I got to get this off my chest....
-
Psycho-*Coder*-Extreme wrote:
The problem is they brought someone in who wants to change the platform for no apparent reason.
That just says to me there is a reason that isn't being communicated to your level. You can be sure there is a giant reason for it, you may just not know what it is. If your outsourcing comments are true, it may just be a way to legally sack most of the current expensive staff because their skills are a bad fit, and get some out sourcing happening. Massively reduce costs, ride the profits for a year, and sell off his shares. He gets a nice company on his resume that increased shareholder value by 80% under his reign, and a nice cash bonus on the side. I'm not saying that is what the VP is doing (how on earth could I) but it is a possible one. -- modified at 3:57 Thursday 7th June, 2007
I agree. It is sad when this happens but unfortunately this is also "textbook" as the saying goes. I have seen this a couple of times and once even where I used to work. The VP or CIO or someone leaves and the company gets someone to "ruffle the feathers" as they say. This gets a lot of the people that work there upset and they will then leave. This is usually the highest paid members. This will cause the salaries paid to be less and therefore the company's profit goes up and this means the stock prices go up. This is very nasty - but it happens. My advice would be to just "ride it out" things should settle down eventually.
-
Let me start by saying that I truly hope this doesn't offend anyone, or step on anyone's toes but I have to get this off my chest and vent. I have worked for this company for a little over 2 years now, and in my opinion it's the best company I've worked for as far as taking care of their development team and IT Department, when we ask for new hardware or software 90% of the time we get it, and in a timely fasion. I know tons of developers who would love to work in my work environment. Now rewind 6 months, the VP of IT at that time, a brilliant man, great to work for, resigned and moved onto greener pastures (well maybe it was 8 or 9 months, I'm not counting). The company then brings in a new VP of IT (from an "unnamed" company, a very large company). Said new VP looks around, assesses the situation, then decides to major changes with the way the company/depart operate. Now granted change can be good, most of the time it can lead to greater things for the company, but other times, such as when said person decides to make said changes without talking it over with the department, development team, or anyone else involved in making said changes. Changes such as, completely changing platforms that the company web presence runs on, a platform that no one on the Development Team even knows, so he wants to outsource the work (yeah thats it, take work away from the very people who have kept this company running for 50 years). Then he wants to move all data off-site. Now I know lots of companies employ co-locating servers, but wouldn't it be a good idea to give some kind of advance notice, so we can have time to, oh I don't know, find where things are going to break with the new replication scheme , when replicating, we have web data, and in-house application data, instead of adding a field to all tables dictating where the data is coming from, ie; "Web" or "In-House" they have decided to make web data primary keys be negative numbers and in-house keys be positive numbers. I can think of tons of ways this will impact/break both web and in-house software. Now granted, I very well may be blowing this out of proportion, but this just doesn't seem right to me. If he wants to change platforms then give the developers advanced notice, provide some training on said platform, and set a launch date far enough in the future to make is feasible, not a date that makes it impossible to so anything but to outsource the work. Moving database servers off-site is a fair move, but think it through thoroughly and find the places it can brea
Sounds like exit time! I went through a similar experience several years ago. The company was slowly but steadily moving our work to India, while having us educate them. And ofcourse the management was never are open about their motives. Bottom line is: they don't care about you, they don't care about making a good product, they don't care about long term. They care about making money on the short term. I pressed the exit button when I had the chance, started writing my own software, doing contracting, and I have never regretted it! Other companies better deserve your talent (looking for a job by the way? :-)) Edit: oh, and don't think that any company won't hire an asshole to get the dirty work done.
Wout
-
Psycho-*Coder*-Extreme wrote:
Shog I would love nothing more than to "not care", but theres a lot riding on this.
Yeah, i know. But really, what can you do? I catch myself doing this all the time, getting worked up about something that's happening higher up... It's a shame, but, there's nothing to be done - letting it eat at me ain't gonna change that.
