|
Would you ask for certification, should you want to get the software "services" of a (very) small private company (made, lets say, of two persons)?
SkyWalker
|
|
|
|
|
|
I fully agree with you!
SkyWalker
|
|
|
|
|
I am not interested in a certification test at all! I would like to see projects some one has done before.
|
|
|
|
|
Some day, the real world is going to come and smack you upside the head and make you realize that what you want doesn't really matter.
The simple fact is our pay checks are paid by those people who are decidedly NOT IT people and have no real concept or understanding of what it is that we do.
The reason we wear these labels and take these tests to get these little pieces of paper is not for our own purpose, but rather those that hire us. We get these certifications so that our "managers" can justify to themselves why they pay such a high salary to us to do things they just don't understand nor have any desire to understand.
Past projects have no bearing on those kinds of situations because they are not your current / future managers projects and therefore have nothing in common with them.
A medical professional specializes for a number of reasons.. first of all, the field of medicine is so diverse that there is room for specialization. Second, by gaining a specialization, that professional can command a higher wage for his or her services than someone without that specializaton.
I firmly believe that developers should seek specialization for the same reasons. IT is a very broad field, and there are definate sects of the industry that would require a definate learned knowledge. Take for example an oracle develper writting PL/SQL code... Now you would not hire that oracle developer to manage your JCL code in your OS/390 environment.
How about the Assembly guy writting embedded code for some specific piece of hardware.. would you hire someone who is a whiz-bang COM developer to fill his roll, or would you seek out another embedded developer?
Say your web services team has an opening. Would you hire an embedded systems engineer to start writting abstract .Net code or would you hire someone with experiance in the field you are looking for?
Like it or not, labels are already here.. and they are here to stay. They are already being applied to you and there is nothing that you can do about it.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi, Jason:
It is true that certfications can indeed help you find a job. However, as a programmer I think what you did before is more important. I think it is more valuable to know your projects, technologies and how you solve the problems. After konwing these, it is not easy to find a wrong person for a job. I will not hire an embedded developer to work with MS .NET ASP project.
|
|
|
|
|
Another thought is, I couldn't care less how you classify yourself, it's your experience that matters.
The "yes" votes is a bit depressing, IMO, because it implies that people prefer meaningless labels vs. real content.
Marc
VS2005 Tips & Tricks -- contributions welcome!
|
|
|
|
|
I'm with you on that.
But I think it's truer for IT that it is for, say, physics.
|
|
|
|
|
I voted yes and I hate labels -- especially meaningless ones. I do think however, that people can specialize in certain areas related to programming an can be extremely competent in that area moreso than someone who hasn't. Sometimes those areas take more than a day to master.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Classification can greatly help in an industry as broad as programming. I wouldn't want somebody who specializes in print drivers to write me a web page. I also wouldn't want someone who only knows vb6 to write me a java app.
Most programmers I've run across have areas that they enjoy working in and focus their skills in that direction. Why not classify them for what they like and are good at?
|
|
|
|
|
I donno... i spend most of my professional time writing UI code in C++, but am fairly handy on the technical side of web development as well. And not that i don't enjoy both, but i'd hate to limit myself to either...
And let's face it - a good number of the folks writing printer drivers would probably be better off writing web pages.
|
|
|
|
|
Shog9 wrote: but i'd hate to limit myself to either...
Yeah, but you have to admit, you'd be on the top of your game if you mastered one over being great at two. Granted it may be more boring, but I don't think that's what the question relates to.
Shog9 wrote: And let's face it - a good number of the folks writing printer drivers would probably be better off writing web pages.
And a good number of cardiologists should be cleaning toilets, but I'm still glad there are ppl that specialize in it.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Jeremy Falcon wrote: Yeah, but you have to admit, you'd be on the top of your game if you mastered one over being great at two.
Sure, 'till the game changes. I could become the biggest walking library of Win32 quirks and trivia this side of Raymond Chen, only to find it obsolete when the WinFX APIs become standard. And stuff changes even faster on the web side of things!
Of the knowledge i've had the longest and still use the most, at least two-thirds of it i picked up writing games as a hobby. At least a third of the techniques i use day-to-day now for offline UIs i picked up while hacking websites.
On the other hand, a cardiologist has a pretty stable target: hearts are gonna be around for a while. 
|
|
|
|
|
Shog9 wrote: At least a third of the techniques i use day-to-day now for offline UIs i picked up while hacking websites.
I think the main things I have against that type of stuff is people that claim to know everything under the sun, 30 programming lanuages, etc. When they obviously don't know any one of them well enough. But, that may be due to the person.
I just think that even if you switch technologies, then you just earned a new programmer category. I mean, there is effort in learning .NET well, etc.
Shog9 wrote: On the other hand, a cardiologist has a pretty stable target: hearts are gonna be around for a while.
I hope so at least. 
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
thrakazog wrote: Why not classify them for what they like and are good at?
Because what a good programmer is good at is learning how to be proficient in something new, adapting to new job requirements, keeping up with the latest technologies, etc.
Marc
VS2005 Tips & Tricks -- contributions welcome!
|
|
|
|
|
You're correct that a good programmer should be able to adapt and learn new technologies.
But if I'm looking to have some ASP web work done. I want a ASP web programmer. Not a C++ office application programmer that will learn as he goes at my expense.
