March 1, 2016 at 7:55 am
Jeff Moden (2/29/2016)
...How did they get that way?
By pointing and clicking and not being required to have any intellectual curiosity. Because the people they were working for also didn't have a clue, they were somehow able to survive and the GUI/IDE made all of that possible.
Is the GUI/IDE a bad thing? No, but the posers, fakers, and "newbies with 10 years of experience" that I'm talking about wouldn't have stood a chance without it. 😉
I'll disagree with you. There have been plenty of *nix and Oracle admins in my life that don't know many things as well, and they've rarely had a GUI. They just haven't dug into their craft/profession and get by because their jobs don't ask them to do much more than keep the lights on. The few crisis situations they have (and often fail at) are blamed on a vendor.
I think your initial comments conflated things. You're blaming the GUI and IDE for poor candidates, when I think they're just that, conflated. They're not causally related.
This is the chef problem. More and more people in the industry, not asked to do a lot or excel because the need isn't there, or, because the organization doesn't trust it's people can do a lot more, and they aren't asked to do much.
March 1, 2016 at 10:26 am
TheFault (2/29/2016)
GeorgeCopeland (2/29/2016)
Some of the posters here appear to have never seen a system that was put together by people who didn't know what they were doing. Windows tools are easy to use and pervasive in business. I have seen systems like this, it happens all the time.Some posters appear to forget that they were once fresh faced rookies starting the first job in their careers. Newbie bashing is sometimes rife here...
I don't understand how that comment relates to George's comment.
Like George, I find, reading some of the posts at SQL Server Central and indeed in many other places, that some people have apparently never seen the sort of mess that results from people putting together a system without having a clue what they are doing. I wish I'd never seen (and had to fix or replace) such systems, and I strongly regret there are a lot of tools out there that seem to be designed to enable people to do just that. The people who build such systems are usually not newbies - they almost always are people with many years of experience, so I can't see any connection with newbie bashing.
But I disagree to some extent with the editorial. Not all IDEs should be tarred with the same brush. Many do encourage people to take short cuts - to rely on the IDE insted of on one's intelligence and skills - and as a result discourage designing for testability, security, error detection, containment, reporting, and recovery, flexibility/extensibility, and performance; others don't - either because the IDE encourages those things rather than discouraging them or because they are used in an environment where none of those things can be ignored because they are built into the culture - in the case of CADES perhaps both of those applied. Certainly CADES didn't encourage sloppy thinking; it was the IDE designed and used for developing ICL's VME, the mainfarme OS originally released in the early 70s for which Fujitsu has guaranteed support both on its proprietory hardware and on X64-based hardware until beyond 2020, and I think we can safely assume that a mainframe OS that old which is still gaining new sales (http://www.datacentres.com/dc-news/dwp-issue-vme-tender) is unlikely to be something thrown together carelessly without regard to the important design and methodology considerations that some other IDEs discourage.
Tom
March 2, 2016 at 12:31 am
Steve Jones - SSC Editor (3/1/2016)
Jeff Moden (2/29/2016)
...How did they get that way?
By pointing and clicking and not being required to have any intellectual curiosity. Because the people they were working for also didn't have a clue, they were somehow able to survive and the GUI/IDE made all of that possible.
Is the GUI/IDE a bad thing? No, but the posers, fakers, and "newbies with 10 years of experience" that I'm talking about wouldn't have stood a chance without it. 😉
I'll disagree with you. There have been plenty of *nix and Oracle admins in my life that don't know many things as well, and they've rarely had a GUI. They just haven't dug into their craft/profession and get by because their jobs don't ask them to do much more than keep the lights on. The few crisis situations they have (and often fail at) are blamed on a vendor.
I think your initial comments conflated things. You're blaming the GUI and IDE for poor candidates, when I think they're just that, conflated. They're not causally related.
This is the chef problem. More and more people in the industry, not asked to do a lot or excel because the need isn't there, or, because the organization doesn't trust it's people can do a lot more, and they aren't asked to do much.
I'll agree to disagree. Yes, there will be people that try to game the system with or without a GUI. But it seems, at least to me, that there are many more in the SQL Server world than there were in the Oracle world before all the GUI stuff happened there.
As a wise man once said, "If you make something idiot proof, only idiots will use it". 😉 While that's not quite true, in this case, it certainly has enabled it's fair share of idiots to use it... seems like I've interviewed a good number of them. :hehe:
Shifting gears a bit, perhaps they wouldn't seem quite as idiotic if they weren't demanding over 6 figures or actually did know how to get the current date and time.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
Viewing 3 posts - 31 through 32 (of 32 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply