Software Engineering Is a Dead-End Career, Says Bloomberg 738
An anonymous reader sends this quote from an opinion piece at Bloomberg:
"Many programmers find that their employability starts to decline at about age 35. Employers dismiss them as either lacking in up-to-date technical skills — such as the latest programming-language fad — or 'not suitable for entry level.' In other words, either underqualified or overqualified. That doesn’t leave much, does it? Statistics show that most software developers are out of the field by age 40. Employers have admitted this in unguarded moments. Craig Barrett, a former chief executive officer of Intel Corp., famously remarked that 'the half-life of an engineer, software or hardware, is only a few years,' while Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook has blurted out that young programmers are superior."
Nothing new? (Score:5, Interesting)
I did a Masters Chemical Engineer (didn't finish), and a bachelor in CS. In both older students and alumni warned that you should get out of tech jobs and move into management within 10 years after graduation.
The first time I heard that must have been in the 1992-1994 timeframe
Re:Nothing new? (Score:5, Interesting)
Cool, so everyone should be a manager? Then what happens when the true fat is cut in an organization and all the middle managers are laid off?
Re:Nothing new? (Score:5, Insightful)
No, just the ones that want to keep a steady progression in wages.
Re:Nothing new? (Score:4, Insightful)
Exactly, if you want to increase your income but continue to be a programmer then look elsewhere. You already make a decent amount of money as a programmer use it to invest in some other things like rental properties or stocks. It's a little after hours effort but it will increase your pay without having to move down into management.
Re:Nothing new? (Score:5, Funny)
Because all the cool toys get more and more expensive.
And, if you like to keep banging younger chicks....it doesn't hurt to have a bit more disposable income than the next guy....
Remember, he who dies with the most stuff....wins.
Re:Nothing new? (Score:5, Insightful)
Now let's assume a company with highly talented individuals. Some experienced, some novice. Why does salary need to keep going up? Simple. They should be paid more, because they're worth more. An experienced software engineer can be ten times as productive as a novice, will solve the same problems in less, more elegant, more maintainable code and have lower bug rates. They meet deadlines more consistently too. Yet, despite much better quality, lower risk and ten-fold productivity, it's rare to see more than a five-fold difference in salary. Being undervalued for their accomplishments, do you think it's strange developers switch career?
It's the experienced coders that you want. Compared to novice coders, they're an absolute bargain. *That* is why you want to keep increasing their salary. Oh and by the way. Experienced coders have no problem doing IPv6,
Re:Nothing new? (Score:5, Insightful)
"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional, wait until you hire an amateur."
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Nothing new? (Score:5, Insightful)
An old man once told me that age and treachery will always trump youth and skill...
Re:Nothing new? (Score:5, Interesting)
And it has cost them dearly both financially and in reputation.
I specifically of one team that was downsized from 35 to literally 1 person with a few 'off shore' techs to handle support. That didn't end up being very successful.
Long story short, when a CEO/Board who have no long term vested interest (i.e. golden parachutes that kick in after only a few years) their decisions are going to be *very* suspect when it comes to long term knowledge of who to keep and who to get rid of. Because if it kicks you in the ass a year after your parachute opened...what the hell do you really care?
I'm a 42 yr old software engineer/programmer and I know the drill. I'm expensive compared to fresh out of college kid. But I have years of experience they don't have and my employer knows this. Will it save me completely? No, but in no other field can you self teach yourself into the skills you need to have tomorrow. It's that simple. those who go out and learn on their own to keep themselves current will continue to be worth the extra money, those that don't will simply make it easier for those of us who do.
On top of that, did you read today that the University of Florida just killed their ENTIRE Computer Science department? Seriously, it boggles the mind that a school could be so completely clueless. Yet as a programmer, I call it job security, there will be fewer people for an every increasing amount of my jobs. I think the trend recently ticked up but for almost a decade the number of programmers graduating in the US went down every year. You can't fire people when you don't have anyone to hire to fill their spot.
Re:Nothing new? (Score:5, Insightful)
You can't fire people when you don't have anyone to hire to fill their spot.
I'm pretty sure companies do this anyway... They just expect under-qualified people to pick up the slack.
Re:Nothing new? (Score:5, Insightful)
I know you are speaking out of ignorance (and/or some really bad experiences with "managers"), and I wish I had time to provide more insight for you. Instead, I'll tell you why you're so wrong. Many managers (like me) are promoted from the ranks. I never really wanted to manage people - I did it before and didn't like it - but was thrown into the position anyway. I spent many years coding and implemented many successful projects. I still do that, and even dig down into code now and the, but my team does most of that. They are good at it, but they need me managing the project, running interference with upper management and business folks, designing the architectures, and many many other things that need to be done. They can't do these larger projects without me.
Frankly, I wonder if you have ever done any real software engineering - you don't seem to have much understanding of how large projects are done.