----
...the wind blows over it and it is gone, and its place remembers it no more...
Shog9 wrote:
I catch myself doing this all the time, getting worked up about something that's happening higher up
Me too - to get over it, I try to put my head down and lose myself in something technical - that usually gives me a sense of achievement (and not a little megalomania - 'Ha, I'm the Master of the Universe!') that shields me from the day to day sh*t-storm of political BS.
-
Psycho-*Coder*-Extreme wrote:
What he is doing is sucking the life out of the wonderful people I work with (and myself). It is making the entire development team feel unappreciated and like we are disposable (and maybe we truly are, I hope not though).
Eh, it happens. The trick, i think, is learning to not care.
----
...the wind blows over it and it is gone, and its place remembers it no more...
:sigh:
We are a big screwed up dysfunctional psychotic happy family - some more screwed up, others more happy, but everybody's psychotic joint venture definition of CP
My first real C# project | Linkify!|FoldWithUs! | sighist -
:sigh:
We are a big screwed up dysfunctional psychotic happy family - some more screwed up, others more happy, but everybody's psychotic joint venture definition of CP
My first real C# project | Linkify!|FoldWithUs! | sighistpeterchen wrote:
:sigh:
See, that's the face of someone who gives a rat's ass about things he can't hope to change. I bet you fret about Global Warming, too... ;P Seriously though, i'm not saying don't do a good job... but no matter how well you do, sooner or later someone's gonna wreck it. Heck, it might even be you. Just ask George Lucas... :rolleyes:
----
...the wind blows over it and it is gone, and its place remembers it no more...
-
Let me start by saying that I truly hope this doesn't offend anyone, or step on anyone's toes but I have to get this off my chest and vent. I have worked for this company for a little over 2 years now, and in my opinion it's the best company I've worked for as far as taking care of their development team and IT Department, when we ask for new hardware or software 90% of the time we get it, and in a timely fasion. I know tons of developers who would love to work in my work environment. Now rewind 6 months, the VP of IT at that time, a brilliant man, great to work for, resigned and moved onto greener pastures (well maybe it was 8 or 9 months, I'm not counting). The company then brings in a new VP of IT (from an "unnamed" company, a very large company). Said new VP looks around, assesses the situation, then decides to major changes with the way the company/depart operate. Now granted change can be good, most of the time it can lead to greater things for the company, but other times, such as when said person decides to make said changes without talking it over with the department, development team, or anyone else involved in making said changes. Changes such as, completely changing platforms that the company web presence runs on, a platform that no one on the Development Team even knows, so he wants to outsource the work (yeah thats it, take work away from the very people who have kept this company running for 50 years). Then he wants to move all data off-site. Now I know lots of companies employ co-locating servers, but wouldn't it be a good idea to give some kind of advance notice, so we can have time to, oh I don't know, find where things are going to break with the new replication scheme , when replicating, we have web data, and in-house application data, instead of adding a field to all tables dictating where the data is coming from, ie; "Web" or "In-House" they have decided to make web data primary keys be negative numbers and in-house keys be positive numbers. I can think of tons of ways this will impact/break both web and in-house software. Now granted, I very well may be blowing this out of proportion, but this just doesn't seem right to me. If he wants to change platforms then give the developers advanced notice, provide some training on said platform, and set a launch date far enough in the future to make is feasible, not a date that makes it impossible to so anything but to outsource the work. Moving database servers off-site is a fair move, but think it through thoroughly and find the places it can brea
Sounds like your company is screwed already. If so, your best bet is to move the entire team to greener pastures - a place where people are still allowed to enjoy their day job.
