an installation switch "Don't annoy me with stupid crap aimed at people who liked Clippy". Sigh.

As for the documentation, a lot of the .NET stuff in the MSDN library definitely looks auto-generated from comments that barely rise above redundancy ("The Foo property returns a Foo object"). That's not true of all entries, though, and I hope they'll continue filling in the gaps until the docs are on the same level as the very detailed Platform SDK docs.

In the meantime, read Jeff Richter's "Applied Microsoft .NET Framework Programming" and Mickey Williams' "Microsoft C# .NET". Also Dino Esposito's "Applied XML Programming for .NET" if you're doing anything with XML.
Chris Nahr Send private email
Thursday, December 16, 2004
I greet every new completely automatized, improved, redesigned and best suit my needs model of life saving boat -- as long as it's equipped with oars and a can to bail out water.

Same for programming languages.

A good programming technology of the future "MUST" include legacy C++ support, that "MUST" include C support, that "MUST" include ASM support and all four of them "MUST" allow inserting a random processor opcode into your program.

Any technology that does not allow you to do that "MUST NOT" be considered good.

Key words are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119.
Alex Bolenok Send private email
Thursday, December 16, 2004
Guys, I appreciate the perspectives.

I'm going with a L.A.M.P. solution (an open source PHP/MySQL CMS) for the project at hand. As far as .Net itself, I am keeping an open mind, but this is simply not the time nor the project for an experiment.


The client wants a high degree of functionality in a relatively short time frame.

The money just isn't there (believe me!) to support a huge amount of work for basic functionality.

I lack not only .Net development experience but also .Net system administration experience. This is on top of needing to deliver a boatload of functions on time.

I know you guys can and will decompose the issues of learning dot net to a bunch of individual tasks or areas of interest, but when you put it all together, it's a new development world that will take time (weeks to months) to master. When I moved into Windows development and C++ from DOS, there were many concepts that stayed basically the same (the idea of a linker, the behavior of C++ at a nuts and bolts level being the same as C, IDEs and debuggers were similar, and so forth.) .Net is a new universe and runs on a new virtual machine.

The client is highly influential, so failure or excuses are simply NOT an option. I have about 2 months to get this going to a beta stage.

This exercise does make me question the sanity of .Net deployment in line of business applications. All I can see are burdens, learning curves, and expense. That's not an excuse to not learn something. It's a business tradeoff.

Toasted oaties Send private email
Thursday, December 16, 2004
 Did you used to work for a large corporation (that shall remain nameless) that makes databases and atm's? You situation sounds too much like my own to be a coincidence, did we work together? I was one of the fortunate before I left the afore mentioned company I received J2EE training which I was able to put to good use at my next job.

 My advice to you short and sweet; find out what the new technology is and get trained in it.

 I saw the change coming down the pike and I moved heaven and earth to make sure I was not left behind. I still got laid off mind you but I was better prepared for my next job.

I now take every opportunity at my new job to research the trends, read the trade publications and attend every seminar I can. I just got back from Dev2Dev days (which was a freebee).   

Don't give up all you experience can be put to good use.
J2EE_Woman Send private email
Thursday, December 16, 2004
To the author of this topic.

I am in same situation, but I resolved this matter for myself quite quickly. The answer is simple: you've been just for too long inside your (and my) C/C++/Win32 framework to make it your own world. As for me, I more live to code, than code to live. So, I hate changes which are just changes fo the sake of changes, not changes for the good. They are changes for good only for companies who strive to develop big things cheaper, but that's NOT MY PROBLEM, my problem is how to make my own life profitable, but still interesting.

So I'll stay in my world as long as I get enough money from it to stay here. I think in 10 years I will stick to drivers development. Alas, even after 10 years in C/C++ I see no place for it when abstractions consume the world, and they will do.

So, if you want to make bucks rather than pleasure from work, got .Net. If you want to make both, go sell cars or write game reviews, or both :)

I don't mean .Net is not fun, it is. But only for those, who wasn't in development for past decade(s). And somewhere in 2015 they'll face same problem with whatever "piece of sh.., oops - changes" comes next. Changes are innatural. Of all animals only human kind is driven towards changes for some reason. Just think of how many times they install free updates which bring nothing, but need to rehabit or even impose new bugs...
Denis Koshman Send private email
Thursday, December 16, 2004

This topic is archived. No further replies will be accepted.

Other recent topics Other recent topics
Powered by FogBugz