Full Stack Developers
-
It should meant Front End, Back End and Database... But in Web, front end that means HTML, css, javascript and who knows how many frameworks. In Windows front end means WinForms and WPF at least. You better know WCF for both, but especially web. ... Do you know just what a nightmare the cloud represents? You now need to be a systems admin and security chief using an arcane language and methodology of DevOps. Plus the cloud lets you make mistakes that are far more expensive than you used to be able to. Another cool thing about the cloud... If you get say a Cloud Programmer or Architect certification, you are then trained as a salesperson or evangelist for their expensive services. You haven't learned to develop in the cloud yet. I like the idea of T shaped skills. That's Full Stack and one skill (or more) that you completely master. It boggles me to think of the learning curve being asked of anyone going into software development these days.
Yet my competition in corporations are 'developers' who have attended a six-week programming camp. Their learning curve allows them access to jobs that amount to slave, sub entry level and always abused.
-
I see an enormous number of jobs asking for full stack developers. Is that their way of saying that the developer will be asked to produce more than one person possibly can? It seems to me so because I think companies want to save on IT costs.
The difficult we do right away... ...the impossible takes slightly longer.
As other commenters here have stated, the term full-stack developer implies high levels of working experience in a number of connected technologies (ie: front-end development, database). For reasonable requirements and project sizes, this is not a difficult level of experience to acquire when one merely has to use a quality IDE that provides form and database development capabilities. However, when one is faced with an increasing number of technologies that now tend to be part of many projects currently, the acquisition of such experience at the same level for all such technologies becomes increasingly impossible. The result is that most companies have very little idea for what they are asking except for the acquisition of the cheapest personnel, all of whom can spout proper details in an interview while failing to be actually capable of developing entire systems on their own. As an example, a few weeks ago, an article appeared here on The Code Project regarding the implementation of a certain type of project. The required technologies numbered close to 11 different and separate type of software. Good luck with that! Today, most developers are expected to know SQL, a major development language, IIS\application server and database configuration and design, good coding practices while being aware of security requirements, documentation capabilities, communication skills, and where necessary a variety of 3rd party tools (ie: jQuery, JavaScript [I will never consider JavaScript a major language.]). To expect a single person to be competent in all such technologies at the same level of expertise is a pipe dream since no one developer can possibly be developing in all such technologies at equivalent levels of time to acquire such experience. This is why the loss of true, senior, development personnel in our profession, which is made up of those older people such as myself among others are the ones who do have such experience but are considered too old among other negative attributes towards the older development professionals to be considered for such requirements. Thus, I have now seen technical leads on projects with only around 3 years of experience. If one is only required to put together a WordPress site such a low level of experience is fine. Putting together a far more complex development endeavor becomes a completely different story and the 3-year technical lead becomes a liability. But this is what companies want these days leaving sanguine, sincere, growing developer quality in
-
I see an enormous number of jobs asking for full stack developers. Is that their way of saying that the developer will be asked to produce more than one person possibly can? It seems to me so because I think companies want to save on IT costs.
The difficult we do right away... ...the impossible takes slightly longer.
-
I see an enormous number of jobs asking for full stack developers. Is that their way of saying that the developer will be asked to produce more than one person possibly can? It seems to me so because I think companies want to save on IT costs.
The difficult we do right away... ...the impossible takes slightly longer.
I'd say those are important questions to try to get a feel for during the interview process. This next bit may be colored by my experience when I was working. Always at small companies where there simply weren't the resources to have hard divisions. So, grain of salt there. Everyone should be a full-stack developer, to some extent. For example, persistence of your form data shouldn't just be magic . One should understand the transfer to the persistence layer, and enough SQL (If using a db) to validate the save and write decently-efficient queries. However, to expect the person who's an expert at doing front-end work to also be an expert DBA is a recipe for failure. Sure, most developers (in the MSFT world, anyway) know how to use SQL Server & Profiler to look into the database, and might be able to provide some help on getting things working better. But expecting them to really be tuning the system isn't realistic.