Re:Nothing new? (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm a less-than 30 year old developer. I've worked in organizations with 1:10 manager:dev ratio, sometimes higher. These managers did no coding whatsoever (some barely understood what we were doing), and spent their time inventing metrics, discussing/presenting these metrics, and making sure devs did the absolute minimum required to satisfy the customer because all they ever looked at were those metrics. While this may not apply to you, I can see where he's coming from. I now work for a company that has roughly a 1:70 ratio of manager:dev, and it's great. Devs participate in all levels of decision making, including the assignment of features/projects to younger devs, and oversight of their proteges. You could say that the managerial-level decision making is informally shared among the senior engineers. But they code just as much as I do. Coders are given independence and have ownership, and quality is their mandate. I hear Valve operates in a similar manner and their success mirrors our own. Ok maybe they are a bit more successful ;).
Good devs shouldn't stop coding unless they are bored with it. They should continue to work and be compensated according to their skill and experience. I feel a lot of firms have devalued experienced engineers to their peril. They dangle the $$ carrot in front of engineers who are at the top of their game, drawing them into an occupation where they no longer add demonstrable value to the company's products (again, not necessarily you), and then hire a newbie to fill the hole at the bottom rung. Worse, they farm out the work. The end result is invariably a crappier product.
Re:Nothing new? (Score:5, Interesting)
Strange, isn't it?
If it was surgery, you'd probably pick the surgeon with 20 years experience over the one with a couple of years experience to operate on you.
If is was a builder you were employing, you'd probably prefer the one with 20 years experience over the younger one to build your house.
And whatever Zuckerberg says can probably be ignored, because you just know he's the type that, when he's getting on a bit, will be saying that age and experience are what counts.
Mod parent up! (Score:5, Insightful)
This is going to sound "ageist" but ... the only advantage young programmers have is that they're willing to work 20 hour days and 7 day weeks for months at a time. And do it for less money.
http://norvig.com/21-days.html [norvig.com]
So you need about 10,000 hours of working in a field to become an "expert". If you believe that article (and I do). And someone who is an "expert" has, hopefully, seen enough mistakes and errors over those 10,000 hours to be able to head them off when they show up again.
That's what you're paying for when you hire the experienced programmers. The knowledge of what errors people usually make and why they make them.
So you get code with fewer errors and fewer re-writes to take out the errors that never got in in the first place.
Re: (Score:3)
That's the problem in the corporate world. But not every company is a big IT centric corporation
But wages progression also in mid and small companies wages progression for technical (not just IT) staff stalls.
Media have been raving on about the tech/beta deficits for two decades now, but the reality is that a business trainee still gets a starter wages above a tech graduate (whose masters are considered "heavier")
Re:Mod parent up! (Score:5, Interesting)
That's why you work long enough to get experience, and skills (and hopefully contacts and some people skills along the way)....incorporate yourself, and go contracting.
In that field, experience is EVERYTHING...and you can make a very healthy bill rate.
It is amazing really...how often, how companies will grind their W2's (young ones) into the ground, for nothing, willingly lose them, but pay a major premium for a contractor to come in and do the same thing or fix things, etc.
It isn't just IT, work has changed. The days of getting a long term job for life, especially at ONE company are long, long, long gone.
You have to be adaptable, willing to risk, willing to move/travel to where the jobs are.
There are plenty of jobs out there paying plenty of money if you are good. You just have to be willing to do what it takes to get to them and have them.
People skills and connections will get you a LONG way....if you can back those up with extreme tech skills, you will go even further. It isn't too bad when you can work your bill rate up high enough to work 6-8mos a year, and be able to easily afford to take the rest of the year off....it can be done,and they're plenty of IT folks out there doing it.
You just have to drop out of that old mindset of what a job is...
Re:Mod parent up! (Score:5, Insightful)
So you have to run your entire life around your work.
Something seems wrong, when that's how life is supposed to be lived.
Re:Mod parent up! (Score:4, Insightful)
"And do it for less money."
I think you've hit the nail on the head. It seems that "increasing shareholder value" has eclipsed every other goal in modern business, including quality and long-term thinking.
Re:Mod parent up! (Score:5, Insightful)
This. The pursuit of ever growing profits has got to be curbed. They can't be increased indefinitely, but those fucking MBA grads know all and want their bonuses, so they do everything and anything. Despite record profits at my company, they have cut the pension, cut the vacation caps, reduced medical coverage, increased medical premiums. And then blamed it on being competitive. All the while touting the company's "excellent" benefit package. They had profits (not revenue, profit) in the BILLIONs of dollars this year, and turned around and on top of all the benefit cuts they also gave no raises to many people.
They do this to increase profit, but it's also a way of giving a big fat middle finger to anyone worth a damn. Ultimately, IMO they have just cut all the reasons for anyone to remain at the company. In this way, the most expensive move on, and if any are replaced they're done so with cheap new talent.