We are a big screwed up dysfunctional psychotic happy family - some more screwed up, others more happy, but everybody's psychotic joint venture definition of CP
My first real C# project | Linkify!|FoldWithUs! | sighist -
Let me start by saying that I truly hope this doesn't offend anyone, or step on anyone's toes but I have to get this off my chest and vent. I have worked for this company for a little over 2 years now, and in my opinion it's the best company I've worked for as far as taking care of their development team and IT Department, when we ask for new hardware or software 90% of the time we get it, and in a timely fasion. I know tons of developers who would love to work in my work environment. Now rewind 6 months, the VP of IT at that time, a brilliant man, great to work for, resigned and moved onto greener pastures (well maybe it was 8 or 9 months, I'm not counting). The company then brings in a new VP of IT (from an "unnamed" company, a very large company). Said new VP looks around, assesses the situation, then decides to major changes with the way the company/depart operate. Now granted change can be good, most of the time it can lead to greater things for the company, but other times, such as when said person decides to make said changes without talking it over with the department, development team, or anyone else involved in making said changes. Changes such as, completely changing platforms that the company web presence runs on, a platform that no one on the Development Team even knows, so he wants to outsource the work (yeah thats it, take work away from the very people who have kept this company running for 50 years). Then he wants to move all data off-site. Now I know lots of companies employ co-locating servers, but wouldn't it be a good idea to give some kind of advance notice, so we can have time to, oh I don't know, find where things are going to break with the new replication scheme , when replicating, we have web data, and in-house application data, instead of adding a field to all tables dictating where the data is coming from, ie; "Web" or "In-House" they have decided to make web data primary keys be negative numbers and in-house keys be positive numbers. I can think of tons of ways this will impact/break both web and in-house software. Now granted, I very well may be blowing this out of proportion, but this just doesn't seem right to me. If he wants to change platforms then give the developers advanced notice, provide some training on said platform, and set a launch date far enough in the future to make is feasible, not a date that makes it impossible to so anything but to outsource the work. Moving database servers off-site is a fair move, but think it through thoroughly and find the places it can brea
-
peterchen wrote:
:sigh:
See, that's the face of someone who gives a rat's ass about things he can't hope to change. I bet you fret about Global Warming, too... ;P Seriously though, i'm not saying don't do a good job... but no matter how well you do, sooner or later someone's gonna wreck it. Heck, it might even be you. Just ask George Lucas... :rolleyes:
----
...the wind blows over it and it is gone, and its place remembers it no more...
Seriously, I sighed because they got you, too.
We are a big screwed up dysfunctional psychotic happy family - some more screwed up, others more happy, but everybody's psychotic joint venture definition of CP
My first real C# project | Linkify!|FoldWithUs! | sighist -
You will be outsourced and/or replaced with H1Bs. Why? Because (obviously) the company you 'love' just can't find people with the appropriate technical skills in your country...(it also might have something to do with trimming labor costs, pensions, fringes and providing a more substantial margin for the principals/owners/stockholders). Just remember, "...outsourcing is good for the economy..." (I'm sure you remember who said that...). -- modified at 23:35 Thursday 7th June, 2007
jorgening wrote:
You will be outsourced and/or replaced with H1Ds.
No doubt at that.
jorgening wrote:
Why?
My bet: Because the VP has no clue and goes with what the other guys do.
We are a big screwed up dysfunctional psychotic happy family - some more screwed up, others more happy, but everybody's psychotic joint venture definition of CP
My first real C# project | Linkify!|FoldWithUs! | sighist -
Psycho-*Coder*-Extreme wrote:
The problem is they brought someone in who wants to change the platform for no apparent reason.
