Who decides what technology to use at your work place
-
I have the fortune to test, evaluate and then pick the right technology for the right job for my product. But it may not be the case for many. (Obviously, I am talking about new projects here). So who dictates what technology need to be used for your products (technology I mean more in line with frameworks rather than generic areas like web/desktop): 1. Someone who have little or no programming experience. 2. Someone who has programming experience but no longer writes code. 3. Someone who writes code actively. 4. The programming team as a whole. 5. A rigorous method that involves test/prototype of different technologies. 6. No idea who does? or don't care. Of course "or" the above options with: 1. The person who picks the technology is supposed to be actively involved with the project.
At my last two positions, the development team got to choose what tools were used. Currently, my team decides what tools we use. But I am the only programmer. My team consists of Sharepoint Admin, a Info Path expert / Business Analyst, a team leader and myself. So I get to choose what .net tools we use.
I didn't get any requirements for the signature
-
I asked a similar question a while ago :) Anyway, in my case the correct answer would be: "history". The technology was picked when the development started, in 1997. Sure, we use new API calls and have switched to Unicode-only builds, but questions such as "WPF vs. Silverlight" make absolutelly no sense in this environment.
modified on Wednesday, May 27, 2009 5:09 PM
Nemanja Trifunovic wrote:
I asked a similar question a while ago
Sorry! I missed it.
Nemanja Trifunovic wrote:
WPF vs. Silverlight
My curiosity arouse precisely because of the above.
-
I have the fortune to test, evaluate and then pick the right technology for the right job for my product. But it may not be the case for many. (Obviously, I am talking about new projects here). So who dictates what technology need to be used for your products (technology I mean more in line with frameworks rather than generic areas like web/desktop): 1. Someone who have little or no programming experience. 2. Someone who has programming experience but no longer writes code. 3. Someone who writes code actively. 4. The programming team as a whole. 5. A rigorous method that involves test/prototype of different technologies. 6. No idea who does? or don't care. Of course "or" the above options with: 1. The person who picks the technology is supposed to be actively involved with the project.
-
Yes, but whoever is paying must be in one of the category I mentioned.
-
Yes, but whoever is paying must be in one of the category I mentioned.
Being in a huge organization, atleast at my level(3 years of total experience) you do not get to know the reality. Suggestions do come along, but not sure about who actually does that. Sometimes it's like: "Hey I have a license for <XXX technology>. You must you must use it."
जय हिंद
-
I have the fortune to test, evaluate and then pick the right technology for the right job for my product. But it may not be the case for many. (Obviously, I am talking about new projects here). So who dictates what technology need to be used for your products (technology I mean more in line with frameworks rather than generic areas like web/desktop): 1. Someone who have little or no programming experience. 2. Someone who has programming experience but no longer writes code. 3. Someone who writes code actively. 4. The programming team as a whole. 5. A rigorous method that involves test/prototype of different technologies. 6. No idea who does? or don't care. Of course "or" the above options with: 1. The person who picks the technology is supposed to be actively involved with the project.
Idiots. Marc
-
Idiots. Marc
-
I have the fortune to test, evaluate and then pick the right technology for the right job for my product. But it may not be the case for many. (Obviously, I am talking about new projects here). So who dictates what technology need to be used for your products (technology I mean more in line with frameworks rather than generic areas like web/desktop): 1. Someone who have little or no programming experience. 2. Someone who has programming experience but no longer writes code. 3. Someone who writes code actively. 4. The programming team as a whole. 5. A rigorous method that involves test/prototype of different technologies. 6. No idea who does? or don't care. Of course "or" the above options with: 1. The person who picks the technology is supposed to be actively involved with the project.
I decide what I want to use (and always have) but since we were bought by a large US company I have to run the licenses past the lawyers first. The GPL is a no-no obviously, but (fingers crossed) everything else should be OK (as long as we adhere to the license usage of course.) I have a lot of respect at work so when it comes to frameworks, etc. my boss lets me use my discretion and hasn't interfered in my decision for many, many years. In fact, the last time was when I was leaning towards Borland's OWL C++ framework back in the early 90's and he steered me into MFC because he didn't think Borland would be able to compete with MS for long. He was spot on. This is an interesting question and relevant to me personally right now as I am in the process of evaluating the Qt framework for future C++ development.
