I couldn't stand the wall of text on such a wide screen that I have. But the TLDR seems to be not to hire based of trendy skills, which I agree with.
Get the readability plugin, it makes most sites easier on the eye.
We only hire the trendiest
51–60 of 728 posts
Re: We only hire the trendiest
#52I couldn't stand the wall of text on such a wide screen that I have. But the TLDR seems to be not to hire based of trendy skills, which I agree with.
Why run a browser window full-width if you don't want the text to be full-width?
Re: We only hire the trendiest
#53Then don't work at those companies. It seems there's always .NET jobs - I get recruiters all the time bugging me about those gigs, but I get nothing on any of the other languages I've worked with (and the .NET work I've done is a very small % of my career). Perhaps it's a location thing - Houston is definitely a .NET town.
Some areas are location specific. Richmond VA seems to be a .NET and Java town mostly. My team's stack is Apache httpd PHP and Java mostly on Linux. A little scripting in Python and bash.
Re: We only hire the trendiest
#54Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Wall of text" is usually reserved for people who don't use paragraph breaks; such a complaint is unfair on a perfectly well-formatted page. If you want it narrower, maybe make your window smaller?
IMO, it's almost impossible to stay focused when the text is poorly formatted as it was in this article. With just a couple of lines of CSS the readability would increase tenfolds. I shouldn't have to make the window smaller in order to be able to read the authors post. If people find the formatting too frustrating, it's their problem as they want to convey a message to me, not the other way around.
> With just a couple of lines of CSS the readability would increase tenfolds.
That's what Firebug is for. :)
Re: We only hire the trendiest
#55I couldn't stand the wall of text on such a wide screen that I have. But the TLDR seems to be not to hire based of trendy skills, which I agree with.
"Wall of text" is usually reserved for people who don't use paragraph breaks; such a complaint is unfair on a perfectly well-formatted page. If you want it narrower, maybe make your window smaller?
That or configure the browser's default CSS rules.
Re: We only hire the trendiest
#56Earlier quoted context omitted.
And they prefer using uncool tools intelligently to solve a complex problem; rather than using the next cool thing dumbly that creates more problems than it solves.
And sometimes they are unbelievably set in their ways, for example using procedural code ( STATIC ALL THE THINGS! ) in Object Oriented languages like Java.
And that's the rub. When you are hiring experienced devs, are you getting Mr I-use-staticz or are you getting Ms Let's-use-boring-tech-because-it-works?
Re: We only hire the trendiest
#57Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's simple ignorance. People think .NET = old, not innovative, corporate In reality its a fast moving stack, that's constantly innovating.
It's not a simple ignorance. The wast majority of people, who claim .NET experience can launch Visual Studio, then some wizards to generate skeleton of the app and then fill something to have a CRUD "solution". They spoil it for the folks, who are truly experienced. The claims in the CVs are so maximized (Dunning-Kruger at the extreme), that it's simpler to just ignore .NET experience.
"The wast majority of people, who claim .NET experience can launch Visual Studio, then some wizards to generate skeleton of the app" -
This is the ignorance. There are people who are pretty bad on other stacks as well. I know many competent .NET developers. And many terrible PHP developers.
On average the average .NET developer is more skilled then your average Python developer. This has about as much substance as your claim.
Re: We only hire the trendiest
#58I sometimes think there's a built in pomposity in the whole attitude of hiring, looking for someone "good enough to qualify." Instead, I like to think of it as, we are looking for someone to help us , someone who has different experience and knowledge, someone who could tell us how we can improve. Then instead of this adversarial situation of selecting a new ingroup member, it's a solicitation for assistance with a b…
"...we are looking for someone to help us,..."
This is exactly what I look for when I interview for a new job. It's inclusive, shows humility and a willingness to learn through others' experience. Any other attitude belies an employer that's arrogant at best, and at worst nurtures a narcissistic blame culture.
Re: We only hire the trendiest
#59The abundance and heterogeneity of various technology stacks, frameworks, methodologies and whatnot fuels this hiring mess. Twenty-five years ago, nearly everyone who called himself a programmer knew C and an interviewer could judge the relative strength of two candidates by really examining their programming skills and not some trendy keywords.
A very large number of software developers today don't actually write much new code. The job is more about wiring up libraries, frameworks and APIs rather than designing and implementing new things. Consequently you need more organisation and focus than "real" programming skills like math or logic.
Re: We only hire the trendiest
#60Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think that depends on where you live really. In the area I'm in being a .NET developer is clearly an advantage. One reason I, and others like me have looked down on .NET developers, is that a large number of them aren't any good. I've meet brilliant .NET developer, some of the most talented developers I know are .NET developers, but the crappiest developers I know are .NET developers as well. Some developers are co…
> These are developers that can make code work, but take Visual Studio away from them and they cease to be developers. Ha, during my brief stint at a windows-shop after graduating, I did meet a few who couldn't get their heads around the concept of having a build happen without someone clicking a green triangle button in VS.
Considering the .NET stack has a heavy bias towards CI, that's hard to believe.