Post #166,561
7/28/04 11:39:30 PM
|
Re: I love this line
Well that's a vast oversimplification of what actually happened. IBM screwed themselves, and didn't need to bend over to do it. Microsoft happened to be there at the right time with the right asshole in charge. Even after the squandered opportunity to own DOS they could have easily blown Windows away by pricing PS/2s aggressively and opening up OS/2 to external developers.
I can't see what's so interesting about this screed. Mainly he's saying "my preferences are those of all elites, and I am elite." I found it sort of annoying.
-drl
|
Post #166,577
7/29/04 12:46:43 AM
|
Well of course
Both on the over-simplification and the "my preferences are those of the elites" issue. It does fit the mold of telling your audience that the traits they believe themselves to possess are actually signs of greatness. Who wouldn't want to believe that.
===
Implicitly condoning stupidity since 2001.
|
Post #166,580
7/29/04 1:01:13 AM
|
roomy scores again
He's brought up a very interesting point...
Why is our industry so fucked up?
Programmers. In the screed, the little jaggof can't even be bothered to sit in a cubicle.
I sincerely believe this. The better the programmer the more dangerous, because great programmers (and at least one indifferent one) are intolerant of bullshit. The desire for control becomes so powerful that bad alternatives become intolerable. That's OK, that's how it should be.
But the programmers made a bad mistake. Instead of being willful enough to force the right ideas into the clear air, they sit around and piss and moan about how shitty everything is, and then eventually succumb to the bullshit. Instead of getting into management where they can effect change, they remain in tech positions because there is no risk - they are guaranteed control in their own realm, even if it means controlling a horrible kluged idiom. There's a good reason for this - speaking up could get you fired, because IT people are basically assholes, and would rather pinkslip than fight back, or worse, lose.
Programmers have allowed our industry to degenerate into shitwork. Remember that screed you posted on why we drink? There was a lot of truth in that. Spoiled brats who do it because they can.
The passive-agressive (management makes specs) anal aspect of programming attracts people with no aggressive will to fight for what is right. So we get shit on. And we put up with it. (OK I'm a little white whine drunk.)
The blood of our ruined industry is on our own hands.
-drl
|
Post #166,582
7/29/04 1:12:24 AM
|
Read Peopleware
Unless real estate goes for truly absurd prices, and your programmers are hired at way below market, it is in your financial interest to put programmers in real offices. A brief interruption costs a programmer 15 minutes or more of productivity. This increased productivity way more than offsets the extra cost.
Unfortunately defending this point against office politics tends to be hard. But companies that do manage that get a good return on their investment.
Cheers,
Ben
To deny the indirect purchaser, who in this case is the ultimate purchaser, the right to seek relief from unlawful conduct, would essentially remove the word consumer from the Consumer Protection Act
- [link|http://www.techworld.com/opsys/news/index.cfm?NewsID=1246&Page=1&pagePos=20|Nebraska Supreme Court]
|
Post #166,583
7/29/04 1:21:27 AM
|
Re: Read Peopleware
I'd work in the closet to be part of an APL or FORTH team, and my productivity would decline by an infinitesimal amount, if any. I'd be horribly unproductive in shidioms with a penthouse overlooking the ocean. It's the beauty and elegance of the "nice solution" that are compelling.
-drl
|
Post #166,670
7/29/04 3:12:12 PM
|
And you're missing the point
Working in a closet your interruption rate would be cut down. It is far from an ideal environment, but it is better than being interrupted all of the time in a noisy cubicle environment.
Working in a "status office" has its own productivity drawbacks. For instance any decent developer would prefer to have a desk with lots of space rather than the fancy wood desk. Or another whiteboard instead of the status picture hanging on the wall.
Cheers,
Ben
To deny the indirect purchaser, who in this case is the ultimate purchaser, the right to seek relief from unlawful conduct, would essentially remove the word consumer from the Consumer Protection Act
- [link|http://www.techworld.com/opsys/news/index.cfm?NewsID=1246&Page=1&pagePos=20|Nebraska Supreme Court]
|
Post #166,672
7/29/04 3:21:29 PM
|
Re: And you're missing the point
Hmm, I've worked in lots of cubicles and as a contractor, considered myself fortunate to have one. I've sometimes worked from a folding church table.
Right now I'd work from the throne in a crowded bathroom.
-drl
|
Post #166,589
7/29/04 2:51:42 AM
|
I wonder if that is universally true.
I recall a story about id Software some years ago. The programmers all had their own offices and retreated to them ostensibly for programming - except productivity was terrible. Someone - I don't remember who - decided they should be all together on open plan desks; i.e. no walls at all. The justification was that individual offices stifled too much communication. Once moved, the programmers were coding more and better and enjoying things more.
I've also programmed in an open-plan environment. On my own, headphones and my choice of music are a great way to isolate, but that's not possible when pair-programming. OTOH, two pairs pair-programming in the same room can and will distract each other.
Wade.