But hey, it's more important to get that stock price an extra 1 cent higher so the corporate managers can earn that extra million dollar bonus.
That's my rant, but watching senior CS people leaving this company, and my last company, has been very disappointing. Some left for better opportunities, most left due to threats of furlough or layoff. Guess billion dollar profits isn't enough to keep people though...
Re:Mod parent up! (Score:5, Interesting)
That's what companies are for. Making money.
Here's a radical idea: why does all of that money have to be made for shareholders? Why can't some of it also be for the people doing the work?
Re:Mod parent up! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Mod parent up! (Score:5, Insightful)
Companies used to operate that way. Immediate short term gain was not the only motive. They would consider the impact their policies had on their host cities because they were wise enough to understand that affected their own future. They even agreed to a 40 hour work week because both their own and independent research showed that got the most productivity out of people. Surely no one thought the 40 hour week was born out of some silly concern over the welfare of the workers! But now in many places, it's strip mining. Plunder and pillage until the accumulated capital is all played out, then move on to new territory. It's management by locusts.
You said shareholders? The money is being made for the workers-- some of the workers. They just all happen to be at the executive level.
Re:Mod parent up! (Score:5, Insightful)
yea, and working those hours only exacerbates their lack of experience with stupid mistakes as they slowly burn out.
Thanks, but I'll take a well rested experience programmer at 8-9 hours a day over some kid working 20 hours days and fucking up for 18 of them.
re: ageist (Score:5, Insightful)
I will be over here doing great work, advocating the high value practices of the industry, and getting higher and higher salaries from smart employers.
For that matter, forget even thinking about those longer hours and just pay your coders by the line. That will get you ahead.
Re: ageist (Score:5, Insightful)
forget even thinking about those longer hours and just pay your coders by the line. That will get you ahead.
It will certainly get you ahead in the contest for needlessly long, verbose code....
Pressure from offshoring (Score:5, Insightful)
Personally I believe the bigger issue is the pressure offshoring has put on the market.
The jobs that used to be handled by junior programmers are now offloaded to offshore service providers. So the junior programmers, who just happen to have played with the latest toys and tools while we were busy writing useful code with the previous generation of tools, are readily available at a cut throat price.
So the work that used to be handled by the intermediate programmers now gets passed off to the new grads who used to be the juniors. In the meantime, the intermediate programmers are now ready and willing to undercut the senior programmers for their former job of designing systems and collecting requirements. Sure they don't have the experience of the senior programmers, but they're cheaper, so they get the job.
Which leaves the senior programmers on the short end of the stick. Thanks not only to the pressure of offshoring but the increased use of effective template-based designs, tooling, and frameworks that put to shame older tools like CORBA, and suddenly the only experience the senior programmer has that's actually relevant is their business experience.
Their degree is out of date. Their tools are matured with a wide range of skillsets available for reasonable or cheap prices.
But one thing experience teaches you that nothing else can is an intuitive grasp of how the frameworks and tools function and what they are probably doing inside all that obfuscated and hidden code. Because we used to have to write the code the frameworks implement by hand.
Unfortunately, despite the speed with which senior developers can debug problems thanks to their intuitive grasp of "the machine", there just aren't enough "tough" debugging problems to justify keeping them around in anything but the largest of teams and companies.
Still, senior developers can find work. If they're willing to retool, retrain, move, and take a pay cut that may well mean they're making less in real, spendable dollars than they did twenty years ago. And if they're real, real lucky.
Re:Mod parent up! (Score:4, Funny)
[[That's what you're paying for when you hire the experienced programmers. The knowledge of what errors people usually make and why they make them.]]
Younger programmers don't create errors. Just ask them.
Re:Mod parent up! (Score:5, Insightful)
Careful there: it is 10,000 of TRAINING. This was originally used in the context of olympic preparation, not programming.
I could sit at home and write code all by myself for 10,000 and still write craptastic useless code.
If the code isn't judged, reviewed, critiqued by someone with far more experience (e.g., a trainer or mentor) who provides metrics of improvement and a training plan to actually get better, then the 10,000 hours spent is utterly meaningless.
Re:Nothing new? (Score:5, Insightful)
"And whatever Zuckerberg says can probably be ignored ..."
You could have stopped right there.
Zuckerberg == rich idiot (Score:5, Insightful)
Zuckerberg runs a big company. He might have spent a few years coding, but he isn't a programmer anymore. I doubt that he put in enough time and sweat behind a compiler to be anything more than a clever amateur, so his opinion on the topic counts for zero. So basically, you have a college kid's level of experience in computer science making sweeping statements about who is and isn't a skilled expert in the field.