That just says to me there is a reason that isn't being communicated to your level. You can be sure there is a giant reason for it, you may just not know what it is. If your outsourcing comments are true, it may just be a way to legally sack most of the current expensive staff because their skills are a bad fit, and get some out sourcing happening. Massively reduce costs, ride the profits for a year, and sell off his shares. He gets a nice company on his resume that increased shareholder value by 80% under his reign, and a nice cash bonus on the side. I'm not saying that is what the VP is doing (how on earth could I) but it is a possible one. -- modified at 3:57 Thursday 7th June, 2007
you forgot a "not" in the disclaimer. But 5 anyway ;)
We are a big screwed up dysfunctional psychotic happy family - some more screwed up, others more happy, but everybody's psychotic joint venture definition of CP
My first real C# project | Linkify!|FoldWithUs! | sighist -
Sounds like exit time! I went through a similar experience several years ago. The company was slowly but steadily moving our work to India, while having us educate them. And ofcourse the management was never are open about their motives. Bottom line is: they don't care about you, they don't care about making a good product, they don't care about long term. They care about making money on the short term. I pressed the exit button when I had the chance, started writing my own software, doing contracting, and I have never regretted it! Other companies better deserve your talent (looking for a job by the way? :-)) Edit: oh, and don't think that any company won't hire an asshole to get the dirty work done.
Wout
wout de zeeuw wrote:
looking for a job by the way?
At this point I'm most certainly open to new opportunities
"Okay, I give up: which is NOT a real programming language????" Michael Bergman
"Well yes, it is an Integer, but it's a metrosexual Integer. For all we know, under all that hair gel it could be a Boolean." Tom Welch
"Let's face it, the average computer user has the brain of a Spider Monkey." Bill Gates
-
Sounds like your company is screwed already. If so, your best bet is to move the entire team to greener pastures - a place where people are still allowed to enjoy their day job.
We are a big screwed up dysfunctional psychotic happy family - some more screwed up, others more happy, but everybody's psychotic joint venture definition of CP
My first real C# project | Linkify!|FoldWithUs! | sighist -
Let me start by saying that I truly hope this doesn't offend anyone, or step on anyone's toes but I have to get this off my chest and vent. I have worked for this company for a little over 2 years now, and in my opinion it's the best company I've worked for as far as taking care of their development team and IT Department, when we ask for new hardware or software 90% of the time we get it, and in a timely fasion. I know tons of developers who would love to work in my work environment. Now rewind 6 months, the VP of IT at that time, a brilliant man, great to work for, resigned and moved onto greener pastures (well maybe it was 8 or 9 months, I'm not counting). The company then brings in a new VP of IT (from an "unnamed" company, a very large company). Said new VP looks around, assesses the situation, then decides to major changes with the way the company/depart operate. Now granted change can be good, most of the time it can lead to greater things for the company, but other times, such as when said person decides to make said changes without talking it over with the department, development team, or anyone else involved in making said changes. Changes such as, completely changing platforms that the company web presence runs on, a platform that no one on the Development Team even knows, so he wants to outsource the work (yeah thats it, take work away from the very people who have kept this company running for 50 years). Then he wants to move all data off-site. Now I know lots of companies employ co-locating servers, but wouldn't it be a good idea to give some kind of advance notice, so we can have time to, oh I don't know, find where things are going to break with the new replication scheme , when replicating, we have web data, and in-house application data, instead of adding a field to all tables dictating where the data is coming from, ie; "Web" or "In-House" they have decided to make web data primary keys be negative numbers and in-house keys be positive numbers. I can think of tons of ways this will impact/break both web and in-house software. Now granted, I very well may be blowing this out of proportion, but this just doesn't seem right to me. If he wants to change platforms then give the developers advanced notice, provide some training on said platform, and set a launch date far enough in the future to make is feasible, not a date that makes it impossible to so anything but to outsource the work. Moving database servers off-site is a fair move, but think it through thoroughly and find the places it can brea
Well, it's certainly not a pleasant position to be in. As this guy is new to the position, he has to be seen to be stamping his position and rolling out his "vision"; whatever it was he sold to the people that gave him the job. As a result, you often get change for it's own sake. You have two choices: 1) Give him all the rope he needs to hang himself. Whole-heartedly support all his initiatives and let them fall over. When anyone comes asking questions, just point out that you're following the new VP's vision and direction. 2) Play a sort of devils advocate role that supports his ideas. For example, if he wants to outsource all your systems, try something like "Ah yes, our systems is what has continually given us an edge over our competitors. Giving them to a third party is a wonderful idea." Good luck! John.
