I'm a c programmer. Does anybody work like me?

[zzuse]

I have been working in one company for nearly one year as a c
programmer.I want to write more codes to improve my programming
skills.But I found my work was just change some configuration files .
I need to change the configuration files to fit for the new
business.Sometimes I want to quit the job.What should I do?

 

[Klarth]

I have been working in one company for nearly one year as a c
programmer.I want to write more codes to improve my programming
skills.But I found my work was just change some configuration files .
I need to change the configuration files to fit for the new
business.Sometimes I want to quit the job.What should I do?

Quit and find something you enjoy. Or you can talk to your boss first
and see if anything happens and then decide from there.

 

[Chris Hills]

I have been working in one company for nearly one year as a c
programmer.I want to write more codes to improve my programming
skills.But I found my work was just change some configuration files .
I need to change the configuration files to fit for the new
business.Sometimes I want to quit the job.What should I do?

To some extant it depends on which country you are in and which sector
of the industry.

It also depends on the company you are in some put new programmers on
simple jobs for a year to see how they get on and then move them up or
sideways when the get the new intake.

 

[santosh]

I have been working in one company for nearly one year as a c
programmer.I want to write more codes to improve my programming
skills.But I found my work was just change some configuration files .
I need to change the configuration files to fit for the new
business.Sometimes I want to quit the job.What should I do?

Milk your job for all it's worth and join, or start, a programming
project which you like.

 

[Christopher Benson-Manica]

I have been working in one company for nearly one year as a c
programmer.I want to write more codes to improve my programming
skills.But I found my work was just change some configuration files .
I need to change the configuration files to fit for the new
business.Sometimes I want to quit the job.What should I do?

If you don't have a degree, be careful. Or go get one. If you've got
a degree, take immediate action - either aggressively seek some real
programming responsibilities at your current job or start working on
your resume. It's amazing how many companies will pay good money to
highly-skilled or potentially-skilled workers to do silly things like
edit configuration files. You're not doing your career any favors by
sticking with a dead-end job that gets you no marketable skills.

 

[Charlton Wilbur]

CBM> If you've got a degree, take immediate action - either
CBM> aggressively seek some real programming responsibilities at
CBM> your current job or start working on your resume. It's
CBM> amazing how many companies will pay good money to
CBM> highly-skilled or potentially-skilled workers to do silly
CBM> things like edit configuration files. You're not doing your
CBM> career any favors by sticking with a dead-end job that gets
CBM> you no marketable skills.

A lot depends on how onerous the job is, and how scarce employment is.

It's better to be editing configuration files for good money than to
be programming C for nothing. Another route out of this is to keep
the job, but find an open-source project to work on: this is a sort of
resume building, and good code that an employer can see is better than
a resume so polished it gleams.

Then, when you can say "I'm the lead developer of <project>," you'll
have accomplished a few things: you have a good body of code that
potential employers can look at, you've got a program that does
something useful, and you'll have sharpened your coding, architecture,
and project management skills. And possibly even people-management
skills, if a team assembles around your project.

Alternately, if you have a good idea that you can develop on your own
and sell, you can go the micro-ISV route. It used to be called
"shareware"; the idea is, you produce a program that fills a need, and
you sell it for $20-$40. If 1000 people buy it in a year, you've got
money to live on.

(I'm in a position similar to the original poster, and these are
solutions I'm pondering for myself. I've pretty firmly established, I
think, that there are few to no programming jobs available in the area
that would suit me, and if there are, I'm only going to find one by
luck. The micro-ISV approach really looks appealing, except for the 3
to 6 month ramp-up time before I can see any income from it, let alone
start to figure out whether my idea will be commercially successful,
and the concomitant lack of paychecks....)

Charlton

 

[santosh]

CBM> If you've got a degree, take immediate action - either
CBM> aggressively seek some real programming responsibilities at
CBM> your current job or start working on your resume. It's
CBM> amazing how many companies will pay good money to
CBM> highly-skilled or potentially-skilled workers to do silly
CBM> things like edit configuration files. You're not doing your
CBM> career any favors by sticking with a dead-end job that gets
CBM> you no marketable skills.

Then, when you can say "I'm the lead developer of <project>," you'll
have accomplished a few things: you have a good body of code that
potential employers can look at,

You have to also ensure that the body of code is good.

Alternately, if you have a good idea that you can develop on your own
and sell, you can go the micro-ISV route. It used to be called
"shareware"; the idea is, you produce a program that fills a need, and
you sell it for $20-$40. If 1000 people buy it in a year, you've got
money to live on.