-
As other commenters here have stated, the term full-stack developer implies high levels of working experience in a number of connected technologies (ie: front-end development, database). For reasonable requirements and project sizes, this is not a difficult level of experience to acquire when one merely has to use a quality IDE that provides form and database development capabilities. However, when one is faced with an increasing number of technologies that now tend to be part of many projects currently, the acquisition of such experience at the same level for all such technologies becomes increasingly impossible. The result is that most companies have very little idea for what they are asking except for the acquisition of the cheapest personnel, all of whom can spout proper details in an interview while failing to be actually capable of developing entire systems on their own. As an example, a few weeks ago, an article appeared here on The Code Project regarding the implementation of a certain type of project. The required technologies numbered close to 11 different and separate type of software. Good luck with that! Today, most developers are expected to know SQL, a major development language, IIS\application server and database configuration and design, good coding practices while being aware of security requirements, documentation capabilities, communication skills, and where necessary a variety of 3rd party tools (ie: jQuery, JavaScript [I will never consider JavaScript a major language.]). To expect a single person to be competent in all such technologies at the same level of expertise is a pipe dream since no one developer can possibly be developing in all such technologies at equivalent levels of time to acquire such experience. This is why the loss of true, senior, development personnel in our profession, which is made up of those older people such as myself among others are the ones who do have such experience but are considered too old among other negative attributes towards the older development professionals to be considered for such requirements. Thus, I have now seen technical leads on projects with only around 3 years of experience. If one is only required to put together a WordPress site such a low level of experience is fine. Putting together a far more complex development endeavor becomes a completely different story and the 3-year technical lead becomes a liability. But this is what companies want these days leaving sanguine, sincere, growing developer quality in
I can do all these things, and, at 54, I imagine I'm one of the older ones... but I don't like all of them. Especially JavaScript, as you say: Dijkstra would've hated it. It's almost as bad as people... I can do the communications thing, too: it's just a matter of appearing to the masses in a form they can understand... but apparently, this is unusual. One of my friends who's apparently a "full-stack developer", but who doesn't understand what XOR means, tells me I wouldn't survive five minutes in a modern software house. This reminded me of a conversation I had with a born-again Christian, who told me that without Christianity, there would be nothing to protect him from the universe. "Ah," I said, "This is why we differ: in my mind, the universe needs protecting from me!"
-
I can do all these things, and, at 54, I imagine I'm one of the older ones... but I don't like all of them. Especially JavaScript, as you say: Dijkstra would've hated it. It's almost as bad as people... I can do the communications thing, too: it's just a matter of appearing to the masses in a form they can understand... but apparently, this is unusual. One of my friends who's apparently a "full-stack developer", but who doesn't understand what XOR means, tells me I wouldn't survive five minutes in a modern software house. This reminded me of a conversation I had with a born-again Christian, who told me that without Christianity, there would be nothing to protect him from the universe. "Ah," I said, "This is why we differ: in my mind, the universe needs protecting from me!"
Well said, Dan... :) And with the way most software developed today, who would want to entertain the idea of working at a software house? George Carlin said it best; "The planet does not need saving. Its the Humans that do!"
Steve Naidamast Sr. Software Engineer Black Falcon Software, Inc. blackfalconsoftware@outlook.com
-
Richard Andrew x64 wrote:
It seems to me so because I think companies want to save on IT costs.
You "think" that. Ok. That's insightful. :-)
dandy72 wrote:
You "think" that. Ok. That's insightful.
And your contribution to the discussion is so extremely useful. :)
The difficult we do right away... ...the impossible takes slightly longer.
-
As other commenters here have stated, the term full-stack developer implies high levels of working experience in a number of connected technologies (ie: front-end development, database). For reasonable requirements and project sizes, this is not a difficult level of experience to acquire when one merely has to use a quality IDE that provides form and database development capabilities. However, when one is faced with an increasing number of technologies that now tend to be part of many projects currently, the acquisition of such experience at the same level for all such technologies becomes increasingly impossible. The result is that most companies have very little idea for what they are asking except for the acquisition of the cheapest personnel, all of whom can spout proper details in an interview while failing to be actually capable of developing entire systems on their own. As an example, a few weeks ago, an article appeared here on The Code Project regarding the implementation of a certain type of project. The required technologies numbered close to 11 different and separate type of software. Good luck with that! Today, most developers are expected to know SQL, a major development language, IIS\application server and database configuration and design, good coding practices while being aware of security requirements, documentation capabilities, communication skills, and where necessary a variety of 3rd party tools (ie: jQuery, JavaScript [I will never consider JavaScript a major language.]). To expect a single person to be competent in all such technologies at the same level of expertise is a pipe dream since no one developer can possibly be developing in all such technologies at equivalent levels of time to acquire such experience. This is why the loss of true, senior, development personnel in our profession, which is made up of those older people such as myself among others are the ones who do have such experience but are considered too old among other negative attributes towards the older development professionals to be considered for such requirements. Thus, I have now seen technical leads on projects with only around 3 years of experience. If one is only required to put together a WordPress site such a low level of experience is fine. Putting together a far more complex development endeavor becomes a completely different story and the 3-year technical lead becomes a liability. But this is what companies want these days leaving sanguine, sincere, growing developer quality in
Thank you for your very good post. I tend to think of the field being a little like modern medicine. There are general practitioners and specialists.
