Poorly valued
-
Why programmers are so poorly valued in their work, do a lot of code but the end result the client does not care only see the mistakes and has no idea of all that is behind it
Because mistakes usually result in core functionality not working. The same as when I had my house built. I could care less about the amount of work involved. I was paying a hefty sum of money for something and I wanted it done without ANY mistakes. I did not devalue the workers doing the work by expecting errors to be caught, handled and corrected.
I wasn't, now I am, then I won't be anymore.
-
Why programmers are so poorly valued in their work, do a lot of code but the end result the client does not care only see the mistakes and has no idea of all that is behind it
-
Why programmers are so poorly valued in their work, do a lot of code but the end result the client does not care only see the mistakes and has no idea of all that is behind it
-
Why programmers are so poorly valued in their work, do a lot of code but the end result the client does not care only see the mistakes and has no idea of all that is behind it
In my industry, medical devices, mistakes or bad code can literally kill someone. But I don't feel poorly valued if someone catches my mistakes during V&V.
It was broke, so I fixed it.
-
Why programmers are so poorly valued in their work, do a lot of code but the end result the client does not care only see the mistakes and has no idea of all that is behind it
-
Why programmers are so poorly valued in their work, do a lot of code but the end result the client does not care only see the mistakes and has no idea of all that is behind it
-
Why programmers are so poorly valued in their work, do a lot of code but the end result the client does not care only see the mistakes and has no idea of all that is behind it
neogeos wrote:
Why programmers are so poorly valued in their work, do a lot of code but the end result the client does not care only see the mistakes and has no idea of all that is behind it
Well, let's look at that. 1. The notion that developers should be rewarded or valued based on the amount of code they produce is an old and discredited fallacy. I would much prefer to find a coder who could come on board and make an app do the same or more with less lines of code. 2. We should be greatful that most clients never look at our code. If the world could see and understand what programmers do, and the dodgy development practices that are widespread, we'd be relegated to somewhere between Fortune Tellers and Fake Psychics in terms of respectibility. 3. If there are mistakes, why should a client take into account the effort required to make those mistakes? "Sure, I know your Reports all show wrong values, but I was here until 2am making them show wrong values" We are paid to deliver, the expectation is that we will deliver something that works. Think about that THE EXPECTATION. So, if you deliver a working system on time, you've met expectations, little more. That's why clients seem overly focused on errors. I wouldn't have it any other way. I don't want to be part of a profession where failure is expected and simply delivering a working system is justification for celebration. We should be setting our sights higher than that. -Richard
Hit any user to continue.
modified on Wednesday, May 11, 2011 11:38 AM
-
Try gardening its far more rewarding :) and you get to see the fruits of your labour.
Software Kinetics - The home of good software
I see all kinds of fruits when I visit the Lounge... :doh:
Craigslist Troll: litaly@comcast.net "I have a theory that the truth is never told during the nine-to-five hours. " — Hunter S. Thompson
-
Why programmers are so poorly valued in their work, do a lot of code but the end result the client does not care only see the mistakes and has no idea of all that is behind it
neogeos wrote:
Why programmers are so poorly valued in their work, do a lot of code but the end result the client does not care only see the mistakes and has no idea of all that is behind it
Hi NeoGeos, I think the way you 'framed' this question is so all-encompassing that there's no one-size-fits-all answer/response that will not be vague: that's not meant as a criticism: what makes your question interesting enough to make me want to reply, is that I think it's a question worth addressing. The fact that users respond to whether or not software works is an easy one: same reason the purhcaser of a flawed Toyota goes nuts when it accellerates suddenly, putting their lives at risk, or you take the TV you bought back to the store immediately when you get it home and find strange horizonal bands of random colors start appearing on the screen, no matter what signal source is fed into it. And, no matter how great the functionality provided by software is, the user is often going to respond to flaws in the user-interface that make it difficult to use, or easy to produce errors. Or the user may be disgusted that the interface, while not 'broken,' is so difficult to use that they hate it, while at the same time using it becomes indispensable because it has such benefits in savings of time and money ... this leading to a peculiar "love-hate" relationship people sometimes have with software. But, I do believe there is very large number of educated people who do see and recognize the hard-work, even craftsmanship, and art, in contemporary software. And, for example, even a large group of people who, without understanding anything of the 'plumbing' underneath software like jQuery, understand that it was a stroke of brilliance and hard work, even genius, for Resig to create that library and make Java/Ecma/Script go from being Cinderella scrubbing vicious step-mother's floors to the Princess at the Ball, rise up, forsooth, even unto the Grand Ball at Redmond. So, in looking at the "creator" side of the equation: you might think on a broad level about the change in western society from the older views of mathematical and computation "types" of people as "mad-scientists," "geeks," "high-priests of mainframes," to the changes in those old stereotypes in modern society today. And, you have to think about to what extent very old cultural traditions come into play here: is programming a set of skills, a craft, an art, a fine art, a science ? All of the abo
-
I see all kinds of fruits when I visit the Lounge... :doh:
Craigslist Troll: litaly@comcast.net "I have a theory that the truth is never told during the nine-to-five hours. " — Hunter S. Thompson
-
Why programmers are so poorly valued in their work, do a lot of code but the end result the client does not care only see the mistakes and has no idea of all that is behind it
-
neogeos wrote:
the client does not care only see the mistakes
Make sure your mistakes don't have as much visibility...?