<snip>

The trick of course is to create a program that enough people are
willing to buy. With the amount of OSS around for just about
everything, it presumably harder to earn your living out of writing
shareware.

 

[Malcolm McLean]

The trick of course is to create a program that enough people are
willing to buy. With the amount of OSS around for just about
everything, it presumably harder to earn your living out of writing
shareware.

It is hard enough to give BASICdraw away for free. I know it is basically a
good program, though of course it is a one-man bedroom programmed job.
However I always cheer whenever the download count on SoftPedia goes up a
tick.

 

[Chris Hills]

It is hard enough to give BASICdraw away for free. I know it is
basically a good program, though of course it is a one-man bedroom
programmed job. However I always cheer whenever the download count on
SoftPedia goes up a tick.

Open source values the programmer at ZERO and that is exactly what the
industry is doing.

The question is how the hell did so many fall for it?

Cue the Who " won't get fooled again"

 

[Malcolm McLean]

Open source values the programmer at ZERO and that is exactly what the
industry is doing.

The question is how the hell did so many fall for it?

Cue the Who " won't get fooled again"

I know I know I know. Far too few pennies come my way, and it is largely
because programming is such a low status job. There must be some way of
turning my Killer Sudoku solver into money, but I haven't found it. I'd
rather people use my stuff than not use it.

 

[user923005]

Open source values the programmer at ZERO and that is exactly what the
industry is doing.

The question is how the hell did so many fall for it?

It works like this:

Flatware company "A" builds silverware for sale.

Flatware company "B" wants to sell silverware.

In order to get workers, Flatware company "B" tells anyone who will
listen that Flatware company "A" is doing something evil by charging
for their flatware. I mean, everybody's gotta eat, and here are some
people forcing users to pay for flatware! So what we would like you
kids to do is build flatware for us and we are going to GIVE IT AWAY
FREE! So the kids all work feverishly designing flatware, improving
flatware and building flatware. Then Flatware company "B" takes the
flatware and gives it away. But they do attach a small "Flatware
instructions and technical support fee" for those who want the free
flatware. Coincidentally, this fee is exactly the same as the amount
that Flatware company "A" charges for the flatware. The kids who did
the work get nothing, and the Flatware company "B" executives get
millions of dollars. The uncompensated (read:"slave") labor extracted
from the workers is somehow viewed as wonderful, fruitful, useful by
the slaves, who continue unabated in their quest to punish Flatware
company "A" for their evil propensity to have the absolute gall to
charge money for flatware!

Of course, this is too extreme (and I have contributed GPL, LGPL,
Berkeley style, and Public Domain software). But there is something
to think about here.

IMO-YMMV.

 

[Al Balmer]

Then Flatware company "B" takes the
flatware and gives it away. But they do attach a small "Flatware
instructions and technical support fee" for those who want the free
flatware. Coincidentally, this fee is exactly the same as the amount
that Flatware company "A" charges for the flatware

? The most I've ever paid for Linux (Suse 10.2) is $8.99. Where can I
get Vista for that price? I'd be willing to go as high as $10.00.

If I wanted, I could pay for technical support, but I could pay extra
for Windows technical support, too. I don't have to get the support
from Company "B", either.

There are legitimate pros and cons to open source - no need to make up
strawmen.

 

[user923005]

? The most I've ever paid for Linux (Suse 10.2) is $8.99. Where can I
get Vista for that price? I'd be willing to go as high as $10.00.

If I wanted, I could pay for technical support, but I could pay extra
for Windows technical support, too. I don't have to get the support
from Company "B", either.

There are legitimate pros and cons to open source - no need to make up
strawmen.

Give away the razor and sell the blades for $2499:
https://www.redhat.com/apps/store/server/

$45,000:
http://www.novell.com/products/server/howtobuy.html

What, do you think I made that stuff up?

As of September 30, 2006, Red Hat had approximately 191 million shares
outstanding of common stock. Do you think that the college kids who
worked on GPL stuff got to put that money in their pockets?

 

[Ben Pfaff]

As of September 30, 2006, Red Hat had approximately 191 million shares
outstanding of common stock. Do you think that the college kids who
worked on GPL stuff got to put that money in their pockets?

Some folks who hacked on free software got offered the chance to
buy Red Hat stock at the "friends and family" price during their
IPO. Being in college at the time, I didn't have a spare $5k at
the time (or even $5k total) so I didn't get to take advantage of
it myself.