The difficult we do right away... ...the impossible takes slightly longer.
-
I'd say those are important questions to try to get a feel for during the interview process. This next bit may be colored by my experience when I was working. Always at small companies where there simply weren't the resources to have hard divisions. So, grain of salt there. Everyone should be a full-stack developer, to some extent. For example, persistence of your form data shouldn't just be magic . One should understand the transfer to the persistence layer, and enough SQL (If using a db) to validate the save and write decently-efficient queries. However, to expect the person who's an expert at doing front-end work to also be an expert DBA is a recipe for failure. Sure, most developers (in the MSFT world, anyway) know how to use SQL Server & Profiler to look into the database, and might be able to provide some help on getting things working better. But expecting them to really be tuning the system isn't realistic.
Exactly. Nobody can have the expertise of a specialist in every technology.
The difficult we do right away... ...the impossible takes slightly longer.
-
Thank you for your very good post. I tend to think of the field being a little like modern medicine. There are general practitioners and specialists.
The difficult we do right away... ...the impossible takes slightly longer.
You are very welcome... :) Thank you for your compliment...
Steve Naidamast Sr. Software Engineer Black Falcon Software, Inc. blackfalconsoftware@outlook.com
-
Well said, Dan... :) And with the way most software developed today, who would want to entertain the idea of working at a software house? George Carlin said it best; "The planet does not need saving. Its the Humans that do!"
Steve Naidamast Sr. Software Engineer Black Falcon Software, Inc. blackfalconsoftware@outlook.com
Excellent!
-
I see an enormous number of jobs asking for full stack developers. Is that their way of saying that the developer will be asked to produce more than one person possibly can? It seems to me so because I think companies want to save on IT costs.
The difficult we do right away... ...the impossible takes slightly longer.
I am a Full Stack Developer. Apparently 'Senior Software Developer' wasn't hip enough so my job title got changed a couple of years ago, by the same person who wanted to hire 'rock-star developers'. He no longer works with us.
-
I see an enormous number of jobs asking for full stack developers. Is that their way of saying that the developer will be asked to produce more than one person possibly can? It seems to me so because I think companies want to save on IT costs.
The difficult we do right away... ...the impossible takes slightly longer.
