|
Didn't say that, it's a necessary evil until someone comes up with a better solution.
Just stated that people on the top branches and the bottom branches may have slightly different opinions on how soft skills are working out.
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, yeah, perspective and sh*t 
Although if I where to complain about hierarchical structures, it might seem a bit strange as we live in Scandinavia. We generally score low on hierarchical things compare to Japan and pretty much every other country in the world.
|
|
|
|
|
Succinct.
A small story here, told by my colleague:
A manager asked his junior: "<<some technical="" problem,="" and="" one="" proposed="" solution="">>. Will this work?". The junior said: "Well, blah blah blah ... <<add all="" indecisive="" statements="" you="" know="">>".
The manager replied: "This is a yes and no kind of answer. Tell me definitely".
IMHO, what is needed is:
"Yes, this solution works. However we need to fill in these gaps ..."; or
"No, this solution will not work. Does not fulfill these two most important conditions ...".
Further IMHO, this is the most important soft skill needed. All others follow.
modified 4-Feb-15 3:58am.
|
|
|
|
|
This is not an RPG, it's not like you get 100 points to spend and you can either allocate them to technical skill or soft skills. Some people just have more points across the board, if we're going to stick with that analogy.
Machiavellianism is of course important to anyone wielding power, and that's a soft skill. Anyone with intelligence can learn it some degree, you don't have to sacrifice your other skills for it.
|
|
|
|
|
Let's put some balance into this subject.
The best soft skills in the world is not going to help you if you can't make the right decisions.
And the best technical competence in the world won't help you either if no ones going to listen.
While you are wrong on the premise that companies should stop looking for people with both traits, it has to be said that those that are both brilliant programmers and brilliant with soft skills are few and far between them.
They are of course the best ones to employ, but when you can't find them you need to have a workplace in balance.
I can recommend the article in my sig on this subject.
|
|
|
|
|
Leng Vang wrote: Companies should stop looking for people with both skills because they are only going to get half-good skills people.
I forget who said it originally, but the essence of an outstanding software engineer is the ability to communicate with other humans. Any 12-year-old can be taught programming, and many are. Being able to document your code, to write specifications, and to interact with clients makes all the difference between a "code monkey" and a professional.
I suspect that this is also true of the IT world.
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack.
--Winston Churchill
|
|
|
|
|
Hello all.
I've been doing a bunch of looking around but I can't really find an answer to my question. I would like to create an application written for Windows using the .NET framework and WPF with an SQL Server backend.
I've read online that creating and selling your own software can be very expensive. You will need to trademark your idea and apply for a patent in order to make sure you retain all the rights. You will also most likely need to retain a lawyer to make sure all your t's are crossed.
So, considering all the above, I have 2 questions.
Does anyone know of a "beginners" guide for creating and selling your own software?
If I just wanted to sell it outright retaining no rights. How could I market the application to a company like Microsoft without them just taking the idea and developing it on their own?
Thanks all for reading this.
I appreciate any help.
I hate users. Not all of them, just the ones who talk.CP member: Al Einstien
|
|
|
|
|
If you want to market it is to a company like Microsoft, you need to offer something that they do not already have in-house and if they already have something similar, you need to known that your software is better then their own.
How do you know/believe that Microsoft might be interested in your product?
Patenting a software is more or less useless these days (IMO), if someone steal your idea, the cost of trying to handle that (in time and money) will be prohibitive.
I'd rather be phishing!
|
|
|
|
|
Well, that's a good question 
Microsoft doesn't have any tools that are really good/efficient at importing huge files (~5GB). Especially if the user using the tool is non-technical.
The file I was importing had ~320 columns with ~5m rows of data.
I tried using the Import wizard build into SQL Server Management Studio.
Once you finally got past all the errors and crap it took almost 8 hours to import.
Even if this had worked, I wouldn't be able to ask a non-technical user to use Management Studio...
So, I created an application that would allow a non-technical user to do this.
My application can import the full file in ~45 minutes.
Plus, I was able to build in a ton of nice features that would benefit both the technical and non.
I've worked with SQL Server and Visual Studio for 14 years now.
Honestly, I don't know if I could market this to Microsoft. I've just worked with their software for so long. They are the company that popped in my head.
thanks for your reply!
I hate users. Not all of them, just the ones who talk.CP member: Al Einstien
|
|
|
|
|
bcp?
SSIS?
I think even 45 minutes is too long.
|
|
|
|
|
I would never provide either of these to a non-technical end user as a solution.
Considering the maintenance and permissions required along with always having to know both the source and destination. Neither of these would be a viable solution.
They also would not provide an easy "wizard like" way to apply custom filters and rules to generate separate exports. Nor would they give the users an easy way to view the results before exporting.
bcp is great as long as you always know your source and destination.
Both the source and destination also need to "look the same".
SSIS in some situations may work if this were strictly ETL and was being used/maintained by the IS staff. However, as a non-technical end user environment. This would never work.
Here again, you would need to know the source and destination. If anything were to change, it would require a change to the package.
It's more of a "right tool for the job" kind of deal.
The application I created allows you to easily apply rules and/or filters to data.
It allows a user to create different exports from the same source data.
The application does not care what the source or destination are and the size of the file is a non-issue as well. If you are a technical user, you can provide column widths and data types but it's not necessary or required. You can import from any source and export that information to any source (n) times.
Thank you for the feedback.
I hate users. Not all of them, just the ones who talk.CP member: Al Einstien
|
|
|
|
|
Show it to Microsoft.