Once he is an expert in the field of software engineering, I will listen to what he has to say on the topic. Looking at the quality of his software, it is pretty obvious what dismissing experience gets you.
Re:Zuckerberg == rich idiot (Score:5, Insightful)
Nope. Facebook is doing the exact same thing as every other large tech company: Microsoft, Google, Oracle, etc. (Facebook also has a lot of silicon valley vets, Zuckerberg isn't just making this stuff up as he goes.)
The idea is that you hire "raw material" (CS grads) who really don't know any engineering. Then you train them in the Company Way. Because they don't know any better, they're now bound to the company's internal processes and it makes it that much harder for them to jump-ship or work on someone else's ecosystem. They also don't get uppity and say "Let's write this in Java" or "Oracle DB does this, why are we recreating it?"
Facebook uses PHP as their internal language and the majority of CS-wonk new hires have never even used it. This is 100% by-design.
Re:Zuckerberg == rich idiot (Score:5, Informative)
Facebook uses PHP because it is open source, and as a result much cheaper than ASP.NET or some other proprietary tool. They started out as a small company with little capital for expensive software licenses, and when they started growing, there is even less incentive to rewrite everything in some other language.
Re:Zuckerberg == rich idiot (Score:5, Insightful)
Nope. Facebook is doing the exact same thing as every other large tech company: Microsoft, Google, Oracle, etc. (Facebook also has a lot of silicon valley vets, Zuckerberg isn't just making this stuff up as he goes.)
The idea is that you hire "raw material" (CS grads) who really don't know any engineering. Then you train them in the Company Way. Because they don't know any better, they're now bound to the company's internal processes and it makes it that much harder for them to jump-ship or work on someone else's ecosystem. They also don't get uppity and say "Let's write this in Java" or "Oracle DB does this, why are we recreating it?"
Facebook uses PHP as their internal language and the majority of CS-wonk new hires have never even used it. This is 100% by-design.
And Facebook, which is based around a successful idea and very simple code, has been plagued by poor programming since it went live.
Re:Zuckerberg == rich idiot (Score:5, Insightful)
Guess what? Between JEE servlets and JSPs, ASP.Net, and the various Apache libraries, I've never had to touch a line of PHP code in my life.
Contrary to the belief of fanatics for different tools and technologies out there, it is very possible for other people to spend decades writing code without ever touching your favourite tool or technology.
Re:Nothing new? (Score:5, Insightful)
It's actually quite simple, think about the only other major activity in which a total lack of experience is considered a plus...
Virgins.
And for the exact same reason, because they are too inexperienced to know how badly you are fucking them.
Re:Nothing new? (Score:5, Interesting)
Strange, isn't it?
If it was surgery, you'd probably pick the surgeon with 20 years experience over the one with a couple of years experience to operate on you.
If is was a builder you were employing, you'd probably prefer the one with 20 years experience over the younger one to build your house.
And whatever Zuckerberg says can probably be ignored, because you just know he's the type that, when he's getting on a bit, will be saying that age and experience are what counts.
In both those examples a person with 20 years experience typically has a managerial role. The builder would be at least a foreman. A surgeon with 20 years experience would be a consultant, probably spending a fraction of his time in theatre and even there doing the trickiest bit and supervising his staff on the rest. His cost gets spread over his staff. To the project, it's worth paying a person twice as much if he can uplift the value of work done by a team of 10 by 20%.
Additionally, in both those examples the cost of the individual is relatively small compared to the value of the project. Construction might be 1/3 land cost, 1/3 materials and 1/3 labour. Increasing even the total labour costs by 30% only increases the total project cost by 10%. With software, the labour cost must be what, >80%? With the surgeon example, his cost is pretty small relative to the value of his work as far as the customer is concerned and competition is very limited.
Re:Nothing new? (Score:4, Interesting)
The interesting this is, though you meant to imply the opposite, you actually show why I wouldn't hire a programmer with twenty years experience.
A doctor has ten years of school, and ten years of field experience, and leads a team of professionals. Your builder (unlike the doctor) doesn't do the hands on work anymore; but what I'm hiring is the crew he leads, and the network of subcontractors he's built up, and his contacts down at the local builder's supply... While someone who is still just a programmer after twenty years is someone stuck in a rut doing grunt work. If I hire someone who wants his wages based on his years of experience, I'm going to hire someone who brings something worth those wages to the table. I'm going to hire a supervisor or a manger - not a grunt. Grunts are a dime a dozen.
Re:Nothing new? (Score:5, Insightful)
This works against older engineers because they are competing against younger engineers who can adapt to new tools faster.