Is it enough to love
Is it enough to breathe
Somebody rip my heart out
And leave me here to bleed
| |
Is it enough to die
Somebody save my life
I'd rather be Anything but Ordinary
Please
| -- "Anything but Ordinary" by Avril Lavigne. |
|
Post #166,680
7/29/04 4:38:49 PM
|
It depends on the people
Closed offices can be a productive environment - or an excuse to goof off. And people do need to cooperate with each other.
For me the approach of using music is awful - music that is enough to block out others is enough to kill my concentration. YMMV.
Your comment on 2 pairs pair-programming in the same room is classic. Noise is not an interruption when it relates to what you're doing. It is an interruption when it is about something other than what you want to focus on.
Cheers,
Ben
To deny the indirect purchaser, who in this case is the ultimate purchaser, the right to seek relief from unlawful conduct, would essentially remove the word consumer from the Consumer Protection Act
- [link|http://www.techworld.com/opsys/news/index.cfm?NewsID=1246&Page=1&pagePos=20|Nebraska Supreme Court]
|
Post #166,702
7/29/04 8:38:42 PM
|
Music works for me.
It must be the musician inside. :-) I do know that it is when I'm playing in a band that I most want to play around with my synth's programming...
Wade.
Is it enough to love
Is it enough to breathe
Somebody rip my heart out
And leave me here to bleed
| |
Is it enough to die
Somebody save my life
I'd rather be Anything but Ordinary
Please
| -- "Anything but Ordinary" by Avril Lavigne. |
|
Post #166,717
7/29/04 10:10:46 PM
|
Peopleware lists an interesting experiment on that
The took a group of students, and asked which ones liked working to music versus didn't. They then subdivided each into two groups, one of whom had to do a programming exercise in a room with music playing, and once of whom worked in a silent room.
They found no statistically significant difference between the performance of people depending on presence of preference for music.
BUT there was a trick! The problem involved a series of complex manipulations that simplified down to "give me back what I started with". All of the people who noticed that were in the quiet room.
The preliminary conclusion is that music doesn't harm productivity, but does hinder creativity.
Cheers,
Ben
To deny the indirect purchaser, who in this case is the ultimate purchaser, the right to seek relief from unlawful conduct, would essentially remove the word consumer from the Consumer Protection Act
- [link|http://www.techworld.com/opsys/news/index.cfm?NewsID=1246&Page=1&pagePos=20|Nebraska Supreme Court]
|
Post #166,720
7/29/04 10:16:58 PM
|
Re: Peopleware lists an interesting experiment on that
Plato considered music as almost evil, that it would inflame the passions and cloud the mind:
[link|http://www.tesc.edu/~rprice/platomus.htm|http://www.tesc.edu/~rprice/platomus.htm]
-drl
|
Post #166,729
7/30/04 12:22:05 AM
|
I buy that
If I'm coding something and I know where I'm going - putting on a really grooving playlist will result in me banging the thing out in record time.
But I can't create like that - I often need to get out of the usual environment and sit with pad of paper and pencil to work things out. Don't need a computer when doing deep conceptualization.
Actually, taking a shower or hitting the hot tub often helps here.
That was lovely cheese.
--Wallace, The Wrong Trousers
|
Post #166,730
7/30/04 12:26:48 AM
|
night
I can't do physics during the day. Don't know why.
I tend not to care about ambience, as long as I'm comfortable.
-drl
|
Post #166,736
7/30/04 1:11:55 AM
|
*That's* what's missing from my office--a hot tub!
"Despite the seemingly endless necessity for doing
so, it's actually not possible to reverse-engineer intended invariants
from staring at thousands of lines of code (not in C, and not in
Python code either)." Tim Peters on python-dev
|
Post #166,770
7/30/04 12:03:13 PM
|
My last SF job was next to health club
And HR negotiated cheap memberships for employees - and since I was living on a boat at the time I joined largely to have another shower I could use. But I also found the steam room useful for having a think.
That was lovely cheese.
--Wallace, The Wrong Trousers
|
Post #166,715
7/29/04 10:02:37 PM
|
Keep in mind also
One thing to keep in mind when comparing these sorts of stories is that studied have shown that any change in a work environment is liable to increase productivity over the short term. The break in the old patterns of working tends to make people think and concentrate on their work more, which causes a short term rise in production.*
Jay
* And before some PHP thinks about it, it doesn't work over the long term. After a enough changes in short a short period of time the employees are numb to the changes and output will fall even further.