My perspective is as a "full stack developer" who sells himself as a "consultant" to small businesses. My clients range from 1-man bands to maybe 30 - 50 staff. IT is an enabler for their business, and very often is actually a key component, but the business itself is not "IT". Management have little or no direct IT knowledge, but they know that they need IT-based solutions. They have minimal budget but know that with the right solution, their business can grow to bigger and better things. Because they have no in-house technical skills, they are unable to "interview" and also unable to provide any form of person specification. They don't know if they need a database, they don't know if they want a cloud-based solution, they don't know if Javascript is involved - because they don't know what any of these terms mean. But down the pub a mate of a mate said the key word to ask for is "full-stack developer". They genuinely do not care about the solution or the technology, so long as it helps their business and grows profits. As developers, we may ridicule them, pity them, laugh about them or whatever - but at the end of the day, they are using IT in exactly the right way: a tool to help their business - and I respect that. I tend to get called in when they've not even had a chat with their mate's mate; but "consultant" is a term they can relate to, and accept my advice almost unquestioningly. In return, I build them a system, from start to end, that boosts their business. In most cases, that means their company's budgets increase, and their requirements increase to meet the increased demand. At some point - 6 months, a couple of years, ten years - they outgrow the services I, as a single "consultant", can deliver to them, and they ask how they can grow further. At that point I can direct them to one or more organisations that can provide more specialist skills. In short, it's not just about saving costs - although any business, of any size, is likely to want to do that. It's about using IT as a "black box" and not needing to know what the individual components of the stack are, or indeed even that there is a "stack". If you want to work with such companies, sending a CV full of language and framework names and versions will get you nowhere. You need to either give examples of how you have helped the business of other clients / employers, OR (which I find works better) gently ask some questions about their business and the problems it faces, and describe in non-technical term
-
My perspective is as a "full stack developer" who sells himself as a "consultant" to small businesses. My clients range from 1-man bands to maybe 30 - 50 staff. IT is an enabler for their business, and very often is actually a key component, but the business itself is not "IT". Management have little or no direct IT knowledge, but they know that they need IT-based solutions. They have minimal budget but know that with the right solution, their business can grow to bigger and better things. Because they have no in-house technical skills, they are unable to "interview" and also unable to provide any form of person specification. They don't know if they need a database, they don't know if they want a cloud-based solution, they don't know if Javascript is involved - because they don't know what any of these terms mean. But down the pub a mate of a mate said the key word to ask for is "full-stack developer". They genuinely do not care about the solution or the technology, so long as it helps their business and grows profits. As developers, we may ridicule them, pity them, laugh about them or whatever - but at the end of the day, they are using IT in exactly the right way: a tool to help their business - and I respect that. I tend to get called in when they've not even had a chat with their mate's mate; but "consultant" is a term they can relate to, and accept my advice almost unquestioningly. In return, I build them a system, from start to end, that boosts their business. In most cases, that means their company's budgets increase, and their requirements increase to meet the increased demand. At some point - 6 months, a couple of years, ten years - they outgrow the services I, as a single "consultant", can deliver to them, and they ask how they can grow further. At that point I can direct them to one or more organisations that can provide more specialist skills. In short, it's not just about saving costs - although any business, of any size, is likely to want to do that. It's about using IT as a "black box" and not needing to know what the individual components of the stack are, or indeed even that there is a "stack". If you want to work with such companies, sending a CV full of language and framework names and versions will get you nowhere. You need to either give examples of how you have helped the business of other clients / employers, OR (which I find works better) gently ask some questions about their business and the problems it faces, and describe in non-technical term
Thanks for the very interesting post. I am inspired by it. Maybe I can transition to being a consultant. :java:
The difficult we do right away... ...the impossible takes slightly longer.
-
Thanks for the very interesting post. I am inspired by it. Maybe I can transition to being a consultant. :java:
The difficult we do right away... ...the impossible takes slightly longer.
-
I see an enormous number of jobs asking for full stack developers. Is that their way of saying that the developer will be asked to produce more than one person possibly can? It seems to me so because I think companies want to save on IT costs.
The difficult we do right away... ...the impossible takes slightly longer.
-
I see an enormous number of jobs asking for full stack developers. Is that their way of saying that the developer will be asked to produce more than one person possibly can? It seems to me so because I think companies want to save on IT costs.
The difficult we do right away... ...the impossible takes slightly longer.
Most requests for full stack developers appear to be listed by individuals or severely limited groups. realistically, anyone whom could fulfill a full stack development position is most likely freelance and consultation operating at a premium contractual price point. Thus, the solicitation for full stack developers seems a bit misinformed and most likely based on a general classification trend. For instance, a full stack web developer should know some form of: web markup (HTML), a scripting language such as Javascript, generally proficient with 1-3 Javascript frameworks, a server side language like PHP, Java or Python with the requirements listing most likely continuing for anywhere between 30-50K annually. Truthfully, the base starting salary would be around 50K not 30K and the posting for positions are more accurately described as leads at this level. Job posting for full stack developers, based on what I've stated above amount to a waste of time; you're either going to get scammed (doing some work under the pretense of a testing or probationary period then let go), hook up with a startup that might mean well, but hasn't been thought through and will most likely fail within 1-2 years or you getting in with an indie group whom are green. Full stack is full of it period. Positions such as what is generally stated as being full stack is Lead or technician level, recapping. I avoid anything throwing around full stack.
I was unaware of that...