Really? Platforms and tools? Rephrasing without the business speak, you seem to be talking about four things: languages, standard/common libraries, techniques, or actual programming tools, i.e. computerised assistence in the actual effort of programming. Languages only get easier to learn; The more you know, the more wierd something has to be to have not 'seen that syntax before'. Same with libraries. Techniques of getting things done? I'm pretty sure it's harder for a fresh out of school programmer to pick up a book on advanced AI techniques and implement them from scratch, than a programmer with 20 years of experience who has probably used similar techniques at some time, possibly even independently developed (Hey we ALL reinvent the wheel on weekends). And learning a new IDE, or tool like make or ant ... Sure the 20 something might be able to read through the manual slightly faster, because of better eyesight...
Recent graduates might graduate with knowledge of current tools, but that doesn't make them able to learn faster. It's just that they don't have to learn at all.
Comment removed (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Nothing new? (Score:5, Insightful)
That's how it works in our society. There are exploiters and the exploited. If you are doing real work, you're not exploiting people. Therefore you are being exploited. IOW, it's a dead end career. If you want to have a good career, start exploiting people as soon as possible.
The best and the brightest have always been taken advantage of by the ruthless.
Re: (Score:3)
This is ridiculous. Management is not a huge field to get into either. Management is supposed to be a small subset of the workforce. What do you do with everyone who doesn't get a job in management then? If you've got 1 manager per 10 workers, yet the number of engineers at age 50 is not ten times less than those at 25, what do you do?
Of course, I'm lucky in the sense that I am in an area where people want experience, as opposed to modern web/app/phone based scripting fluff or IT help desk support. And
Cool, so where do you go next? (Score:4, Insightful)
It's not like we make as much money as atheletes, so where do programmers go when they are 40?
Re:Cool, so where do you go next? (Score:4, Funny)
Our own bloody fault, should have gone into football instead of engineering. Common good and all that.
Re:Cool, so where do you go next? (Score:4, Funny)
You ever hear of Logan's Run? It was wrong ... by 19 years. Sad to say, I've only got a few more months to go.
Re: (Score:3)
Already been passed over for management twice in the past five years at my current job... pretty sure that ain't going to happen here. Finding a management job elsewhere with nothing but senior level programmer/analyst roles hasn't been very successful so far either.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Cool, so where do you go next? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
"Finding the right tool for the job" doesn't seem to fit into either of your categories.
Re:Cool, so where do you go next? (Score:5, Insightful)
Consulting or professional services. No, really.
As much as product-oriented software houses may prefer to have younger programmers for whatever reason, people who have been in the industry for a while have a lot of breadth and depth in terms of domain expertise and the like.
In terms of actually helping to implement the things in the real world, companies tend to find themselves needing a broader context for these things. With the added benefit you can roll up your sleeves and write code as needed.
Sometimes a developer only sees things from a given perspective, which doesn't always translate into the ability to help businesses actually do things. Not all developers have yet learned how to interact with non-technical people.
Having 'graduated' from a software development company several years ago, there's a market for people with a good general grounding in computers who also have some domain expertise in one or more areas.
The 'grown up' skills like being able to conduct yourself nicely in meetings, work with actual end users and not be a condescending prat, and be able to see the big picture of why someone is doing something are quite marketable.
There is life after code. It can be quite rewarding. That good, solid technical grounding is still a valuable skill as long as you have some of the soft skills to back it up.
Re:Cool, so where do you go next? (Score:5, Insightful)
You have to be the sort of engineer who genuinely cares about the success of others on your team above your own personal success. (I've seen one too many technical managers who covered their own tails by tossing one of their employees under the bus...only to discover that employee had critical knowledge about a project that sets the whole team back in the long run.) You have to be the sort of engineer that is interested in time management, personnel skills, putting people in the right place to succeed, and getting the right people to work together to achieve the best results for both of them. Yeah, I know it sounds corny, but it's the truth. You have some of those concepts pounded into your head when you do an MBA with a focus on management because you're stuck doing a pile of Industrial Psych courses (depending on where you go) and you have to take them seriously. If you're coming into a team without a lot of technical background, those are the concepts that your employers will grill you on in your interviews...not whether or not you know what a regular expression is or what SOAP stands for. You have to be able to see personal friction between your team members and deal with it before it gets out of control...not just wait for it to become a problem then fire someone. You have to be enthusiastic about process improvements, and not cling to doing things the way you personally feel comfortable with. A whole lot of managers with technical backgrounds have that problem, and it never turns out well.
If you, as a developer, don't really embrace those traits as well, I'd think your best bet is to go back to school. Start a coffee shop. Start your own business. Marry a doctor. One of those things. Don't be a manager, it won't end well for you.
Re: (Score:3)
Greetings and Salutations;
Well, as a 57 year old, I have been told by a number of folks that Walmart is always looking for greeters.
Welcome to Costco. I love you.
Welcome to Costco. I love you.
Welcome to Costco. I love you.
senior software architect (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
If nobody is reading those docs thats a problem with your organization, not your architect.
