|
|
|
|
devimages wrote: So if you are a gold or silver advertiser in the product catalog would you be eligible to write such an article?
This is a little confusing because there are gold and silver members, and also gold and silver catalog entries. They have nothing to do with each other. Gold and silver catalog entries refer to the paid catalog entries. There is also a free catalog entry called "bronze".
devimages wrote: If so how would it be submitted?
If you want to submit a free "bronze" catalog listing, go to the Catalog entry on the green menu bar above. You want the Post a Catalog Item menu entry.
If you have any problems, you can post a question for the CP admins on the Site Bugs / Suggestions forum.
|
|
|
|
|
|
devimages wrote: Lets assume I have a paid-for advert in the Product Catalog. Does this make me eligible to publish an article in the Product Showcase?
I don't know.
devimages wrote: what specifically are the qualifying criteria to allow such an article to be published?
You basically just pay for it - see my post above for link to Product Showcase info.
|
|
|
|
|
An article about a simple and short class using anonymous pipe for inter-process communication could be interesting to someone?
|
|
|
|
|
I look forward to seeing it.
"WPF has many lovers. It's a veritable porn star!" - Josh Smith As Braveheart once said, "You can take our freedom but you'll never take our Hobnobs!" - Martin Hughes.
My blog | My articles | MoXAML PowerToys | Onyx
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for your reply. The article is on the way. 
|
|
|
|
|
I have posted an article called File Searcher in C#[^] .
On April 8, I wanted to update the text and the source code of this article. So I wrote an email to submit@codeproject.com. The email contained 2 attachments: "ViewHtml.aspx.htm" (an updated version of the html text) and "FileSearcher.zip" (the new source code). The email also contained the name of the article and its URL in the email body.
- But the article still has not been updated! What did I do wrong?
|
|
|
|
|
Manfred Bittersam wrote: But the article still has not been updated! What did I do wrong?
Probably nothing. That was only 2 days ago. The CP editors have some backlog, so I wouldn't worry for another few days. If you're really concerned, post a message on the Suggestions forum, and ask what the status is; I don't think the editors read this forum regularly.
|
|
|
|
|
Hello all - I'm an independent contractor, and would like to do some research into the stature of senior developers within busines culture in the past few years.
Speaking to senior developers in the domain of business programming - we were all attracted to business programming because we were respected and the pay was very good.
But is this still true? Do we have the same career opportunities as our colleagues in - say - sales, marketing or finance? Can we expect to rise as high in a company, or even within our own professional hierarchy? Is our opinion as valued as our other colleagues outside of development? If we do rise in the company, do we have to shed (or even deny) our technical expertise? Do we find positions above us are filled by NON technical people, because of a belief that general business skills are more valuable than our analytical skills and intimate knowledge of business processes?
I have heard fellow seniors complain that they feel they are being sidelined in their company as their opinions and input are quickly dismissed or patronised - often by the same people who felt they had valuable input and insight (or perhaps, demands and complaints) for IT. Does this attitude really exist, and does it hold you back when you are ready for advancement?
And - ultimately - is their a salary ceiling for developers? As high as it may be, is it actually a dead-end with few opportunities for advancement?
I think an article on this topic would be interesting to senior developers, or up-and-comers who are considering where their career paths might go. Or, has this article already been written? I'd love to see a reference to it.
I would greatly appreciate any comments, anecdotes, rants or insights on this topic.
Thanks to all,
Carlo
|
|
|
|
|
This sounds like it could be an interesting article. I say 'could' because it will depend entirely on the data you collect to back up your analysis. Obviously, with too little data, the results would be questionable.
How do you plan to collect enough data to support a competent analysis?
|
|
|
|
|
I wanted to get some observations from others to see if there was anything to this. My own professional experience was making me suspect that this was the case, but I certainly wouldn't write about just that.
I have talked to three placement agents about this - two in Montreal, one in Europe - and they generally agree. One exception was in investment banking: developers working within Swiss banks had become frustrated with their limited horizons and were able to make the jump into investment banking. You can guess what shape they are in now.
I just can't think of any non-IT manager that rose to their position from senior developer. I have met managers who have had SOME development experience, but they had jumped tracks so early that they would not have risen to senior. By contrast, I have met IT managers with little or no technical experience (most recently, a CIO of a $250M company).
Observations from others might give me an idea on where to look for hard data, which is what brought me here.
|
|
|
|
|
Good luck. I will look forward to reading your article.
|
|
|
|
|
CrashAlpha wrote: I just can't think of any non-IT manager that rose to their position from senior developer.