Daniel Desormeaux wrote:
Make sure your mistakes don't have as much visibility...?
tee hee. Programmer A: So, eh.. I finally got the damn users off my back about bugs in the software. Programmer B: Really, how'd you do it? Programmer A: Well, I just hid all the bugs so they couldn't see them. Programmer B: Genius, like that timeout you were getting with the DB? Programmer A: Yep, totally still times out, but I stuck an error handler around it, and I just roll back and resubmit. Works fine, the users don't even realise. Programmer B: And the Divide By Zero when you're calculating interest? Programmer A: Yeah, I hid that one too, it was only happening when the start was after the end, which didn't make sense anyway. Put in a check for that, boom, user is none the wiser. Programmer B: So, let me get this straight, by adding error handling, and better validation you've pretty much conned the users into thinking you've built a great piece of software. Programmer A: I know right? Morons. Programmer B: Yeah. Morons. -Richard
Hit any user to continue.
-
neogeos wrote:
Why programmers are so poorly valued in their work, do a lot of code but the end result the client does not care only see the mistakes and has no idea of all that is behind it
Well, let's look at that. 1. The notion that developers should be rewarded or valued based on the amount of code they produce is an old and discredited fallacy. I would much prefer to find a coder who could come on board and make an app do the same or more with less lines of code. 2. We should be greatful that most clients never look at our code. If the world could see and understand what programmers do, and the dodgy development practices that are widespread, we'd be relegated to somewhere between Fortune Tellers and Fake Psychics in terms of respectibility. 3. If there are mistakes, why should a client take into account the effort required to make those mistakes? "Sure, I know your Reports all show wrong values, but I was here until 2am making them show wrong values" We are paid to deliver, the expectation is that we will deliver something that works. Think about that THE EXPECTATION. So, if you deliver a working system on time, you've met expectations, little more. That's why clients seem overly focused on errors. I wouldn't have it any other way. I don't want to be part of a profession where failure is expected and simply delivering a working system is justification for celebration. We should be setting our sights higher than that. -Richard
Hit any user to continue.
modified on Wednesday, May 11, 2011 11:38 AM
-
neogeos wrote:
Why programmers are so poorly valued in their work, do a lot of code but the end result the client does not care only see the mistakes and has no idea of all that is behind it
Hi NeoGeos, I think the way you 'framed' this question is so all-encompassing that there's no one-size-fits-all answer/response that will not be vague: that's not meant as a criticism: what makes your question interesting enough to make me want to reply, is that I think it's a question worth addressing. The fact that users respond to whether or not software works is an easy one: same reason the purhcaser of a flawed Toyota goes nuts when it accellerates suddenly, putting their lives at risk, or you take the TV you bought back to the store immediately when you get it home and find strange horizonal bands of random colors start appearing on the screen, no matter what signal source is fed into it. And, no matter how great the functionality provided by software is, the user is often going to respond to flaws in the user-interface that make it difficult to use, or easy to produce errors. Or the user may be disgusted that the interface, while not 'broken,' is so difficult to use that they hate it, while at the same time using it becomes indispensable because it has such benefits in savings of time and money ... this leading to a peculiar "love-hate" relationship people sometimes have with software. But, I do believe there is very large number of educated people who do see and recognize the hard-work, even craftsmanship, and art, in contemporary software. And, for example, even a large group of people who, without understanding anything of the 'plumbing' underneath software like jQuery, understand that it was a stroke of brilliance and hard work, even genius, for Resig to create that library and make Java/Ecma/Script go from being Cinderella scrubbing vicious step-mother's floors to the Princess at the Ball, rise up, forsooth, even unto the Grand Ball at Redmond. So, in looking at the "creator" side of the equation: you might think on a broad level about the change in western society from the older views of mathematical and computation "types" of people as "mad-scientists," "geeks," "high-priests of mainframes," to the changes in those old stereotypes in modern society today. And, you have to think about to what extent very old cultural traditions come into play here: is programming a set of skills, a craft, an art, a fine art, a science ? All of the abo
-
Daniel Desormeaux wrote:
Make sure your mistakes don't have as much visibility...?
tee hee. Programmer A: So, eh.. I finally got the damn users off my back about bugs in the software. Programmer B: Really, how'd you do it? Programmer A: Well, I just hid all the bugs so they couldn't see them. Programmer B: Genius, like that timeout you were getting with the DB? Programmer A: Yep, totally still times out, but I stuck an error handler around it, and I just roll back and resubmit. Works fine, the users don't even realise. Programmer B: And the Divide By Zero when you're calculating interest? Programmer A: Yeah, I hid that one too, it was only happening when the start was after the end, which didn't make sense anyway. Put in a check for that, boom, user is none the wiser. Programmer B: So, let me get this straight, by adding error handling, and better validation you've pretty much conned the users into thinking you've built a great piece of software. Programmer A: I know right? Morons. Programmer B: Yeah. Morons. -Richard
Hit any user to continue.