-
Let me start by saying that I truly hope this doesn't offend anyone, or step on anyone's toes but I have to get this off my chest and vent. I have worked for this company for a little over 2 years now, and in my opinion it's the best company I've worked for as far as taking care of their development team and IT Department, when we ask for new hardware or software 90% of the time we get it, and in a timely fasion. I know tons of developers who would love to work in my work environment. Now rewind 6 months, the VP of IT at that time, a brilliant man, great to work for, resigned and moved onto greener pastures (well maybe it was 8 or 9 months, I'm not counting). The company then brings in a new VP of IT (from an "unnamed" company, a very large company). Said new VP looks around, assesses the situation, then decides to major changes with the way the company/depart operate. Now granted change can be good, most of the time it can lead to greater things for the company, but other times, such as when said person decides to make said changes without talking it over with the department, development team, or anyone else involved in making said changes. Changes such as, completely changing platforms that the company web presence runs on, a platform that no one on the Development Team even knows, so he wants to outsource the work (yeah thats it, take work away from the very people who have kept this company running for 50 years). Then he wants to move all data off-site. Now I know lots of companies employ co-locating servers, but wouldn't it be a good idea to give some kind of advance notice, so we can have time to, oh I don't know, find where things are going to break with the new replication scheme , when replicating, we have web data, and in-house application data, instead of adding a field to all tables dictating where the data is coming from, ie; "Web" or "In-House" they have decided to make web data primary keys be negative numbers and in-house keys be positive numbers. I can think of tons of ways this will impact/break both web and in-house software. Now granted, I very well may be blowing this out of proportion, but this just doesn't seem right to me. If he wants to change platforms then give the developers advanced notice, provide some training on said platform, and set a launch date far enough in the future to make is feasible, not a date that makes it impossible to so anything but to outsource the work. Moving database servers off-site is a fair move, but think it through thoroughly and find the places it can brea
Psycho-*Coder*-Extreme wrote:
set a launch date far enough in the future to make is feasible, not a date that makes it impossible to so anything but to outsource the work
Maybe that was his intention all along. A political manouver to persuade the board to outsource. Maybe he has a friend that runs an outsourcing company and stands to gain from a back hander. Maybe I'm just cynical.
Upcoming events: * Glasgow: Mock Objects, SQL Server CLR Integration, Reporting Services, db4o, Dependency Injection with Spring ... * Reading: Developer Day 5 Never write for other people. Write for yourself, because you have a passion for it. -- Marc Clifton My website
-
Let me start by saying that I truly hope this doesn't offend anyone, or step on anyone's toes but I have to get this off my chest and vent. I have worked for this company for a little over 2 years now, and in my opinion it's the best company I've worked for as far as taking care of their development team and IT Department, when we ask for new hardware or software 90% of the time we get it, and in a timely fasion. I know tons of developers who would love to work in my work environment. Now rewind 6 months, the VP of IT at that time, a brilliant man, great to work for, resigned and moved onto greener pastures (well maybe it was 8 or 9 months, I'm not counting). The company then brings in a new VP of IT (from an "unnamed" company, a very large company). Said new VP looks around, assesses the situation, then decides to major changes with the way the company/depart operate. Now granted change can be good, most of the time it can lead to greater things for the company, but other times, such as when said person decides to make said changes without talking it over with the department, development team, or anyone else involved in making said changes. Changes such as, completely changing platforms that the company web presence runs on, a platform that no one on the Development Team even knows, so he wants to outsource the work (yeah thats it, take work away from the very people who have kept this company running for 50 years). Then he wants to move all data off-site. Now I know lots of companies employ co-locating servers, but wouldn't it be a good idea to give some kind of advance notice, so we can have time to, oh I don't know, find where things are going to break with the new replication scheme , when replicating, we have web data, and in-house application data, instead of adding a field to all tables dictating where the data is coming from, ie; "Web" or "In-House" they have decided to make web data primary keys be negative numbers and in-house keys be positive numbers. I can think of tons of ways this will impact/break both web and in-house software. Now granted, I very well may be blowing this out of proportion, but this just doesn't seem right to me. If he wants to change platforms then give the developers advanced notice, provide some training on said platform, and set a launch date far enough in the future to make is feasible, not a date that makes it impossible to so anything but to outsource the work. Moving database servers off-site is a fair move, but think it through thoroughly and find the places it can brea
If you can, look for another job.