What distinct feature that managers require, would we (as developers) lack?
I are troll 
|
|
|
|
|
Eddy Vluggen wrote: What distinct feature that managers require, would we (as developers) lack?
- tact
- ability to communicate with stupid people (eg, users) without becoming rude or insulting them
- ability to anticipate top management requests
- ability to sit through long, boring, and non-productive meetings
- ability to take hands off mouse and keyboard while holding a conversation
- ability to look people in the eye when talking to them
- ability to write plans and reports that can be understood outside the department
- ability to work normal hours (ie, hours that 90% of the company works)
- ability to comprehend and accommodate the business objectives of the organization
- ability to manage arrogant developers
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for making a convenient list
I are troll
|
|
|
|
|
Hans Dietrich wrote:
1. tact
2. ability to communicate with stupid people (eg, users) without becoming rude or insulting them
3. ability to anticipate top management requests
4. ability to sit through long, boring, and non-productive meetings
5. ability to take hands off mouse and keyboard while holding a conversation
6. ability to look people in the eye when talking to them
7. ability to write plans and reports that can be understood outside the department
8. ability to work normal hours (ie, hours that 90% of the company works)
9. ability to comprehend and accommodate the business objectives of the organization
10. ability to manage arrogant developers
So, how many would qualify as business/social skill? (Where #7 represents the inability or lack of interest in communicating outside of your area of professional interest).
The impatience, lack of tact, and lack of accomodation reinforces the impression of arrogance - but contradicts point #6, which is a clear sign of insecurity. Here we see the sterotypical developer: socially inept outside of their domain, rude and arrogant within it. Is this what constrains developer's careers?
I HAVE seen people like this rise to the role of IT managers only to fail when their team sees then as impatient and contemptuous. Often, they cannot delegate, end up doing everyone else's work and the resulting stress and rushed results reflect poorly on everyone.
So, would a company look at IT managers and leaders like this and think:
1) We can't let someone like this manage people outside of IT.
2) If we brought in a manager from outside of IT to manage an IT project, their communication and team-building skills would more than make up for their lack of technical expertise.
Are these scenarios realistic? I also believe that nowadays, these stereotypes are in the minority - but is the stereotype so prevalent that developers cannot escape it?
Carlo
|
|
|
|
|
CrashAlpha wrote: Are these scenarios realistic? I also believe that nowadays, these stereotypes are in the minority
Based on working on different contracts at dozens of companies over the last ten years, I disagree. Developers as a group have different mindsets and motivations than other workers. The exceptional developer who can achieve a global awareness of the business environment is rare. The developer who can function effectively and successfully as a manager is rarer still.
I agree that it might happen, especially if a company supported and encouraged developers to take this career path. However, I have never seen a company do more than pay lip service to this.
|
|
|
|
|
Hans Dietrich wrote: Based on working on different contracts at dozens of companies over the last ten years, I disagree.
Well, so much for my attempt at diplomacy! Like you, I have been contracting for quite some time - in my case, 20 years this year. Most of my work is outside of Canada - and especially outside of my home province of Quebec (difference rate expectations). While working in the US, I found it seemed more likely that I would meet non-steroetypical developers than at home in Canada. Typically, thse non-sterotypical developers would be musicians, and since I briefly worked as a professional musician myself there may be bias that creeps in. I make no comment on whether professional musicians are seen as management material or not.
But let's say that you are right amd the developer's reputation as socially awkward and professionally myopic is well-deserved. You suggest that the companies themselves could be doing more to address this, but aren't.
Is this because developers are too valuable where they are? If so, we can't expect the company's to change, can we? Given that assumption, would you advise developers with ambitions to rise to higher pay levels and unrestricted career paths to NOT aspire to becoming "senior developers"?
|
|
|
|
|
CrashAlpha wrote: Is this because developers are too valuable where they are? If so, we can't expect the company's to change, can we?
Turn the question around. How many people in top management do you think have had a bad experience in dealing with developers? How many times have they discovered that the developer answered the question they asked, but because they didn't word it exactly right, they didn't get a complete answer? How many times has a key developer quit, or threatened to quit unless he got more money?
How prevalent is this? I don't know. But why would any company take a functioning developer and give him responsibilities and duties he is neither qualified for or wants?
I am assuming in all this that you are not just talking about a 'technical team leader' kind of manager, which developers can and must do.
My friend has a joke he tells about developers: How can you tell when a developer is extrovert? - because he stares at your shoes while he's talking to you.