Re:senior software architect (Score:5, Insightful)
Frequently, you have business people asking for things like "Can you make it so it doesn't go into weird modes?" Now how do you explain that to a 25 year old software developer or QA engineer tasked with writing tests for that? What defines "weird"? What do they mean by "mode"? That's the sort of situation architects deal with. They end up in long phone calls with business people and customers who don't have the technical vocabulary to put their requirements in a state where you can transcribe them into requirements, stories, or whatever.
The way you can determine if an architect isn't worth his/her salary is if you sit down to read his assessment and requirements document, and it looks like a bunch of random demands without a point. You can tell that person just transcribed everything word for word and didn't clarify anything. At that point, that architect has become a phenomenally well-paid office assistant.
Explains Software Quality (Score:5, Interesting)
Really explains a lot about Facebook as well, actually!
Re: (Score:3)
But if you avoid such thinking at all cost, and you are the American and European industries in the face of Japanese competition in the eighties, that kept banging on about their quality, while the Japanese sold their cheap products by the million. That's the way of the dinosaur.
The balance is somewhere inbetween. Progress, but in a sustainable way.
Re: (Score:3)
Beat me to it. This attitude explains quite a lot. Everything from why the industry wants to keep reinventing the wheel to how the same mistakes keep getting made over and over again.
The people who know better are "too old". They're also too likely to tell management that management was just sold a bill of goods by a vendor, and managers who think they have a fucking clue what they're talking about certainly can't have that.
Re:Explains Software Quality (Score:5, Insightful)
Of course someone like Zuckerberg prefers kids that don't have a life, will put up with any crap their fed by the boss, and won't contradict management.
The same goes for your other bean counters.
Re: (Score:3)
Of course someone like Zuckerberg prefers kids that don't have a life, will put up with any crap their fed by the boss, and won't contradict management.
The same goes for your other bean counters.
True. Unless you are pre-IPO you better regard orgs like Facebook and Google for that matter as just a pit stop to pick up the resume item. Optimal in-out time is roughly two years. Wait for your full vest and you'll look like a lamer while your pals are rolling in trajectory goodness.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Explains Software Quality (Score:4, Interesting)
Bloomberg, the same one that predicted that the iPhone would be an utter failure?
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aRelVKWbMAv0 [bloomberg.com]
"The iPhone is nothing more than a luxury bauble that will appeal to a few gadget freaks. In terms of its impact on the industry, the iPhone is less relevant."
America and Europe are confronted with an aging population. In the Netherlands (where I live) there's about 40.000 men in the age-group of 40-45. There are 30.000 in the age-group of 20-25. Assuming that being a good programmer is something a certaint percentage of the population has, there are a lot less younger programmers available. 25%, to be exact. Market mechanisms mean these young whippersnappers will ask for more money, but the product they deliver will not necessarily be more valuable. In ten year times it will be cheaper to hire a bunch of us old farts instead of one of those young bright sparks.
I'm not sure this works the same for programmers, but /me as a sysadmin has no trouble finding a new job every 1.5-3 years. Experience and insight in what I do gets me higher up the ladder every time for the last 25 years.
Re: (Score:3)
It's not "Bloomberg" that's saying it, but somebody who submitted an editorial to Bloomberg, which published it. Traditionally, not everything that's published on the editorial page of a newspaper should be considered the opinion of the newspaper. Some of it is just the opinion of the individual author, as in this case. This "Bloomberg View" page the online equivalent of the editorial page -- although I think a lot of news Web sites could do a lot better job of identifying independent opinion vs. news, this
I agree with Bloomberg (Score:4, Interesting)
Unless you are one of the recognized leaders of your field, you become "obsolete" to your employer after about 15 years even if your skills are not. Why keep a stubborn old programmer on board, when you can replace them with a younger less stubborn programmer at lower pay.
It's important to have an alternative career path. For example, I went to college for Computer Science, but have always been interested in computer security.
I took the computer programming skills I learned and put them to use in the computer security field instead.
I don't write code anymore, and I'm ok with that. Instead, I figure out what security issues others created in their code, without even having the source code in front of me.
Unfortunately, at least when I went to college, they never taught secure coding techniques. I had to learn all about that on my own.
Re: (Score:3)
I do. Typesetting and "desktop publishing" in the 1980s (It was still code back then). Technical writing since 1992. Automated testing since 1994. The technologies change, true. I've been through four automated testing systems (Visual Test, a homegrown C++ system, QuickTestPro and finally TestComplete) and had to learn powershell, c#, vb.net, how to run a dozen VMWare ESXi servers effectively and a few other odds and ends along the way, but I'm still working. One day, I'll be rebuilding a server to install
Re: (Score:3)
So, after 20 years, I'm still working in software.
For the same company?