I would want an "classified" expert in the field I needed the work done in. Not a jack of all trades, master of none.
|
|
|
|
|
> I want a ASP web programmer. Not a C++ office application programmer that will learn as he goes at my expense.
If you are in the recruiting business, this is your problem of finding a good programmer. Classication would lead to regulations, meaning less programmers. This would result in a shortage of programmers the same as other industries such as doctors. As a result, the mediocre programmer would keep his/her job while some good programmers would have to wait for their "permit to write code". Only competition ensures the best programmers remain in the industry and mediocre go find a job elsewhere.
When recruiting, you have to ask the right questions during the interview and ask for previous experience. Asking the government to solve your recruiting problem is clearly the wrong approach.
By the way, I don't think you have a clue what quality is about. You appear lazy to do you own work to recruit a good candidate and spend some money on training. Some programmers are jack of all trades and master of all. Those people are hard to find... and I would bet you would not be capable to distinguish an outstanding programmer from a mediocre one.
|
|
|
|
|
To start off here: I'm a programmer. I'm not a recruiter. To get my job I "Classified" myself on my resume as a .Net programmer, who worked in Windows writing web and office apps. This classification is in the area I am good at and enjoy. Like it or not if you've ever sent out a resume looking for work you've classified yourself in one way or another.
Sure I can write code in many areas outside what I listed on my resume. Hell, I've written code for Unix systems using ADA and C++. It wasn't my cup of tea. So I saved everybody a load of time by not "Classifying" myself as a .net/ada/c++/windows/unix programmer. I leave the Unix programming to people who enjoy it. Since they enjoy it they'll learn to do a better job at it than I would.
danmorin wrote: government to solve your recruiting problem
danmorin wrote: Classication would lead to regulations
danmorin wrote: Classication == Permit to Write Code
I'm not sure what country you're from. But in America, Classification leads to specalization. And being a specialist in something means a bigger paycheck for doing what you're good at. Primarily because you have an intimate knowlege of the one area you have studied the hell out of.
danmorin wrote: Some programmers are jack of all trades and master of all.
Outside some Hollywood movie this person does not exist.(don't try to fancy yourself as one either) Everybody has their strengths and weaknesses in programming. In my experience the only people who try to be a jack of all trades in programming are those that are unemployed and desperate for a pay check.
|
|
|
|
|
danmorin wrote: Classication would lead to regulations, meaning less programmers
What are you talking about ??? Are you serious ???
Hey dude Homus Universalis died with Leonardo Da Vinci.
danmorin wrote: Some programmers are jack of all trades and master of all.
Come ooooooooooooon plz get real.
danmorin wrote: shortage of programmers the same as other industries such as doctors
No comments plz.This dude lives in other planet.
GET REAL
|
|
|
|
|
Marc Clifton wrote: Because what a good programmer is good at is learning how to be proficient in something new, adapting to new job requirements, keeping up with the latest technologies, etc.
Personally, I'd think a good programmer would be one that understands in and out what he claims to know rather than just learning the new buzzword of the day so he/she can appear "marketable".
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Jeremy Falcon wrote: I'd think a good programmer would be one that understands in and out what he claims to know
And I'd add, is honest about what he doesn't know.
Jeremy Falcon wrote: rather than just learning the new buzzword of the day so he/she can appear "marketable".
Definitely. That certainly wasn't what I meant by "keeping up with the latest technologies".
Marc
VS2005 Tips & Tricks -- contributions welcome!
|
|
|
|
|
Marc Clifton wrote: And I'd add, is honest about what he doesn't know.
 Ain't it the truth. I've never quite realized how that is until I was giving an interview rather than receiving.
Marc Clifton wrote: Definitely. That certainly wasn't what I meant by "keeping up with the latest technologies".
Oh. Well, on the flipside, it's no good becoming a dinosaur either. Like, if you're a COBOL program you're either making great money or dilvering pizzas because there's only a few specialized mainframe-type jobs for COBOL nowadays.
As for me, if I'd hire someone I'd want to least make sure they know what they know well. Some people claim they know 30 programming languages, etc. usually menas they haven't mastered any one of them.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
So, why should I be pigeon-holed as a C# WinForm application writer (for example) when the disciplines that such an activity spans includes other disciplines such as web services, ASP.NET, client/server, databases, ORM, ActiveX, C++, so on and so forth, not to mention the 8051 assembly code, TCP/IP hardware and protocols, USB hardware and protocols, device drivers, etc? Oh, and did I mention, designer, tester, documenter?
And you wonder why I rant about the stupid VS2005 team editions. 
Marc
VS2005 Tips & Tricks -- contributions welcome!
-- modified at 10:48 Tuesday 13th December, 2005
|
|
|
|
|
...is to start pigeon-holing creative people into "specialist" roles - which is exactly what bureaucrats love.
It's a good thing to be recognized for what you know and can accomplish as a developer, but a completely bad thing to be bound by those very same things.
edwin
|
|
|
|
|
I agree, this just a way to expand bureaucracy. Once implemented, everyone has the same diploma and therefore the same accomplishment. What do bureaucrats know about software quality? Recognition comes from experience and personal accomplishment; not from a piece of paper or a paid license.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