Of course, there are exceptions; exceptional companies, who know how to manage and train developers, and provide safety nets for new managers; and exceptional developers, who want to stretch their boundaries.
Please excuse my bluntness. I assumed you want straight answers.
|
|
|
|
|
Hans Dietrich wrote: How many times has a key developer quit, or threatened to quit unless he got more money?
It's easy to see top management becoming frustrated with developers. But I think you know that developers aren't the only ones who threaten to quit over salary demands once they think they're indispensible.
Hans Dietrich wrote: But why would any company take a functioning developer and give him responsibilities and duties he is neither qualified for or wants?
Let's break up your observation into "is not qualified for" and "nor wants".
"not qualified" - I have seen IT positions up to CIO (within a $200M+ company!) filled by people with no IT experience or significant education. Can this not be seen as a sign that people can be appointed to positions that they are NOT strictly qualified for? Does this mean that the rules for managing development projects are somehow different?
"nor wants" - like many things in life, it is always dangerous to assume that what makes you happy now, will make you happy for the rest of your career. Do developers KNOW that their career choice may freeze them in that slot until they retire? (Of the four developers that I have met who are 55 or older, all four expressed frustration over where their craeer took them).
Hans Dietrich wrote: Please excuse my bluntness. I assumed you want straight answers.
It's extremely welcome. I think that we are on the ssame wavelength - which may mean that it is time for me to think of ways to get feedback from others on what they have seen and how they feel about their career path and how they feel they are seen by their own upper management. Any ideas?
|
|
|
|
|
CrashAlpha wrote: the developer's reputation as socially awkward and professionally myopic is well-deserved
Most of them have an interest in learning what buttons to push on a machine. Ask a developer if he wants to learn about human nature or if he wants to learn C# 4.0 - what answer are you most likely to get?
CrashAlpha wrote: Is this because developers are too valuable where they are?
Well, you will loose a good programmer and gain a manager. Which of these two commodities would be easier to find? Will it be easy to replace that programmer that has intimate knowledge of the inhouse code?
CrashAlpha wrote: If so, we can't expect the company's to change, can we?
Lots of companies provide a way for the employee to enhance his/hers curriculum, offering courses and additional education. Is it the company that needs to promote more management-related courses to the developers, or is it the developers' responsibility to find the education that would suit him/her most?
I think that coders (as a generalization) rather work with machines than humans. Managing machines is logical, whilst managing humans is more emotional based. Change is something that always meets resistance, and once you're comfortable with managing machines, the step toward something unknown to handle can be quite large.
CrashAlpha wrote: Given that assumption, would you advise developers with ambitions to rise to higher pay levels and unrestricted career paths to NOT aspire to becoming "senior developers"?
I'd say that we are glorified mechanics, and that running a company doesn't require any knowledge of computers whatsoever. A good mechanic might be good at leading a company, just as a good baker might, but it's not seen as their core competence.
Many a good baker won't dream of an 'unrestricted career path', but most of them don't expect one either - unrestricted growth with a single competence is a bit too much to ask for. You won't lead a multi-million dollar company if your knowledge is limited to compilers or mixing flour and eggs.
The reason I'm picking a baker as an example is merely because I admire bakers; get up early, getting their hands dirty, be friendly to annoying customers.. Everything that the stereotypical programmer isn't 
I'm getting more and more curious about your article on the subject
I is hungry for knowledge, in any form
|
|
|
|
|
Eddy Vluggen wrote: Ask a developer if he wants to learn about human nature or if he wants to learn C# 4.0 - what answer are you most likely to get?
I agree with you - even though I am not the same type at all. I study these things out of neccessity, not interest. Should we assume all developers are like that?
Eddy Vluggen wrote: Managing machines is logical, whilst managing humans is more emotional based.
I have seen good managers and have admire their simple style - their ability to inspire peopel to perform. Managing machines only LOOKS hard.
Eddy Vluggen wrote: I'd say that we are glorified mechanics
I've compared us to electricians. In the begniing of the electrical age, where Thomas Edison was the Bill Gates of his day, I'll bet many pioneer electricians saw a bright, unrestricted professional and business future ahead of them. Today, they are tradesman, like plumbers and carpenters (with all due respect to all).
Eddy Vluggen wrote: I'm getting more and more curious about your article on the subject
I do think that this subject should be addressed for the sake of people entering into the field, as well as those who are finding themselves stuck in a dead-end and wondering where else there is to go. If I don't write it, then who will? 
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