They will work with you for 3 months stringing you along while learning how you did what you did.
Then they will reverse-engineer it and freeze you out of the marketplace.
|
|
|
|
|
If it's written in .net reverse engineering basically just involved opening the DLL's in dotPeek or reflector though
|
|
|
|
|
0) Write the app
1) Give it away free to "beta testers" to get feedback
2) Repeat from 0 until all features are working properly
3) Then see about offering it for sale
|
|
|
|
|
Sound advice! Agree 100% with your steps. It's the way it works.
|
|
|
|
|
Violently agree. 
/ravi
|
|
|
|
|
What's the best way to find beta testers?
I hate users. Not all of them, just the ones who talk.CP member: Al Einstien
|
|
|
|
|
Make your own blog, present yourself, write about your product.
Or if it takes too much time, just write an article about your software. Or may be just go to stackoverflow (or similar), look for people which have same issues as you had when you decided to implement your software and try to show them your solution.
|
|
|
|
|
Exactly! I have never developed own produkt/software to sell it. But if I would once do it, I will do it as you suggest 
|
|
|
|
|
Agreed! I'd say that big companies are more interested in buying a user/customer-base rather than any product - the product's usually incidental.
How do you know so much about swallows? Well, you have to know these things when you're a king, you know.
modified 31-Aug-21 21:01pm.
|
|
|
|
|
If you think it is patentable then it could be worth looking at - but it can be expensive, and unless it does something 'new' then patenting may not be possible.
But once your methods are 'out there' at least nobody else can patent it!
from what you describe, selling your app to someone already selling SQL tools might be easier - someone like Redgate for example.
As someone said, creating the application and getting it out there is probably the best marketing strategy these days; if people use it and like it, then companies are more likely to want to buy it.
Good luck with it!
Oh, and if you feel the need to get money while you are waiting for a big company to shower you with cash, then you can always market it online yourself - maybe a free 'lite' or time-limited version and a paid for full version
PooperPig - Coming Soon
|
|
|
|
|
_Maxxx_ wrote: If you think it is patentable then it could be worth looking at
But we all hope it is not patentable, since it is software.
Software is mostly ideas and ideas should NEVER be patented.
If a lone individual has written an algorithm that is so different and yet no one has ever stumbled upon (and patented already) it would be quite amazing.
For example: Do any of us wish that sorting algorithms were patented?
No.
Is it likely that someone has written a sorting algorithm that is so differen to be discernible that no one has stumbled upon it yet? Unlikely.
And I'm just noodling the idea here, not trying to shut down innovation.
I love innovation, which is why I don't care for software patents.
EDIT
And I should've said this: I do believe in creating new software that uses non-patented algorithms which is a new application which makes things so much easier that consumers purchase the application.
However, it is unlikely a large company like microsoft would purchase such an application. They'd probably just build it themselves.
|
|
|
|
|
I agree with you to a point.
However, there needs to be some way of protecting software you develop.
Say you wrote Flappy Bird. Is it fair that anyone can come along and make a game that looks and feels just the same, and makes money out of it, and all you can protect is the name (which is why we have Floppy Bird, Flappy Bat etc.)
newton.saber wrote: it is unlikely a large company like microsoft would purchase such an application. They'd probably just build it themselves.
Quite the opposite, in fact. Big companies like Apple, Microsoft etc. tend to buy up companies with ideas, rather than developing it themselves.
Even MS Word, they hired the programmers of another WP program to develop one for them. the V part of VB was bought from outside.
and Minecraft.
So while they may not buy the software, they may well buy the company!
PooperPig - Coming Soon
|
|
|
|
|
Very good points and I agree with you about Microsoft possibly buying the company.
Also, it is frustrating such as in the case of Flappy Bird where there were a million knock-offs.
However, I believe if Flappy Bird hadn't been abandoned then the original creator would've been able to fight those -- of course that means legal action and that's a time-waster.
However, I believe if the original creator hadn't given up on it then others wouldn't have been as quick to try to steal feeling the compulsion of law against them.
For example, Super Mario Bros doesn't have near as many knock offs -- or at least none of them really ever became more popular than the original.
But, again I agree with you that real creators are somewhat crushed between the thieves and the patent trolls. It's a difficult challenge.
|
|
|
|
|
Look. We write software to make a profit, and because we enjoy it.
I am a libertarian, I believe in property rights above all else.
But I also believe that patents should be a LOT harder to get.
WD-40 did not patent their product, and it helps them because it would have expired long ago.
If a product, like flappy bird, is easy to reproduce/knock off, then it
DESERVES to be knocked off. It served its purpose, and made the author rich.
Move on.
I do NOT believe in software patents. They get Copyrights. They are written.
Hardware Patents. Oh Yeah!
But it gets crazy. For example Ice Ice Baby turned out to rip off someone elses tune.
He gets NOTHING from sales of that song.
This is where it gets blurry. Do we protect software the same way? Someone makes a
word processor, and EVERY WORD PROCESSOR (because it has the same basic "beat") is now
infringing? (Copyright laws COULD do that), despite Borland winning the Look and Feel case
against Lotus!
If taking an idea to its very end scares you as much as this idea scares me, then it is
probably a bad idea to be applying it this way.
Personal Quip: Most doors in a restroom use a little SLIDER device to lock/unlock the door.
How did Apple Patent that SAME CONCEPT in a different form factor (slide to unlock)???
Knock offs only work when the core brand was successful. I HOPE FOR YOU that your idea is so good that you get THOUSANDS of knockoffs!
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
