|
I'd consider remote at this point. PM me if interested.
|
|
|
|
|
If you are receptive to a remote, what kind of weekly contribution hours wise are you looking for? I ask because I already have a job that I don't really want to give up** but the pay isn't exactly stellar. I've got about 6 years of SQL Server + ~4 years WPF.
** I have an actual office all to myself plus sick time and lax deadlines which is really quite nice
if (Object.DividedByZero == true) { Universe.Implode(); }
|
|
|
|
|
CWYAF
"One man's wage rise is another man's price increase." - Harold Wilson
"Fireproof doesn't mean the fire will never come. It means when the fire comes that you will be able to withstand it." - Michael Simmons
"You can easily judge the character of a man by how he treats those who can do nothing for him." - James D. Miles
|
|
|
|
|
I'm pretty sure this is it - add remote possible and people will run in your doors.
I'm in Germany, where remote job offers are really rare (Home Office Option is quite common - where option means only for after work-hours  ), and non-web job offers as remote are even rarer.
You should know: nowadays desktop developers work mainly in industry, not in software companies - those are almost all web or app (ios/android) as of now. Industry employees are paid damn well, but they are also bound to their production site, because they take care of machinery. So they don't lack work, they don't lack money - but they absolutely lack flexibility - especially the possibility to work remote.
Mark your job as remote here on stackoverflow and it will go out by e.g. goremote.io - whose newsletter hits developers around the world. Developers like me, who match your prerequisites word by word. You don't know how many industry workers will be so happy to see that specific field of software development offered as remote.
So... See you in the next newsletter!
By the way: only US or Europe too...?
|
|
|
|
|
My 2 cents, if you are asking for 5+ years of just developing Windows Desktop Applications(...).
I would make: UWP a bonus
I would state: Looking for someone who wants to learn Xamarin.
I would loosen MVVM to "MVVM, MVC, or similar patterns"
Honestly, if the person walked in, was clearly qualified as stated above, interested in learning and move a project to Xamarin... etc. Wouldn't you have hired them already?
I try to separate what they "know" from what they "can learn". Give me a developer with core skills and an interest ANY day.
Good luck!
|
|
|
|
|
Good suggestions, thanks!
|
|
|
|
|
I've had to learn on my own and work with several languages. The most time consuming part is not learning the language, but learning the application. Your requirement of 5+ years experience in Windows programming seems excessive. I'd cut it to 2 or 3. And you might add Silverlight experience as an option.
|
|
|
|
|
Your first line is why I wouldn't consider it even though I could do what you need. Here is how I see it:
1) One doesn't need five years to understand WPF and MVVM, a couple is plenty for most things. And if your stuff is so esoteric as to need that many specifically in that area I would take a pass unless the esoteric area really appealed to me.
2) Desktop programming is on the decline. Until I am nearing retirement I would prefer to avoid closing technologies.
3) The mention of Windows Forms further makes it look like dead end technology.
So I would recommend that you instead look for five years experience in the C# with a solid background in XAML. And, be sure to mention that your company is looking to move toward expanding and that the developer won't be stuck with this as long as she/he stays with your company.
|
|
|
|
|
dandy72 wrote: IMNSHO, that's why you're not finding anyone. While I know mostly Windows developers, nobody's even remotely interested in UWP. There's more interest in transitioning from Windows to other platforms than UWP.
You'd be better off skipping that requirement so you don't scare anyone away. Instead look for someone who can adapt to new technologies.
Sorry, but that's a very short-sighted view. Microsoft has made it very clear that Win32 is an endangered species. Microsoft is still over 90% of the desktop and laptop market (and laptops are making a comeback as people learn that Android tablets are not a suitable replacement). Being able to code for UWP is going to become IMMENSELY important to developers as UWP provides a much richer experience than web apps and they use a very similar model in the architecture of how the apps interact with the business systems. Business are not going to toss out there very, very, very expensive dependency on Microsoft Windows and move to Mac or GNU/Linux. Even Google is getting into the UWP game. They are working with Microsoft for a joint app framework based on UWP that will run on both Android (or its rumored replacement) and Windows 10 with Android providing the mobile support and Windows 10 providing the deeper application support. It's very clear the Google sees the writing on the wall about desktop, and that Microsoft was probably already working on this stuff for quite a while before killing Windows 10 Mobile.
|
|
|
|
|
Sharp Ninja wrote: Microsoft has made it very clear that Win32 is an endangered species
Microsoft also thought it would all be replaced by Metro apps by now. And UWP is little more than the natural progression of that.