-
I have the fortune to test, evaluate and then pick the right technology for the right job for my product. But it may not be the case for many. (Obviously, I am talking about new projects here). So who dictates what technology need to be used for your products (technology I mean more in line with frameworks rather than generic areas like web/desktop): 1. Someone who have little or no programming experience. 2. Someone who has programming experience but no longer writes code. 3. Someone who writes code actively. 4. The programming team as a whole. 5. A rigorous method that involves test/prototype of different technologies. 6. No idea who does? or don't care. Of course "or" the above options with: 1. The person who picks the technology is supposed to be actively involved with the project.
A director of architecture has the final say over an overall architecture direction. We have a review process here that runs designs through a process to ensure that new solutions fit properly into the general architecture. Do I like it? I am very much on the fence right now because it creates some tension since I appear to be a 'dotnetter' in the land of Java folks, and I am not sure if I will ever be able to change that mindset, of if I even should try. I think they got stuck early on in the land of 'services mean java' and to try to effect a change at this point may end up being a 'no way', but I digress.
-
I asked a similar question a while ago :) Anyway, in my case the correct answer would be: "history". The technology was picked when the development started, in 1997. Sure, we use new API calls and have switched to Unicode-only builds, but questions such as "WPF vs. Silverlight" make absolutelly no sense in this environment.
modified on Wednesday, May 27, 2009 5:09 PM
Absolutely the same here: MFC, COM and hundreds of thousands rows of code. The project is started also in 1997 /AD/.
The narrow specialist in the broad sense of the word is a complete idiot in the narrow sense of the word. Advertise here – minimum three posts per day are guaranteed.
-
I have the fortune to test, evaluate and then pick the right technology for the right job for my product. But it may not be the case for many. (Obviously, I am talking about new projects here). So who dictates what technology need to be used for your products (technology I mean more in line with frameworks rather than generic areas like web/desktop): 1. Someone who have little or no programming experience. 2. Someone who has programming experience but no longer writes code. 3. Someone who writes code actively. 4. The programming team as a whole. 5. A rigorous method that involves test/prototype of different technologies. 6. No idea who does? or don't care. Of course "or" the above options with: 1. The person who picks the technology is supposed to be actively involved with the project.
-
I have the fortune to test, evaluate and then pick the right technology for the right job for my product. But it may not be the case for many. (Obviously, I am talking about new projects here). So who dictates what technology need to be used for your products (technology I mean more in line with frameworks rather than generic areas like web/desktop): 1. Someone who have little or no programming experience. 2. Someone who has programming experience but no longer writes code. 3. Someone who writes code actively. 4. The programming team as a whole. 5. A rigorous method that involves test/prototype of different technologies. 6. No idea who does? or don't care. Of course "or" the above options with: 1. The person who picks the technology is supposed to be actively involved with the project.
When not dictated by the client I've generally been able to pick what I want to use (I'm mostly a solo dev); there's a formalized process for making major architectural decisions. I've never been involved in it before (all major decisions predated me); but will be involved to some extent in a few pending decisions on new stuff. Edit: I do have to convince my boss of the rightness of my decision (especially when spending money is involved), but haven't had any major issues there yet.
It is a truth universally acknowledged that a zombie in possession of brains must be in want of more brains. -- Pride and Prejudice and Zombies
-
I have the fortune to test, evaluate and then pick the right technology for the right job for my product. But it may not be the case for many. (Obviously, I am talking about new projects here). So who dictates what technology need to be used for your products (technology I mean more in line with frameworks rather than generic areas like web/desktop): 1. Someone who have little or no programming experience. 2. Someone who has programming experience but no longer writes code. 3. Someone who writes code actively. 4. The programming team as a whole. 5. A rigorous method that involves test/prototype of different technologies. 6. No idea who does? or don't care. Of course "or" the above options with: 1. The person who picks the technology is supposed to be actively involved with the project.
I was just going to ask you for a long term loan. I read the first part of your post as "I have a fortune", then my eyes re-focused. I am so disappointed for us both.
Henry Minute Do not read medical books! You could die of a misprint. - Mark Twain Girl: (staring) "Why do you need an icy cucumber?" “I want to report a fraud. The government is lying to us all.”