GP wasn't saying nobody has a software career for 15 years. He asked who has a software job for 15 years, meaning one specific gig at one specific company. I agree -- maybe engineers at companies like IBM, Oracle, or Sun have stuck with the same company that long, but I don't personally know many developers who have. Anecdotal evidence suggests few Google or Microsoft developers stick around so long, which says a lot.
Not bloody likely (Score:5, Insightful)
Got my first software-development gig at 25. Been doing it full-time since then, and now I'm 58. Still going strong.
What are those Bloomberg assholes smoking?
Re:Not bloody likely (Score:5, Interesting)
Agreed.
I started software development at 22 and I'm turning 58 next month; I've spent a grand total of about 12 months out of work due to layoffs. I haven't been back to school since I got my master's in CS in '87; everything I've learned since has been on the job or on my own time. It's not that hard.
Frankly, it is more difficult to land a new position when competing with younger workers who are freshly trained in current technologies, and who don't have family obligations eroding their work days, but I still bring something to the table, most especially experience that helps prevent making old mistakes new again. At least twice in the last few years, my past experience with assembly helped me resolve issues that had my co-workers scratching their heads even after I explained it to them.
Current expertise: Objective-C (OS X and iOS), C++, and picking up Qt and Ruby. Java is getting a little rusty now. My skills and the language. ;-)
It does help that I love what I do.
Re: (Score:3)
As always on Slashdot, +5 anecdotes trump data.
Re:Not bloody likely (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Not bloody likely (Score:5, Informative)
OK, I'm 62 and still going strong. I'm up to date on my skills and respected by my (much younger) colleagues.
But I have known people in their 40's with good backgrounds who couldn't find work in the field.
Re:Not bloody likely (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm almost 54. Going strong and doing what I love. My wife is 45 and also a software engineer. I had a project end about 9 months ago and had to find a position within 4 weeks. Lots of work, even for a guy my age (Southern California).
Re:Not bloody likely (Score:4, Funny)
I see. Let me get off your lawn right away, sir.
Re:Not bloody likely (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
I really think there's a lot of play in where you are located too. I'm in Boston right now, and I could find a job in heartbeat if I needed too (I'm 38, mostly high end sys admin stuff.) Previously I was in Huntsville, AL and I could have found something pretty quickly there too I think. Back in Louisiana, I was pretty much screwed. You need to be in the places that have the right combination of jobs and people. Places with to many qualified people (Silicon Valley), or to few technical jobs (most of Lo
i know you are but what am i (Score:5, Insightful)
you could say that about any professional career... I am sure doctors are pretty dead end too...
I guess unless you can hedge fund your way to making billions by exploiting millions... you are in a dead end career.
If it's false, it's false. If it's true... (Score:5, Insightful)
...it won't end well, now, will it?
People don't just magically stop having bills after 35, individuals are getting married and starting families later in life, and software / tech careers are becoming the linchpin of what's left of the American middle class.
Effectively cut them off from their career fields at such a pivotal point in their lives, en masse... see what you reap. You may not be doing much hiring of any kind when they're done shoving your dumb, pathologically stock-price-obsessed ass effectively out of society.
Re: (Score:3)
Um, I think some important facts are being ignored (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Um, I think some important facts are being igno (Score:5, Interesting)
Say what? I started programming in the mid '70's. There were already "software engineers" and "computer scientists" back then. Computers were around long before "personal computers" and needed programming.
The only way I get work as a programmer now is as an consultant. It is not because I haven't kept up with tech, languages and tools. Around 10 years old head hunters started telling me it would be easier to find work for for me if I rewrote my resume to hide my true age and years of experience.
The majority of my clients are through referrals, they've never seen me in person and have no idea how old I am.
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah, I'm over 40, and my father was a software guy before me (still working for Adobe).
Re:Um, I think some important facts are being igno (Score:4)
Which could mean that a young person will stupidly take the first job offered while an older person will wisely shop around? Or maybe that an older person has stricter job requirements (such as not moving, good school district, spouse's job, etc, etc.) which inherently make it more difficult to find a job irrespective of age.
Re:Um, I think some important facts are being igno (Score:5, Insightful)
TFA points out that it takes *longer* for the older programmer to find the job. This has nothing to do with how many older guys are out there.
It takes longer for most older people to find jobs. It has nothing to do with being a programmer or not.
I'll bet it's hours. (Score:5, Insightful)
I think what they're really saying here is:
"Programmers in their 40s have wives, kids, and hobbies, and that means they won't put up with the 50-60 hour week bullshit we can get the 20-year-olds to eat." Also, they expect raises and vacation, and we just can't have that.
Work isn't your life. Work is what you do to pay for your life.
