January 2, 2008 at 5:23 pm
Comments posted to this topic are about the item Corporate Programming Sucks
January 3, 2008 at 1:59 am
In my experience its not the cutting of code that is the problem.
One should always build quality software.
Its the people, especially those in charge, and they are usually the bean counters who hold the purse strings.
Read the Dilbert Principle by Scott Adams - It is not comedy it is a tragedy of how these people operate!
--Shaun
Hiding under a desk from SSIS Implemenation Work :crazy:
January 3, 2008 at 6:41 am
I think it takes a special person to be a corporate programmer. I tried that for a bit in my internships in college. For me, though, I can't really do well personally in your stereotypical corporate office. As much as I don't mind automating tasks with the quickest way to get it done, there are times when I like having the creative license to think outside the box and apply new ways and technologies to things. And for me, super serious corporate stuff just didn't keep my interest and let me put all of my programming abilities to use.
For me personally, I'd agree that corporate programming sucks. But being an in-house programmer for a company that promotes technology and likes technology rocks -- that's the job I work and enjoy now 🙂
January 3, 2008 at 8:20 am
Drab, grey buttons work as well as well thought out colorful ones in corporate systems, so no one wants to pay any extra money to make things better.
Better? OK. I'll grant you one on the choice of colors. I like using the system colors. That wqay the user can choose the colors using Windows. I've done things with cool animations like forms that fade in an out using tranparency. That is until the customer called and asked how to turn it off.
My look and feel sucks. I know that. I let our graphics design folks come up with the standard for what makes it look good and they let me make it work good. That's team work.
ATBCharles Kincaid
January 3, 2008 at 8:28 am
I totally disagree that being an in-house programmer sucks. I have been an "in-house programmer" for 14 of the last 19 years, and I have found plenty of opportunities to get creative in my work, and "delighted the customer" in the process. As a result, my bosses would give me even more opportunities to be creative. But there is a difference between doing creative things that make a difference in the final product and doing "sexy" things that are superficial.
January 3, 2008 at 8:45 am
I don't think it always sucks. Definitely there is a focus on solving problems quickly and pragmatically, which isn't always the same as elegantly. I think Steve is on the money when he says that for many people coding isn't their life; a nice job where they can do interesting work, work reasonable hours, and maybe get some occasional training suits them. It's easy to want to work 60 hours a week when you're 25, no so easy 10-15 years later when you have a family! Ultimately its about the company and the leadership; I had a lot of opportunities to work on some really challenging projects, at other times I had to do the dull work of building reports!
January 3, 2008 at 8:58 am
I like being a "corporate programmer", I guess it depends on the size of the company that you work for and the distance between you and your users. I like that I get to see first hand that I make improvements in people's day-to-day work.
I tell people here that my job is simple, all I have to do is make their lives easier. There's been endless repetitive jobs I've eliminated so that they can more productive (and hopefully find it more enjoyable) at work. I also get to see my impact on the company's finances that I wouldn't if we just sold products, when work I do increases sales or decreases costs.
In the end it sounded like Joel was pitching a job rather than making any real comments about the industry. There's companies where it's great to work for and those where it's drudgery-- no matter how existing the products you work on are.
January 3, 2008 at 10:10 am
It is not being a "corporate programmer" that sucks, it's working for someone that does not allow your creativity. I worked for a small division of Merck for 10 years and it was about the best job I have ever had. Our "corporate" was far enough away that the boss got to set the complete tone of the job. And he looked forward to seeing us shine and write excellent software. Two of the projects I was the IT project manager on made it into the Merck annual report. Not because the IT portion was so overwhelming, but I think because the whole project, including the IT portion, made a big, positive difference in the bottom line.
Then I went out on my own and worked as a contractor at a true "corporate" job. ANY ideas of creativity was immediately stepped on as being a waste of time. I made the mistake in 1993 of asking the boss if he wanted me to add a line or two of code to make sure the program I was writing would not break at Y2K.
I truly feel it is not where one works, but for who one works that makes a great deal of difference.
[font="Comic Sans MS"]Vic[/font]
www.vicrauch.com
January 3, 2008 at 11:43 am
I've been resisting the joke about an in house programer being better than an out house programmer.
I let that slip out. Rats! I need food.
ATBCharles Kincaid
January 3, 2008 at 12:46 pm
Made me smile, Charles!
Glad to see people enjoying their jobs. I've always enjoyed it myself.
January 3, 2008 at 1:20 pm
I think it depends on the company. The attitude the company has, the way they do business, the way they treat staff, the management, ...)
I've been an in-house 'programmer' (/admin/troubleshooter/GDB) for just over 3 years now, and before that was 1 year doing the same thing somewhere else. I've enjoyed most of the last 3 years.
There are some rumours floating around about the recent take over so, we'll see how things go in the next 6 months.
Gail Shaw
Microsoft Certified Master: SQL Server, MVP, M.Sc (Comp Sci)
SQL In The Wild: Discussions on DB performance with occasional diversions into recoverability
January 5, 2008 at 7:33 pm
It depended on your manager. If your manager was good, it was not bad but it sucked if your manager was bad (in most cases in big corporations, for some reasons big corporations managed to hire the worst managers and chased all the good programmers away.) I worked for the company more than 1 year, I did a good job, the director and my manager liked me and gave me a good review. Then the new CIO made a big change in the IT organization. He moved the director to different department and moved my manager to become the director and I had a new manager. The first thing the new manager told me that he would micro managed me because he did not know my work ability. What about my previous review that was given by his boss (my old manager)! That did not count!!!!!
Then my manager gave me a new project also a template he wrote, he told me to follow the template. Did he think I started programming just a month ago? A template!!!!!! It was fine if the template worked but it did not so I did not follow the template. To make the story short, I got fired!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Yes corporate programming sucks!!
January 5, 2008 at 8:31 pm
Hey Loner... how did your recent interview go?
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
January 6, 2008 at 6:09 pm
One already rejected me, that was a DBA job. I knew I failed it when they asked me if the database had a full backup at midnight and every hour had differential backup. If the database failed at 4:00pm, what should I do?
My answer was restored the full backup from midnight, then restore the last transaction log. I guessed I was only half right?
I had another one right before Christmas and I just had one last Friday so I am waiting for the results, both jobs were SQL Server developer plus DBA experience.
I don't know why these days most jobs requires you have DBA skills and developer skills.
January 6, 2008 at 10:50 pm
Loner (1/6/2008)
My answer was restored the full backup from midnight, then restore the last transaction log. I guessed I was only half right?
Since they didn't say about log backups, I'll assume they had none.
Restore the full, restore the 4pm diff. (assuming the 4pm diff occired before the failure, if not, restore the 3pm diff and live with the lost data)
Will diffs, you only have to apply the last one. With logs, you have to apply all sequentially from the last full/diff to the point of failure.
Gail Shaw
Microsoft Certified Master: SQL Server, MVP, M.Sc (Comp Sci)
SQL In The Wild: Discussions on DB performance with occasional diversions into recoverability
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 17 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply