is software jobs for life time?

[george franciscus]

hi all,

I have doubt is software jobs for life time?.
???

[Tara Bhattacharjee]

It depends on the individual. You may not be doing the same work but as you gain more experience you can be involved in different roles, still doing software work.

[stara szkapa]

Well, it can be. However, it would be na�ve to think it is going to be life long carrier. The work environment is too unstable and people have too little control of how their carrier evolves. One bad move, one bad luck, longer period of unemployment, and you might be done.
Twenty years after graduation from college, only 19% of computer science majors are still employed as programmers. This compares, for instance, to a figure of 57% of civil engineering majors who are still working as civil engineers 20 years after leaving school.
Source: http://heather.cs.ucdavis.edu/itaa.real.html
[ November 30, 2003: Message edited by: stara szkapa ]

[george franciscus]

I think some times.
now a days most of the things are free from WEB even some ERP applcations which can manage a big enterprise company also freely available..
With this approch we are covering all the world with software..But we are loosing jobs..is't it?
think deeply once, after 20yrs why can't all the software needed by an organization/individual can't be free on net???

george..
just a though makes everything..

[Jeroen Wenting]

Originally posted by george franciscus:
[QB]I think some times.
now a days most of the things are free from WEB even some ERP applcations which can manage a big enterprise company also freely available..
With this approch we are covering all the world with software..But we are loosing jobs..is't it?
think deeply once, after 20yrs why can't all the software needed by an organization/individual can't be free on net???
[QB]

Who's going to make all that free stuff?
At the moment it's programmers who are paid to do similar work and do it as a hobby.
When no programmers are being paid to perform their craft (as that's what it is, if not an art) the number of people taking up the gauntlet of learning that craft will dwindle to next to nothing and those free tools will disappear over time as well.
That's the thing where the diehard open source people are dead wrong, as they consider any money changing hands for software to be A Bad Thing (while at the same time often picking up an income from software development themselves, never underestimate hypocricy).

[Richard Scothern]

Originally posted by george franciscus:
I think some times.
now a days most of the things are free from WEB even some ERP applcations which can manage a big enterprise company also freely available..
With this approch we are covering all the world with software..But we are loosing jobs..is't it?
think deeply once, after 20yrs why can't all the software needed by an organization/individual can't be free on net???

george..
just a though makes everything..

If the world stood still this may be true but it doesn't. In 20 years time (much less, in fact) today's 'cutting edge' software will be a mere commodity, if used at all. The computer landscape will look much different, and someone will have to create it.
Richard

[D. Rose]

Hi,
I took a look at the site mentioned here. It was interesting.
It confirms my own observation in the field.
It is not just in US that older workers are bypassed. It is happening all over the softeware field be in India, Europe or anywhere.
I think because the s/w technology is undergoing changes very fast (compared to other fields like civil) , younger people are favored.
Sometimes I think this is fallout of our technology driven life. In general society as such values youner people. In old days ( agrarian societies)expeience of older people was considered valuable but is is not so anymore.

[Nathan Pruett]

Just to clear up the fallacy that Open Source is going to destroy progamming jobs...

How many programmers are working for companies developing operating systems, web browsers, databases, or web servers? Now compare this to how many programmers are working for companies that are writing code that use these underlying programs to do something specific to the company - Writing web apps to sell their stuff, writing inventory control systems that interface to the databases, writing applications to keep track of shipping, etc. The vast majority of computer people do their work on top of these more general services. No one's going to write an open source widget tracking system for a company or create a free corporate website.

Also, developing and releasing an open source app doesn't mean you are never going to make any money on it... you can always charge people for support or consulting work on your application, and you may get job offers from companies that are impressed by it and want you to do custom work for them.

[Rufus BugleWeed]

I think because the s/w technology is undergoing changes very fast (compared to other fields like civil) , younger people are favored.

Do you believe younger people are better at keeping up with change?

[Kaish Avi]

Yes, the job is for the lifetime BUT it is for the LIFE of the JOB!

[george franciscus]

But,
Which industry is providing free stuff?..other than IT industry?..
First of all..I got another question why software should be free?..
I understand that anybody gives free for getting popular in industry, getting satisfaction for him/her self..

[george franciscus]

Hi Nathan Pruett,
If you see from internet there are many many free tools/ utilities which can manage a small / medium range of companies. Those all for free..

[Mark Herschberg]

Originally posted by george franciscus:
But,
Which industry is providing free stuff?..other than IT industry?..

Social services and medical come to mind.

Originally posted by george franciscus:

First of all..I got another question why software should be free?..
I understand that anybody gives free for getting popular in industry, getting satisfaction for him/her self..

I recommend reading Homesteading the Noosphere and The Magic Cauldron.
--Mark
[ December 01, 2003: Message edited by: Mark Herschberg ]

[george franciscus]

Hi,
I think there is a lot of difference between free and open source.
I have asked about why software should be free?.
I have not asked why software should be open source?
I mean a software can be purchased with its source including. But Why for free..
thanks.

[george franciscus]

Social Services and medical are the basic needs for any human..those are for humanity.
But software is for luxory ( a kind of) then why it should be free?

[D. Rose]

Do you believe younger people are better at keeping up with change?

I think S/W Companies think that way!
[ December 02, 2003: Message edited by: Rei Damle ]

[Rufus BugleWeed]

It is not just in US that older workers are bypassed. It is happening all over the softeware field be in India, Europe or anywhere.

I don't believe people are trained to think older workers are inferior. As you mention the behavior is worldwide. This makes me believe this behavior is a genetic predisposition. It reminds me of the experiment where they give young children picture of two people and ask them which ones do they what to be friends with. They pick the better looking.
The Indigo Girls song about being punished for events in a previous life really hits home. An old guy cannot get a job because god hates him.

[Jeroen Wenting]

social services and medicare are far from free.
Indeed it is the idea that they are free that is causing massive problems with them!
These services are paid by the taxpayer, something the people handing out the money often forget.
Not enough budget? No problem, the government will provide (by raising taxes...).

[Tim Holloway]

Originally posted by george franciscus:

think deeply once, after 20yrs why can't all the software needed by an organization/individual can't be free on net???

This reminds me of a talk I had with one of the founders of the company I worked for for 13 years (before they laid me off).
When they first started, they hired 6 programmers. They were worried about what they were going to do with all these expensive (in 1965 Dollars) programmers "once all the software was written".
I started there in 1979 and at that time, we had 10 people in the mainframe OS support group alone.
I doubt there's less than 250 application programmers there now, even after the squeeze.

[Mark Herschberg]

Originally posted by george franciscus:
Social Services and medical are the basic needs for any human..those are for humanity.

That's a matter of opinion. Many people argue that social services and some types of medicine are not basic needs, but are luxury.
Alternatively, you can argue that every dollar a hospital saves by running linux is a dollar more for medicine.

Originally posted by george franciscus:

But software is for luxory ( a kind of) then why it should be free?

Did you even read the articles I linked? They explain it quite well.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally posted by Jeroen Wenting:
social services and medicare are far from free...These services are paid by the taxpayer, something the people handing out the money often forget.

Yes, well, open source isn't free either. It's "paid" for by the time donated by the developers. I believe the implication was no cost to the end user (as in free beer, to borrow a phrase from the open source folks--yes I know they they promote it as "free speech, not free beer").
--Mark

[Nathan Pruett]

If you see from internet there are many many free tools/ utilities which can manage a small / medium range of companies. Those all for free..


Yes, there are many programs you can use to run a business that are free... but unless the owner of the company is also knowledgeable enough about computers and has the time to set up all the systems and maintain them then *someone* has to get paid to be a systems administrator.


Which industry is providing free stuff?..other than IT industry?..
First of all..I got another question why software should be free?..


Part of the reason that software can be free is because the only cost is in the initial creation. There is no cost at all to make any number of copies after the first is created. There is no comparison in any other industry. There is a big difference in cost to make 1 car as opposed to 5000 cars. There is no difference in cost at all between making 1 copy of Linux or 5000. The economics of supply and demand don't come into play at all because software has a truly *infinite* supply (unless you start introducing artificial controls to supply, which is how software companies stay in business).

Part of it is also because the people writing free software want to be programmers, not bussinessmen. Unfortunately, once you start charging for something, there are lots of additional costs and lots of time taken up by things other than programming. You've got to factor in the cost of keeping track of payments, taking payments (Credit Cards, checks, etc.), an accountant, increased taxes, a lawyer, advertising, and possibly a business license. All this takes extra time in which they won't be programming. Would Linux be as big as it is today if Linus charged money for people to buy it? He could have set up a small company and charged $100 a copy. If he did, today he would be maybe a few thousand richer, but Linux would probably be as dead as CP-M. Free, Open Source software is owned by the community, so people are more willing to improve it for the good of the community. If you are charging for software it is owned by *you*, and any improvements are mostly benefitting *you*, so others do not have as great an incentive to improve it.

Another part of the problem is that if you charge money for software it is very easy for a larger company (i.e. Microsoft) to sell a similair program for much less ( or bundle it with their OS ) because they already have the infrastructure in place and because they can make money on the volume of sales what they lose in price.

