Third time unlucky.
-
My first redundancy was in June 2009; the second in November 2010; the third is looming and likely to be July 2012. I was told today that DotNet is no longer a viable conversion option in the company which manufactures specialised engineering test equipment. They are partly right as the current application has been under development for almost four years. It's been scrapped once and redesigned but in the process of extensibility it was too complex to maintain. When I joined the company in February last year I very soon got tangled in a very complex to unravel class hierarchy. The app was too difficult to change as a single code edit in one place could very well zap functionality elsewhere. Given the complexity of the data acquisition, calculations, and so on that it used there was never any real hope it could be reused anywhere else in the same way on the other 15 instruments that were pending to be converted. So I battled on and made some very good enhancements but the virtual absence of any comments in the code I took over made it difficult to grasp the cause-and-effect-and-the-why its written as it is. Some two months ago, I helped solve a seemingly insoluble problem that freed the legacy software that was stuck in an XP time warp (it used a package that is no longer available). That solution I wrote in DotNet gives the legacy application at least two to three years more of life which is ironic to some extent. I'm starting the redundancy process next week and have thankfully been given "garden leave". Part of the process is to give me the opportunity to present my case why redundancy could be avoided. I'll now have the time to prepare a presentation about a new architecture I've been working towards which I think could restore confidence in DotNet and open up marketing opportunities which our competitors have nothing to match. I think my proposed solution will dramatically flatten how a client's instrument would talk to the data acquisition and the separation of the calculations buried deep in the base classes will make reuse much simpler. I have many ideas I need to prepare. Of course, none of it may make a difference at all. Perhaps the path to redundancy has been fully decided except for the necessary legal procedures to be followed. I really enjoyed my time at the company and I learned so much from it. Interesting knowledge but not necessarily useful in a commercial/financial market except perhaps to demonstrate different approaches to some rather obtuse problems. It's going to be a very interestin
-
My first redundancy was in June 2009; the second in November 2010; the third is looming and likely to be July 2012. I was told today that DotNet is no longer a viable conversion option in the company which manufactures specialised engineering test equipment. They are partly right as the current application has been under development for almost four years. It's been scrapped once and redesigned but in the process of extensibility it was too complex to maintain. When I joined the company in February last year I very soon got tangled in a very complex to unravel class hierarchy. The app was too difficult to change as a single code edit in one place could very well zap functionality elsewhere. Given the complexity of the data acquisition, calculations, and so on that it used there was never any real hope it could be reused anywhere else in the same way on the other 15 instruments that were pending to be converted. So I battled on and made some very good enhancements but the virtual absence of any comments in the code I took over made it difficult to grasp the cause-and-effect-and-the-why its written as it is. Some two months ago, I helped solve a seemingly insoluble problem that freed the legacy software that was stuck in an XP time warp (it used a package that is no longer available). That solution I wrote in DotNet gives the legacy application at least two to three years more of life which is ironic to some extent. I'm starting the redundancy process next week and have thankfully been given "garden leave". Part of the process is to give me the opportunity to present my case why redundancy could be avoided. I'll now have the time to prepare a presentation about a new architecture I've been working towards which I think could restore confidence in DotNet and open up marketing opportunities which our competitors have nothing to match. I think my proposed solution will dramatically flatten how a client's instrument would talk to the data acquisition and the separation of the calculations buried deep in the base classes will make reuse much simpler. I have many ideas I need to prepare. Of course, none of it may make a difference at all. Perhaps the path to redundancy has been fully decided except for the necessary legal procedures to be followed. I really enjoyed my time at the company and I learned so much from it. Interesting knowledge but not necessarily useful in a commercial/financial market except perhaps to demonstrate different approaches to some rather obtuse problems. It's going to be a very interestin
-
Making a presentation to justify your own job is like something out of "Office Space". Good luck.
Just tell them you are a people person, that you have people skills, and that should be good enough.
-
Just tell them you are a people person, that you have people skills, and that should be good enough.