 

[Al Balmer]

Give away the razor and sell the blades for $2499:
https://www.redhat.com/apps/store/server/

$45,000:
http://www.novell.com/products/server/howtobuy.html

What, do you think I made that stuff up?

Here's a secret - you don't have to buy the product from RedHat or
Novell. If you want, you can buy an enhanced (not all open source)
product, or you can buy a different product (services) from those
companies, but if you do, they will provide what you buy, at a cost to
them, just like any other business.

As of September 30, 2006, Red Hat had approximately 191 million shares
outstanding of common stock. Do you think that the college kids who
worked on GPL stuff got to put that money in their pockets?

The people who work for Red Hat get paid. The college kids who work on
open source stuff get exactly what they want and expect.

I'm curious - do you feel that you personally have been negatively
impacted by free open source software? I'm in the software business, I
get paid well, and I use open source tools to aid and enhance what I
get paid for.

 

[user923005]

Here's a secret - you don't have to buy the product from RedHat or
Novell. If you want, you can buy an enhanced (not all open source)
product, or you can buy a different product (services) from those
companies, but if you do, they will provide what you buy, at a cost to
them, just like any other business.




The people who work for Red Hat get paid. The college kids who work on
open source stuff get exactly what they want and expect.

Sure, just like my post said.

I'm curious - do you feel that you personally have been negatively
impacted by free open source software?

Not at all.
I gladly use open source tools all the time.
I have participated in at least 50 open source projects from GPL to
Public Domain (might be as many as 200 but I have not really kept
track).

I'm in the software business, I
get paid well, and I use open source tools to aid and enhance what I
get paid for.

I do not object to GPL or LGPL or Berkeley style or Public Domain or
any other sort of open license.
It's not a miracle cure for software woes.
I *do* believe that some people are being exploited. Exploitation
(willing or unwilling) is still exploitation.

I think you mistake my eye for realism with dislike. The outcome of
the open source projects is almost always excellent. I think that
sometimes the pathway to get there is a little odd. While some people
work on these projects with both eyes open (I like to think that I
do), I also believe that some people are duped out of free labor.
Even that would not be so bad -- but others are filling bathtubs with
cash from their work. That is what smells bad to me.

 

[user923005]

Some folks who hacked on free software got offered the chance to
buy Red Hat stock at the "friends and family" price during their
IPO. Being in college at the time, I didn't have a spare $5k at
the time (or even $5k total) so I didn't get to take advantage of
it myself.

I guess that your story is typical (I guess that *most* free GPL work
is by college kids, though I do lots of it myself and I have been out
of college for *cough* quite a while). I want to reiterate that I do
not object to open source software.
The thing that bothers me is when the workers are not compensated at
all and the big companies that sell "tech support" make millions.
*IF* the workers know that this is exactly what is happening then I
have no objection even to that.

 

[user923005]

Here's a secret - you don't have to buy the product from RedHat or
Novell. If you want, you can buy an enhanced (not all open source)
product, or you can buy a different product (services) from those
companies, but if you do, they will provide what you buy, at a cost to
them, just like any other business.

Buying a product without technical support is an insane policy for a
big business.
IMO-YMMV.
My opinion is that Redhat/Novell/etc. have simply stuck a label on the
box that says "tech support" instead of "software sales"
In any case, to have reliable service you need to pay the money.

Now, a small shop that is very Unix savvy can probably get away with
just downloading tar balls and supporting it themselves (of course,
that isn't free either, but it may be the cheapest alternative)
[snip]

As always
IMO-YMMV.

I guess this is turning into an advocacy thread and it probably should
go off to some other newsgroups. I don't know which ones would be
appropriate because nothing useful takes place in them (IMO -- of
course), so I don't read them.

 

[CBFalconer]

.... snip ...

? The most I've ever paid for Linux (Suse 10.2) is $8.99. Where can
I get Vista for that price? I'd be willing to go as high as $10.00.

Hmm. Looks you might be a suitable customer for this bridge I have.

 

[CBFalconer]

.... snip ...

The thing that bothers me is when the workers are not compensated at
all and the big companies that sell "tech support" make millions.
*IF* the workers know that this is exactly what is happening then I
have no objection even to that.

However the market system works. If the 'bigs' are making more
than they deserve for their effort, the underlying material is
available to anybody who wants to undercut them. Meanwhile those
who don't need (or want) the additional services don't need to buy
them. Win-win as I see it.

Operations such as RH, Debian, Ubuntu even hire people (and
actually pay them) to create material that they GPL and include in
their own offerings.