[HS Thomas]

Originally posted by george franciscus:
hi all,

I have doubt is software jobs for life time?.
???

They could be for life , not necessarily at the same job.
Some people take out insurance against loss of jobs but I'm not sure how this is supposed to work in practise.
regards

[Matt Cao]

Originally posted by george franciscus:
hi all,

I have doubt is software jobs for life time?.
???

Hi,
It is depended on you and how did you groom your career track. I know some people work in the AirForce Intelligence as software engineers. They travel the world, but when they home. I know CNN will have something worthy to watch. Some come from the same family, so I think those people job must last a life time.
Regards,
MCao

[Joe Pluta]

Part of the reason that software can be free is because the only cost is in the initial creation. There is no cost at all to make any number of copies after the first is created. There is no comparison in any other industry.
To my mind, there are many parallels. First is one of the oldest industries, that of bookmaking. The price of a book, at least these days, has little if anything to do with the paper attached, and with e-books it's almost a direct correlation. Music is even more like software, even using the same delivery mechanism, as are movies.
Is it your assertion that movies should be given away for free?
In fact, software is a creative process. It is indeed unique, but its uniqueness lies in the fact that software is probably one of the few places where a person can create something purely in their mind and then transfer it to a form where it provides a tangible business service to others.
The price of software is not in what is delivered, but is instead is a way to spread the initial cost over thousands of users, thereby allowing each user to pay a small portion of the initial expense. Unlike manufactured items, where the initial markup may eventually be outweighed by the price of raw materials, and thus eventually the price is determined directly by the price of those materials, software must instead build in a per-person charge that is used to amortize the initial investment. Otherwise, we all have to buy custom software, and there would be no "home computer" market at all.
Free software has its place. Free projects often lead to diversity and new ideas, although the truth is that far more open source projects sputter and die than become the next Linux. That's because few people can really afford to continue to develop free software unless they are paid. The only people I know who can afford to create free software are people who have independent means (by independent, I mean independent from the software the give away). And since, unlike many other creative endeavors, software requires a not insignificant investment in equipment and ongoing expenses, you're unlikely to find "starving programmer" communities, where young unkempt developers create works of software by guttering candlelight in abandoned lofts.
Anyway, that's my .02
Joe

[george franciscus]

Hi,
So, What is the conclusion for this topic..
???

[Rufus BugleWeed]

We concluded pharmacist is a job for life. Some old timers around here believe you should stay out of IT. Some others think the future is so bright they are going to have to get their rose colored glasses remade with a deeper tint.

[Nathan Pruett]

Music is even more like software, even using the same delivery mechanism, as are movies. Is it your assertion that movies should be given away for free?


Should? No. Could. They already are. Check out The Fanimatrix or BMW Films... Pretty much, they're giving away movies for free. What about all the people legally releasing their own music for free on MP3.com? Or all the people who make little Flash cartoons, or re-do the Matrix or Star Wars in Legos. As the tools for making professional grade movies and music become cheaper and more available I'm sure we'll see more free movies and music similiar to free software.


The price of software is not in what is delivered, but is instead is a way to spread the initial cost over thousands of users, thereby allowing each user to pay a small portion of the initial expense. Unlike manufactured items, where the initial markup may eventually be outweighed by the price of raw materials, and thus eventually the price is determined directly by the price of those materials, software must instead build in a per-person charge that is used to amortize the initial investment.


Yes, but what is the "initial investment" of software? Basically it boils down to "time", "creativity", and "a computer". The computer is the only thing that has a hard, set price on it. "Time" and "creativity" only have arbitrary price tags. (Not that I'm saying that time and creativity aren't worth anything... they are, it's just they have a very subjective measurement.)


Free projects often lead to diversity and new ideas, although the truth is that far more open source projects sputter and die than become the next Linux. That's because few people can really afford to continue to develop free software unless they are paid.


That's true of *any* project... In any field of endevor. Far more non-free projects sputter and die than become the next Windows. Far more musicians get relegated to the $1.99 bargin bin than become the next <insert name of famous rock star here>.


The only people I know who can afford to create free software are people who have independent means (by independent, I mean independent from the software the give away).


Exactly like I said... most people who develop free software have a "real life" job developing custom software for a company, or maintaining the systems of a company.


And since, unlike many other creative endeavors, software requires a not insignificant investment in equipment and ongoing expenses, you're unlikely to find "starving programmer" communities, where young unkempt developers create works of software by guttering candlelight in abandoned lofts.