-
My first redundancy was in June 2009; the second in November 2010; the third is looming and likely to be July 2012. I was told today that DotNet is no longer a viable conversion option in the company which manufactures specialised engineering test equipment. They are partly right as the current application has been under development for almost four years. It's been scrapped once and redesigned but in the process of extensibility it was too complex to maintain. When I joined the company in February last year I very soon got tangled in a very complex to unravel class hierarchy. The app was too difficult to change as a single code edit in one place could very well zap functionality elsewhere. Given the complexity of the data acquisition, calculations, and so on that it used there was never any real hope it could be reused anywhere else in the same way on the other 15 instruments that were pending to be converted. So I battled on and made some very good enhancements but the virtual absence of any comments in the code I took over made it difficult to grasp the cause-and-effect-and-the-why its written as it is. Some two months ago, I helped solve a seemingly insoluble problem that freed the legacy software that was stuck in an XP time warp (it used a package that is no longer available). That solution I wrote in DotNet gives the legacy application at least two to three years more of life which is ironic to some extent. I'm starting the redundancy process next week and have thankfully been given "garden leave". Part of the process is to give me the opportunity to present my case why redundancy could be avoided. I'll now have the time to prepare a presentation about a new architecture I've been working towards which I think could restore confidence in DotNet and open up marketing opportunities which our competitors have nothing to match. I think my proposed solution will dramatically flatten how a client's instrument would talk to the data acquisition and the separation of the calculations buried deep in the base classes will make reuse much simpler. I have many ideas I need to prepare. Of course, none of it may make a difference at all. Perhaps the path to redundancy has been fully decided except for the necessary legal procedures to be followed. I really enjoyed my time at the company and I learned so much from it. Interesting knowledge but not necessarily useful in a commercial/financial market except perhaps to demonstrate different approaches to some rather obtuse problems. It's going to be a very interestin
PHS241 wrote:
Wish me luck.
Good luck!:rose::rose: You and Vilmos should start a club.
Henry Minute Girl: (staring) "Why do you need an icy cucumber?" “I want to report a fraud. The government is lying to us all.” I wouldn't let CG touch my Abacus! When you're wrestling a gorilla, you don't stop when you're tired, you stop when the gorilla is. Cogito ergo thumb - Sucking my thumb helps me to think.
-
My first redundancy was in June 2009; the second in November 2010; the third is looming and likely to be July 2012. I was told today that DotNet is no longer a viable conversion option in the company which manufactures specialised engineering test equipment. They are partly right as the current application has been under development for almost four years. It's been scrapped once and redesigned but in the process of extensibility it was too complex to maintain. When I joined the company in February last year I very soon got tangled in a very complex to unravel class hierarchy. The app was too difficult to change as a single code edit in one place could very well zap functionality elsewhere. Given the complexity of the data acquisition, calculations, and so on that it used there was never any real hope it could be reused anywhere else in the same way on the other 15 instruments that were pending to be converted. So I battled on and made some very good enhancements but the virtual absence of any comments in the code I took over made it difficult to grasp the cause-and-effect-and-the-why its written as it is. Some two months ago, I helped solve a seemingly insoluble problem that freed the legacy software that was stuck in an XP time warp (it used a package that is no longer available). That solution I wrote in DotNet gives the legacy application at least two to three years more of life which is ironic to some extent. I'm starting the redundancy process next week and have thankfully been given "garden leave". Part of the process is to give me the opportunity to present my case why redundancy could be avoided. I'll now have the time to prepare a presentation about a new architecture I've been working towards which I think could restore confidence in DotNet and open up marketing opportunities which our competitors have nothing to match. I think my proposed solution will dramatically flatten how a client's instrument would talk to the data acquisition and the separation of the calculations buried deep in the base classes will make reuse much simpler. I have many ideas I need to prepare. Of course, none of it may make a difference at all. Perhaps the path to redundancy has been fully decided except for the necessary legal procedures to be followed. I really enjoyed my time at the company and I learned so much from it. Interesting knowledge but not necessarily useful in a commercial/financial market except perhaps to demonstrate different approaches to some rather obtuse problems. It's going to be a very interestin
Save you presentation and ideas, after you have been made redundant they may be an asset that you have not given away. Just saying!
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity RAH
-
Save you presentation and ideas, after you have been made redundant they may be an asset that you have not given away. Just saying!
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity RAH
A friend of mine turned in her resignation. The company told her how valuable she was and to stay on. She did. Six months later, she was fired once the project was complete. Don't tell your employer anything. If you have a better solution for data acquisition, generalize it, package it and sell it!