|
As long as it's not MFC we won't judge. 
|
|
|
|
|
Peter Moore - Chicago wrote: As long as it's not MFC we won't judge.
I know I've been guilty of that crime in the past, but now I'm rehabilitated, and...
...I use QT. 
|
|
|
|
|
I use MFC C++ for windows user mode stuff, and its fine. Does the job every time. 
|
|
|
|
|
Exactly. If the tools are adequate for the task at hand, why change them?
Ad astra - both ways!
|
|
|
|
|
Very much, indeed! I am using QT only because most code is cross-platform. When I need to whip up a native desktop application with an UI, it's going to be MFC all the way.
|
|
|
|
|
OK, you cant do fancy modern UI stuff with it, but quite frankly, I hate the modern UI. Give me grey buttons and edit windows! Thats all I Want! 
I work mostly in the kernel, and that really hasnt changed for ages. In fact since the days of NT!
|
|
|
|
|
Daniel Pfeffer wrote: If the tools are adequate for the task at hand, why change them?
Because of course that is simplistic.
I did work at a company sometime ago where a contract required an update to an app running on Windows 3.1 written in Visual C++ 1.52. The only way we succeeded was because I am a technology packrat and so I had the CDs (not DVDs) with that environment. I still do. The company did not and no one else at the company did either. And I threw out the 3.5 inch disks with Borland C++ on it quite some time ago so no going back on that one.
Same is true for something like Java 6. Apps still exist but the VM is no longer supported. So one risks leaving security holes open unless one wants to patch them in house. Even things like timezone changes would need to be patched in house.
Beyond that one must also be able to hire someone to keep maintaining it because those with experience either move on, retire or even die. I spent years with C but even quite a while ago I found going back to it very difficult. So difficult that my solution actually was pseudo OO rather than structured because I found it impossible to think in structured terms. Nothing wrong with the application that I was working on, but the skills to use it did not exist (I was the one most qualified to work on it by far.)
|
|
|
|
|
If you intend to accept contracts requiring maintenance of legacy software, you naturally must keep the necessary tools and runtime environments. No argument there.
My original point was directed more at new development. I do not believe that using the latest (and supposedly greatest) framework is always necessary or desirable. If an older framework is still supported by the tool chain, and it meets the requirements - there is no benefit to writing the application using the latest buzzword technology.
Ad astra - both ways!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Peter Moore - Chicago wrote: 5+ years’ experience developing Windows desktop (WPF or Windows Forms), UWP, or Xamarin Forms applications using C#/.NET and XAML
Let's break that down and see why you might be putting people off.
5 years WPF experience? Fair enough, you can have that but expect these people to be expensive.
By implication of the start of the sentence, 5 years UWP. Nope, UWP was introduced with Windows 10 in 2015 (okay, there were some diehards trying it out during the beta phase but do you really want to hang your hopes on that). Prior to Windows 10, it was UWA - you know that coders are pedantic so and so's.
Again, by implication of the start of the sentence, 5 years experience Xamarin Forms. Again, this dates back to 2015.
So, if someone comes along having the maximum experience in UWP or Xamarin Forms, your advert is going to put them off. The requirements read like they were written by a recruiter rather than an experienced developer.
This space for rent
|
|
|
|
|
Well, I would just about qualify for that (but for the fact that I live several thousand miles away) but the fact is that I wouldn't always have qualified for that!
I've been in the game for about 25 years but only the last 5 of those have been on Windows desktop and that's been Winforms/WPF not UWP or Xamarin. I've been using SQL for an awful lot longer.
So looking at your ad at any point up to a year or so ago, I wouldn't have met your requirements and wouldn't apply on those grounds. 5 years on a single tech is a big ask in an industry that reinvents the screwdriver on a daily basis!
Let's suppose, for the sake of argument, that I'm your ideal candidate: Your ad really says that I wasn't until a months ago. Now, I'm still the same guy that I was a couple of years ago - I may now have a little bit more exposure to WPF and MVVM but this doesn't really have any bearing on more fundamental questions such as "Can I code my way out of a wet paper bag?"
Sure, you obviously want someone who can hit the ground running with MVVM but would it not be better to ask for someone with 5+ years development experience with knowledge of desktop techs?
98.4% of statistics are made up on the spot.
|
|
|
|
|
Is there something about the word "OR" that folks are not getting?
It should be obvious I'm not expecting someone to have five years experience on UWP.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, I totally get the word "or", my point was entirely about the 5+ years desktop 
98.4% of statistics are made up on the spot.
|
|
|
|
|
Ah gotcha. Well I could try making that list a little broader because yes obviously someone with a background like yours - even a year ago - would be a shoo in. Thanks for the insight!
|
|
|
|
|
You might want to look at restructuring it with 'required' and 'desired'.
But even so I would expect a long timeline on a hire and if that isn't going to work then you might want to look for someone that is enthusiastic and with a demonstrated ability to learn.
|
|
|
|
|
That's precisely my skill set. I've been doing WPF since 2010, have always used MVVM, and have a MCSA cert for SQL Server 2012. But, well, Chicago.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