|
Post #166,718
7/29/04 10:11:27 PM
|
Ah yes, the infamous Hawthorne effect
To deny the indirect purchaser, who in this case is the ultimate purchaser, the right to seek relief from unlawful conduct, would essentially remove the word consumer from the Consumer Protection Act
- [link|http://www.techworld.com/opsys/news/index.cfm?NewsID=1246&Page=1&pagePos=20|Nebraska Supreme Court]
|
Post #166,652
7/29/04 1:40:06 PM
|
Where to begin
Instead of getting into management where they can effect change, they remain in tech positions because there is no risk. There's a glass ceiling over top tech types. You are actively prevented from moving (on, up, over, anything) because the clueless manager views you as his golden goose. I've been trying to move to management for about 6 years. Occasionally I met with some success. However.... speaking up could get you fired, because IT people are basically assholes, and would rather pinkslip than fight back, or worse, lose. And it has - a couple times now. Most recently I was fired from CheapBastards (ok - tickets) because I disgreed (quietly and privately) with the "architect" and I got canned. The conversation went something like this: VP: We're going to have to part company. Some of your team mates have complained that you're not making your deliverables. ME: I've made every concrete deliverable I've been assigned since I got here. VP: That's not what your team mates say. ME: Which ones. VP: I can't say. ME: OK, name a deliverable I've missed. VP: Oh, I don't have any specifics. ME: Did I not complete the previous project OK? VP: This isn't about that. ME: OK, is there another team that would value my contributions? VP: No. ME: Fine. I'm outta here. As manager I've had subordinates complain to my superiors when I didn't select "standard" technologies (because they figured it wouldn't help their resumes any). A lot of the problem is our so-called pundits/leaders. The fuck wads that write articles for Java Developer, Artima, and so on. They create a culture of faddishness that undermines sound engineering practice. The other problem is the complete lack of knowledge of history of the craft. Nothing is new, just a little different. The churn keeps the software vendors in business. Planned Obsolesence is alive and well in the software world.
That was lovely cheese.
--Wallace, The Wrong Trousers
|
Post #166,677
7/29/04 4:11:46 PM
|
You reminded me of one thing that was not mentioned.
Technical expertise is a wasting asset. Take a look [link|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=166636|the salary survey link] I posted in Jobs. People with over 10 years experience are not getting raises.
A certain percentage of your time as an employee must be allocated to maintaining your professional status. For example reading industry/technical magazines, dead tree or on line versions, attending courses and seminars, etc.
I figure about 10% of your time should be spent that way. If you are a contractor, you probably need to do this on your own time.
Alex
"If I seem unduly clear to you, you must have misunderstood what I said." -- Alan Greenspan, Federal Reserve chairman
|
Post #166,681
7/29/04 4:41:03 PM
|
How long have you been in the industry?
A certain percentage of your time as an employee must be allocated to maintaining your professional status. For example reading industry/technical magazines, dead tree or on line versions, attending courses and seminars, etc.
I figure about 10% of your time should be spent that way. (Staying away from hard numerical suggestions) I'd say that percentage needs to rise as you spend more time in the industry. The natural progression I notice is: 1) Courses/seminars: 3-5 years behind (OK, be fair, sometimes 10 ;). 2) Books: 2-3 years behind. 3) Tech magazines: 1-2 years behind. 4) Real conversations (with Graham's "great hackers"): 6 months behind. 5) Build it yourself. :) But each move closer to "now" means less distillation by those before you, and more personal time required to filter/integrate the info. I've only been doing IT (professionally) for six years; I can't remember the last time I read a tech magazine article whose content wasn't 'obvious' (due to personal constant exposure). I haven't bought tech books in over a year (OK, you got me, I just bought Fowler's _Patterns of Enterprise Application Architecture_, but there wasn't anything new in it (which he warned me about in the foreword, but I bought it anyway)). Seminars were never interesting. I'm done rambling, so I'm just going to peter out there without a conclusion. :)
|
Post #166,705
7/29/04 8:49:49 PM
|
A decade longer than you've been alive. :)
Alex
"If I seem unduly clear to you, you must have misunderstood what I said." -- Alan Greenspan, Federal Reserve chairman
|
Post #166,706
7/29/04 9:06:35 PM
|
"Stow it sonny" :)
-drl
|
Post #166,735
7/30/04 1:09:47 AM
|
That's the generic "you" :)
And no, I'm not 24. ;)
"Despite the seemingly endless necessity for doing
so, it's actually not possible to reverse-engineer intended invariants
from staring at thousands of lines of code (not in C, and not in
Python code either)." Tim Peters on python-dev
|
Post #166,756
7/30/04 10:17:07 AM
|
You're 32, if you haven't had a birthday since January.
Alex
"If I seem unduly clear to you, you must have misunderstood what I said." -- Alan Greenspan, Federal Reserve chairman
|
Post #166,764
7/30/04 11:03:54 AM
|
Off-by-one somewhere in your math. ;) 33
"Despite the seemingly endless necessity for doing
so, it's actually not possible to reverse-engineer intended invariants
from staring at thousands of lines of code (not in C, and not in
Python code either)." Tim Peters on python-dev
|
Post #166,786
7/30/04 1:36:11 PM
|
Duly noted! :)
Alex
"If I seem unduly clear to you, you must have misunderstood what I said." -- Alan Greenspan, Federal Reserve chairman
|