-
I have the fortune to test, evaluate and then pick the right technology for the right job for my product. But it may not be the case for many. (Obviously, I am talking about new projects here). So who dictates what technology need to be used for your products (technology I mean more in line with frameworks rather than generic areas like web/desktop): 1. Someone who have little or no programming experience. 2. Someone who has programming experience but no longer writes code. 3. Someone who writes code actively. 4. The programming team as a whole. 5. A rigorous method that involves test/prototype of different technologies. 6. No idea who does? or don't care. Of course "or" the above options with: 1. The person who picks the technology is supposed to be actively involved with the project.
For software development it's me. If I like it and it works I'll use it.
-
Idiots. Marc
Marc Clifton wrote:
Idiots.
Yes?
The narrow specialist in the broad sense of the word is a complete idiot in the narrow sense of the word. Advertise here – minimum three posts per day are guaranteed.
-
I was just going to ask you for a long term loan. I read the first part of your post as "I have a fortune", then my eyes re-focused. I am so disappointed for us both.
Henry Minute Do not read medical books! You could die of a misprint. - Mark Twain Girl: (staring) "Why do you need an icy cucumber?" “I want to report a fraud. The government is lying to us all.”
Five of course.
The narrow specialist in the broad sense of the word is a complete idiot in the narrow sense of the word. Advertise here – minimum three posts per day are guaranteed.
-
I have the fortune to test, evaluate and then pick the right technology for the right job for my product. But it may not be the case for many. (Obviously, I am talking about new projects here). So who dictates what technology need to be used for your products (technology I mean more in line with frameworks rather than generic areas like web/desktop): 1. Someone who have little or no programming experience. 2. Someone who has programming experience but no longer writes code. 3. Someone who writes code actively. 4. The programming team as a whole. 5. A rigorous method that involves test/prototype of different technologies. 6. No idea who does? or don't care. Of course "or" the above options with: 1. The person who picks the technology is supposed to be actively involved with the project.
I do, anyone and everyone may suggest and recommend a tool or technology and I have to evaluate it for relevance to our needs. There are some lovely too;s out there and I would dearly like to use some of them and then I look into the BENEFITS and the ROI and they tend to get dropped. I spend lots of time here and on blogs devouring commentaries on WPF and Silverlight to see if they are mature enough to move out of the sandbox. It gets to be fun sometimes and when there is clear benefit we move quickly into a new area.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity RAH
-
I have the fortune to test, evaluate and then pick the right technology for the right job for my product. But it may not be the case for many. (Obviously, I am talking about new projects here). So who dictates what technology need to be used for your products (technology I mean more in line with frameworks rather than generic areas like web/desktop): 1. Someone who have little or no programming experience. 2. Someone who has programming experience but no longer writes code. 3. Someone who writes code actively. 4. The programming team as a whole. 5. A rigorous method that involves test/prototype of different technologies. 6. No idea who does? or don't care. Of course "or" the above options with: 1. The person who picks the technology is supposed to be actively involved with the project.
Me. But, it is driven by our customer's needs of course.
Sovereign ingredient for a happy marriage: Pay cash or do without. Interest charges not only eat up a household budget; awareness of debt eats up domestic felicity. --Lazarus Long Avoid the crowd. Do your own thinking independently. Be the chess player, not the chess piece. --Ralph Charell
-
I have the fortune to test, evaluate and then pick the right technology for the right job for my product. But it may not be the case for many. (Obviously, I am talking about new projects here). So who dictates what technology need to be used for your products (technology I mean more in line with frameworks rather than generic areas like web/desktop): 1. Someone who have little or no programming experience. 2. Someone who has programming experience but no longer writes code. 3. Someone who writes code actively. 4. The programming team as a whole. 5. A rigorous method that involves test/prototype of different technologies. 6. No idea who does? or don't care. Of course "or" the above options with: 1. The person who picks the technology is supposed to be actively involved with the project.
Usually #2 when I'm at a client site. Sometimes #1. I work with whatever they've bought when I walk in the door. But that's my role. To use whatever they bought to get them the results they think they need. By the time I get there the damage is done. Its usually database or report software so cost and the software's reputation are the real drivers. At home the tech decision is 5, but I wouldn't call it rigorous.
_____________________________ Those who study history are doomed to watch others repeat it. -Scott M.
-
I asked a similar question a while ago :) Anyway, in my case the correct answer would be: "history". The technology was picked when the development started, in 1997. Sure, we use new API calls and have switched to Unicode-only builds, but questions such as "WPF vs. Silverlight" make absolutelly no sense in this environment.
modified on Wednesday, May 27, 2009 5:09 PM