Kevin
-
Let me start by saying that I truly hope this doesn't offend anyone, or step on anyone's toes but I have to get this off my chest and vent. I have worked for this company for a little over 2 years now, and in my opinion it's the best company I've worked for as far as taking care of their development team and IT Department, when we ask for new hardware or software 90% of the time we get it, and in a timely fasion. I know tons of developers who would love to work in my work environment. Now rewind 6 months, the VP of IT at that time, a brilliant man, great to work for, resigned and moved onto greener pastures (well maybe it was 8 or 9 months, I'm not counting). The company then brings in a new VP of IT (from an "unnamed" company, a very large company). Said new VP looks around, assesses the situation, then decides to major changes with the way the company/depart operate. Now granted change can be good, most of the time it can lead to greater things for the company, but other times, such as when said person decides to make said changes without talking it over with the department, development team, or anyone else involved in making said changes. Changes such as, completely changing platforms that the company web presence runs on, a platform that no one on the Development Team even knows, so he wants to outsource the work (yeah thats it, take work away from the very people who have kept this company running for 50 years). Then he wants to move all data off-site. Now I know lots of companies employ co-locating servers, but wouldn't it be a good idea to give some kind of advance notice, so we can have time to, oh I don't know, find where things are going to break with the new replication scheme , when replicating, we have web data, and in-house application data, instead of adding a field to all tables dictating where the data is coming from, ie; "Web" or "In-House" they have decided to make web data primary keys be negative numbers and in-house keys be positive numbers. I can think of tons of ways this will impact/break both web and in-house software. Now granted, I very well may be blowing this out of proportion, but this just doesn't seem right to me. If he wants to change platforms then give the developers advanced notice, provide some training on said platform, and set a launch date far enough in the future to make is feasible, not a date that makes it impossible to so anything but to outsource the work. Moving database servers off-site is a fair move, but think it through thoroughly and find the places it can brea
Time to look for a new job. :doh:
Simply Elegant Designs JimmyRopes Designs
Think inside the box! ProActive Secure Systems
I'm on-line therefore I am. JimmyRopes -
For some reason, I feel like I'm stuck in Dilbert cartoon here.
Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++ Metal Musings - Rex and my new metal blog "I am working on a project that will convert a FORTRAN code to corresponding C++ code.I am not aware of FORTRAN syntax" ( spotted in the C++/CLI forum )
I saw the headbanger's journey last night. Sure was entertaining! I had no idea Dio was that short... \m/ \m/
-
peterchen wrote:
a place where people are still allowed to enjoy their day job
Those places actually exist? :~
.net is a box of never ending treasures, every day I get find another gem.
norm .net wrote:
peterchen wrote: a place where people are still allowed to enjoy their day job Those places actually exist?