Re:I'll bet it's hours. (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually, what they're saying is that Facebook and other major software development firms engage in illegal age discrimination [eeoc.gov], but that rather than complain about it or get the EEOC or other agencies to do something about it, we should just roll over and accept it.
schizophrenic industry (Score:5, Informative)
First, the jobs move overseas and we get told it's a "good thing":
http://blog.douweosinga.com/2003/10/why-jobs-moving-overseas-isn-so-bad.html [douweosinga.com]
Then, there is complaining that the industry can't find any programmers:
http://www.xconomy.com/seattle/2011/05/23/tech-talent-shortage-one-of-this-years-major-storylines-illustrated-in-national-study-by-job-search-site-dice/ [xconomy.com]
Next, the industry tries to figure out where all the programmers went:
http://www.google.com/search?q=shortage+of+programmers [google.com]
Finally, they realize they've castrated themselves and simply claim it's a dead-end career. Nice.
Conventional wisdom? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
I studied Electrical Engineering (specialization in Computer Engineering, granted, but digital design, hardware, not software), got a Master's Degree, and then went and got a job writing software - for 12 years. Went from there to a "Real EE" job for 2.5, then did a couple of gigs as "Director of Software Development" that included hands-on programming, and my title is now "Software Engineer"...
Titles don't matter much, and unless you're applying to a big company that has a square hole for you to insert yo
Why we can't have nice things. (Score:4, Interesting)
"Willing to put up with abuse" does not mean "superior", however much employers might like to conflate them.
As I approach the FP's end-of-career age, I find myself far, far more efficient than a decade ago, in not just my coding-for-coding's-sake work, but in my ability to address what the business wants out of my code. The beancounters don't care about skinnability, about what buzzword technologies went into the app, about how fast (beyond a very loose "fast enough") a program runs. They care if it answers their questions, and does so accurately.
Unfortunately, they can't easily see past how much I cost - Yes, at this point in my career, I make in the ballpark of twice as much as an entry level dev. And yes, I do provide that much more value to the company than I did fresh out of college (I'd even go so far as to say I provide far more than merely 2x the ROI, but will stay on the conservative side for now).
Important point to note about the FP... It talks about Intel and Facebook; TFA additionally mentions Microsoft - All companies that do tech for tech's sake, not as a means to satisfy a non-tech-related business need. Your time in Silicon Valley, your chance to strike gold in a startup, your 60 hour weeks and the glares for cutting out early when you need to attend Grandma's funeral, may all end by 40. But your career doesn't need to, as long as you've spent those first 15-20 years picking up the skills that matter outside the tech hubs.
Re:Why we can't have nice things. (Score:5, Insightful)
remember, 2 entry level employees cost more than 1 employee at twice the salary. Benefits and overhead cost quite a lot and they are generally on a per headcount basis.
Who's Zuckerberg to judge? (Score:5, Insightful)
Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook has blurted out that young programmers are superior
And his great achievement as a programmer, that gives him the right to judge programming abilities, is ...?
Bloomberg says? (Score:4, Informative)
Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
Statistics Don't Support That BS (Score:5, Insightful)
And Zuckerberg is nothing more than a PHP script kiddie who both got lucky and cheated others to achieve his success. His word is hardly to be taken seriously.
We'll find out: I'm 50 and looking for new work (Score:5, Interesting)
Subject says it all.
Contact me if you want to see my resume.
Interviews have been coming at a steady rate so far, and in one shop I'd be one of the younger people if hired.
I think it depends on the industry (Score:4, Insightful)
I think all of this depends on the industries. In certain industries, banking, government, etc. "old" programmers are very much in demand. Why, because these industries value consistency, tradition and the like. In new industries, that change overnight, it is out with the old and in with the new.
When I was the DP manager for a large government agency, we found that taking employees who understood the business aspects of the agency and training them to program was much more effective than hiring programmers and teaching them the business. I haven't seen any data to suggest the same wouldn't be true in the private sector.
Re: (Score:3)
I'm 62 and do fine in this field. Mostly because I have a good math background and can pick up a new technical domain at a fundamental level pretty easily.
Software engineering != computer programming (Score:3, Interesting)
I think of software engineering as being a higher level funtion than computer programming. a code mokey might get hired as a computer programmer, but then grows into a software engineer...
In his book ("iWoz") - Woz tells a story where "when he was young" he was able to lock himself in a room for a week and come out with a completed project. As he aged he found that he lost that ability/motivation (and he could just pay someone to write the code)
regarding Zuckerberg's comment, that guy who used to run Microsoft (Bill Gates I think) basically said the same thing - i.e. young minds have better/more ideas (read "Breaking Windows" to see when Bill Gates hit that wall).
anyway, the human brain changes as we age - which may not be "fair" but ... ummm, what was I saying...
hmm (Score:3)
One comment on work/life balance: I've never been expected to work more than 8 hours a day, ever, for any extended period of time. Have I had to work late nights when there was a deadline or a release? Sure. I've worked over some weekends, but very few. Then again, I don't work in the gaming industry and I'm not located in northern California. Maybe that makes the difference.