Remind me, how's the Windows Store doing?
Yeah, the writing may be on the wall for Win32 apps, but nobody's impressed with the alternative MS is proposing.
|
|
|
|
|
The only people who aren't impressed with UWP have never used it, and the Windows Store has many, many, many quality apps in it.
|
|
|
|
|
Sharp Ninja wrote: the Windows Store has many, many, many quality apps in it
That's a well-kept secret if I've ever heard one. Every time the Windows Store is brought up in an article, invariably, even amongst life-long Windows tech journalists, it's to deride it.
|
|
|
|
|
To deride it for what? Publishing to it is harder than for Android. Why? Microsoft actually has security and quality standards. Google allows ANYTHING that compiles to be posted to Google Play Store. Sure, it may get taken down later when they find the porn or cryptocurrency malware, but Google encourage crap apps to go there to bolster the numbers.
|
|
|
|
|
Sharp Ninja wrote: To deride it for what?
Ok, clearly, you're either trolling or in denial. I'm out. Enjoy the Kool-Aid.
|
|
|
|
|
It was an honest question. I have worked with Windows Store/UWP apps since Windows 8.1. I've followed the progression of the APIs, the changes to permissions in the various versions and ultimately the integration with .Net Standard 2, which gives you a multitude more programming cases and designs to fit those cases than in previous versions.
What gets me is the assertions that if I like something that someone else doesn't then I must be <insert your="" derogatory="" comment="" here="">. Or I could take the easy route and nod in agreement and then take a shower.
|
|
|
|
|
Ok, here's the thing: I'm a life-long Windows software developer. Going back to DOS in fact. Some would call me a fanboi.
While I'd love to say the future is UWP, even the Microsoft evangelists will readily admit that adoption is nowhere near to what they'd like it to be. You've got to ask yourself, why is that. There's probably a bit of a catch-22 in the answer.
I just find it very uninspiring. I find UIs today to be a serious step back, all in the name of "keeping things simple". However - and this is all my own opinion - based on what've seen, simplicity apparently comes at the cost of functionality, or (if you're lucky) the equivalent functionality requires more clicks to get the same thing done. I'm just not a fan of what's being proposed as the "desktop replacement".
|
|
|
|
|
The young-uns(people under 35 as far as I am concerned) where I work laugh at Windows apps and scoff at anything that is not web development.
Having come from a background of winforms development I am probably one of those who might be in demand at some point.
That said - any decent web developer(someone experienced in MVC, C# SQL) should have little difficulty developing on a non web system - the thing is finding people willing to do that work is probably not going to be easy ,as the future seems to have been web development for the past 10 years and more.
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
― Christopher Hitchens
|
|
|
|
|
GuyThiebaut wrote: Having come from a background of winforms development I am probably one of those who might be in demand at some point.
That said - any decent web developer(someone experienced in MVC, C# SQL) should have little difficulty developing on a non web system - the thing is finding people willing to do that work is probably not going to be easy ,as the future seems to have been web development for the past 10 years and more.
Well, I somewhat agree with this point. Web developers who didn't start with WROX books or Google searches shouldn't have a problem, but those that are less skilled can still succeed with UWP (and even WPF) because the programming model is basically the same, and XAML is a natural transition for HTML developers. The biggest hurdle with going from web to UWP is having to wrap your brain around styling XAML. But once you have the concepts grasped, it's much more powerful than CSS and JavaScript.
|
|
|
|
|
Strange, according to most posters to this thread i should not be existing...
Still i am here and chose desktop instead of elephanting we(e)b stuff. 
Rules for the FOSW ![ ^]
if(!string.IsNullOrWhiteSpace(_signature))
{
MessageBox.Show("This is my signature: " + Environment.NewLine + _signature);
}
else
{
MessageBox.Show("404-Signature not found");
}
|
|
|
|
|
Are you looking for a job?
|
|
|
|
|
Oh im fine with mine, thanks.