Surprisingly enough yes. :->
-- You have to explain to them [VB coders] what you mean by "typed". their first response is likely to be something like, "Of course my code is typed. Do you think i magically project it onto the screen with the power of my mind?" --- John Simmons / outlaw programmer
-
Let me start by saying that I truly hope this doesn't offend anyone, or step on anyone's toes but I have to get this off my chest and vent. I have worked for this company for a little over 2 years now, and in my opinion it's the best company I've worked for as far as taking care of their development team and IT Department, when we ask for new hardware or software 90% of the time we get it, and in a timely fasion. I know tons of developers who would love to work in my work environment. Now rewind 6 months, the VP of IT at that time, a brilliant man, great to work for, resigned and moved onto greener pastures (well maybe it was 8 or 9 months, I'm not counting). The company then brings in a new VP of IT (from an "unnamed" company, a very large company). Said new VP looks around, assesses the situation, then decides to major changes with the way the company/depart operate. Now granted change can be good, most of the time it can lead to greater things for the company, but other times, such as when said person decides to make said changes without talking it over with the department, development team, or anyone else involved in making said changes. Changes such as, completely changing platforms that the company web presence runs on, a platform that no one on the Development Team even knows, so he wants to outsource the work (yeah thats it, take work away from the very people who have kept this company running for 50 years). Then he wants to move all data off-site. Now I know lots of companies employ co-locating servers, but wouldn't it be a good idea to give some kind of advance notice, so we can have time to, oh I don't know, find where things are going to break with the new replication scheme , when replicating, we have web data, and in-house application data, instead of adding a field to all tables dictating where the data is coming from, ie; "Web" or "In-House" they have decided to make web data primary keys be negative numbers and in-house keys be positive numbers. I can think of tons of ways this will impact/break both web and in-house software. Now granted, I very well may be blowing this out of proportion, but this just doesn't seem right to me. If he wants to change platforms then give the developers advanced notice, provide some training on said platform, and set a launch date far enough in the future to make is feasible, not a date that makes it impossible to so anything but to outsource the work. Moving database servers off-site is a fair move, but think it through thoroughly and find the places it can brea
I was in that situation not too long ago. Noone at the top got replaced, but after Gartner, twice, said that our IT department was doing more for 1/3 the cost and half the people than anyone else they surveyed, they decided to take one of the best IT departments in the country and utterly destroy it. HUGE cuts and reorg's abounded. I watched as lots of very hard working people, who poored their hearts into the work for the company, got screwed, laid off, thrown into jobs they had no experience with and told to "sink or swim". Morale plummeted farther anyone could have ever imagined! No raises, no merit, not even performance reviews. Nothing! People with CS degrees couldn't find jobs in the crap economy here and ended up handling baggage at the major airport. The entire Help Desk got shipped off to India at the end of last year. Response times for problems are so high it's embarrasing. To this day, they're STILL reorg'ing, for, I think, the 5th time in as many years. Though I still know some people that have survived there, there's nothing left of the IT department I used to work for. I wonder what Gartner would say about the place now...
A guide to posting questions on CodeProject[^]
Dave Kreskowiak Microsoft MVP Visual Developer - Visual Basic
2006, 2007 -
jorgening wrote:
Just remember, "...outsourcing is good for the economy
Well i Don't feel outsourcing is good for my economy. We have more talented people than I've ever worked with. The problem is they brought someone in who wants to change the platform for no apparent reason. I've researched the platform he wants our web presence on, and it seems very suitable for our internal Intranet, for the IT Project system, for the IT Team System but not really for all of our websites. And he chose a platform he knew beforehand no one there had ever worked with, so why would someone do that?
"Okay, I give up: which is NOT a real programming language????" Michael Bergman
"Well yes, it is an Integer, but it's a metrosexual Integer. For all we know, under all that hair gel it could be a Boolean." Tom Welch
"Let's face it, the average computer user has the brain of a Spider Monkey." Bill Gates
Psycho-*Coder*-Extreme wrote:
it seems very suitable for our internal Intranet, for the IT Project system
Let me guess ... MS SharePoint? ;) Is must be some kind of disease. I know a manager, too, who wants to run everything on SharePoint. He's not able to explain why we are not allowed to use an appropriate CMS.
____________________________________ There is no proof for this sentence.