Any "starving programmer" communities around here aren't due to "free software", but instead "cheap labour" (i.e. outsourcing)...
[ December 03, 2003: Message edited by: Nathan Pruett ]

[Mark Herschberg]

Originally posted by Nathan Pruett:

Yes, but what is the "initial investment" of software? Basically it boils down to "time", "creativity", and "a computer". The computer is the only thing that has a hard, set price on it. "Time" and "creativity" only have arbitrary price tags. (Not that I'm saying that time and creativity aren't worth anything... they are, it's just they have a very subjective measurement.)

The computer has a hard, set price on it? What state run economy are you living in? :-p
The price of my computer is set by market demand. The laptop I own varied by a few hundred dollars per month when purchased new. My company is currently HP and ask for a quote. Then you go to Dell and ask them to beat it. Then you go to Compaq. Then back to HP... :-) There is definately no fixed price there.
Likewise, my price is also set by market demand. Now I'll grant you that computers are more fungible than employees, but both are still set by the free market. Its just that people have higher error bars because the market isn't quite as lquid.
--Mark

[HS Thomas]

Originally posted by Rufus BugleWeed:
We concluded pharmacist is a job for life.

Look for a software job in a pharmacy . Keeping the pharmacist up to date with medecines and technology sounds like a < boring > job for life.
Don't people want as much variety as they can get ?

[Nathan Pruett]

The computer has a hard, set price on it? What state run economy are you living in? :-p

Heh, heh... sorry... I meant that the computer is the only thing that requires an outlay of capital for an individual. Unless you grab it from a dumpster or something...
[ December 03, 2003: Message edited by: Nathan Pruett ]

[stara szkapa]

Real computer scientists use Turing Machine

[Mark Herschberg]

Originally posted by Nathan Pruett:


Heh, heh... sorry... I meant that the computer is the only thing that requires an outlay of capital for an individual. Unless you grab it from a dumpster or something...

Boy, in my day we used flowcharts. They didn't require no fancy 'puter up front. You got yourself a good old fashioned pencil and paper (none of this whiteboard stuff, either) and drew it out. And don't get me started on that "U-M-L" with it's fancy arrows and diagram this and diagram that. All a real programmer needs are about half a dozen boxes and one type of arrow. That's how software was meant to be written.
:-)
--Mark

[george franciscus]

So,
At last I think we are going to get everything for free..music, software..and all.
then how people developing those get survived..they should have some other job also..right?
that means they should have primary, secondary job..one is where they earn money for expenses one is free job for people
is it right?

[stara szkapa]

We need special kind of social assistance for computer scientists exclusively. I imagine it could be funded from income generated by open source. It would be sort of like Communism, but this time it would work because computer geeks are addicted to writing code. Computer programmers would make perfect Communists.

[Al Newman]

Originally posted by Mark Herschberg:

Boy, in my day we used flowcharts. They didn't require no fancy 'puter up front. You got yourself a good old fashioned pencil and paper (none of this whiteboard stuff, either) and drew it out. And don't get me started on that "U-M-L" with it's fancy arrows and diagram this and diagram that. All a real programmer needs are about half a dozen boxes and one type of arrow. That's how software was meant to be written.
:-)

You got it. Actually UML isn't the problem, it's RUP and all the fancy horsepucky that the methodology geeks pile on top. I wish Rational would fix it's software. Or is it IBM now?

[Jeroen Wenting]

Originally posted by george franciscus:
So,
At last I think we are going to get everything for free..music, software..and all.
then how people developing those get survived..they should have some other job also..right?
that means they should have primary, secondary job..one is where they earn money for expenses one is free job for people
is it right?

And then of course they no longer have time to create that free software/music/whatever because they are working 20 hours a day to earn that income and commuting the other 4.

[Tim Holloway]

Unlike art and music, you can't really have a "day job" selling DVD players at Radio Shack and work nights in an attic garret producing software. Unless the whole development process becomes radically different than what it is right now, the only way to get most really high-quality free software is by having it developed by people who spend their days immersed in technology, because the process itself mutates daily. Instead of a "learning curve", we have something that more closely resembles a "learning ocean" where there's always some sort of training going on, just a higher or lower level as new waves of technology wash over us (how's that for a metaphor? )
Even artists aren't all starving. Mozart's salary was about the same as what he would have received as an advanced J2EE expert if such a position had existed back then (he did not die a pauper, that's just a misundestanding of burial customs at the time). Beethoven did OK as well, and he was self-employed.
OTOH, one of the less pleasant scenarios that could come to pass is the case where software development moves to countries that pay such low salaries that few of its practicioners can afford home systems to do the after-hours work on.