Also, i wouldn't relocate to another country 
Rules for the FOSW ![ ^]
if(!string.IsNullOrWhiteSpace(_signature))
{
MessageBox.Show("This is my signature: " + Environment.NewLine + _signature);
}
else
{
MessageBox.Show("404-Signature not found");
}
|
|
|
|
|
There is a widespread feeling in the developer community that platform dependent desktop development is a dead-end. WinForms/GDI+ is considered a new VB6, WPF is half-baked and hasn't had an update for years, and Xamarin requires GTK. Multi-platform desktop products can now be build using alternatives such as Electron Framework and JavaScript. So, yes, desktop development is fading away from the mainstream. Most newcomers prefer agile'n'web drone career, with just enough back-end knowledge for a hello world service using REST/JSON/OWIN/UNITY/Newtonsoft/oauth/(insert 10 other frameworks) technology. In addition to that, the philosophy of old Windows Desktop development and WPF is radically different. So having a good C/C++ programmer once guaranteed a good WinForms programmer, but does not guarantee good WPF programmer, and vice versa, further cutting the developer stock. Tips? Are your requirements carved in stone? Can you live with another technology? If not -- steal a corporate drone. A lot of us still do maintain line of business apps on WinForms/WPF. We can be found either in IT companies that create LOB software or in corporations maintaining legacy LOB systems.
p.s. Don't use web developers. They have radically different mindset, they work with gazillion of frameworks, don't know strong typing, storyboard their life, and inject'n'pattern everything that moves. That's all very nice, and cool too, but you don't use a wrench to cut hair. And beware of "standard control" freaks. They don't innovate and their software looks like living DevExpress mutant from the 90ties, with 20 switchable fluorescent control skins that scare the sh*t out of you, and without any catchy innovative approach that makes your app stand out. You'll recognize them by bloated data-modeling and raping you with screen wireframes.
modified 13-Apr-18 4:57am.
|
|
|
|
|
Tomaž Štih wrote: they work with gazillion of frameworks, don't know strong typing, storyboard their life, and inject'n'pattern everything that moves
I will put this in my forum signature some day 
GCS d-- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L+@ E-- W++ N+ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t+ 5? X R+++ tv-- b+(+++) DI+++ D++ G e++ h--- ++>+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
|
|
|
|
|
Tomaž Štih wrote: p.s. Don't use web developers. They have radically different mindset, they work with gazillion of frameworks, don't know strong typing, storyboard their life, and inject'n'pattern everything that moves. That's all very nice, and cool too, but you don't use a wrench to cut hair. And beware of "standard control" freaks. They don't innovate and their software looks like living DevExpress mutant from the 90ties, with 20 switchable fluorescent control skins that scare the sh*t out of you, and without any catchy innovative approach that makes your app stand out. You'll recognize them by bloated data-modeling and raping you with screen wireframes.
Sorry, but I couldn't disagree with you more. WPF lends itself well to multi-tiered architecture, but UWP is even better. As a matter of fact, following Microsoft's development guidelines for UWP provides a VERY rich and consistent user interface paradigm (something that iOS, but no so much Android thrives upon) which will become very natural in the future, especially since the Win32 versions of Office are about to become extinct. Web development of SPA and ASP.Net MVC is not much different than UWP development. With UWP now being run from DotNet Core, you can even use that back end and put it in the app and have a distributed app that is self contained and can work offline, simply syncing with servers as networking becomes available. You CANNOT do that easily with Web, and hardly anybody does it with mobile. UWP is far more powerful than any other framework out there. Also, with WebAssembly starting to take off, the days of Javascript/Bootstrap/Angular hell are numbered, and those same skills will be directly applicable to UWP as much a WebAssembly.
And those "dinosaur" C++ developers have a VERY good platform with UWP to continue their careers as UWP has a very good support for COM objects interacting with the new Windows API from C++.
|
|
|
|
|
Sharp Ninja wrote: Also, with WebAssembly starting to take off, the days of Javascript/Bootstrap/Angular hell are numbered
This made my day! JavaScript is an abomination.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
