"Why would you want a great developer to become a manager in the first place?"

Well, this particular developer is becoming a manager for the following reason:

Job requirements for engineers have an alphabet soup attached to
them. I've been rejected for jobs because the version of Sybase I last
used is too old, and this is for a role where SQL isn't even the core
requirement. The SQL standard hasn't changed, but agents can't figure
that out - they just want people who've used the latest version of
Sybase.

I get turned down for UNIX dev roles because the version of VB I've
used isn't the latest -- because they add a VB background to all the
dev position requirements, and it's got the be the latest version of
VB.

I've just got bored of having my technical skills outdated every six
months. If I take my eye off the ball and Microsoft announces a
technology and I don't immediately ram it into my CV or pick the wrong
job, a year later I'm near unemployable.

I'm fed up of my career being this bizarre stamp collecting exercise
where I get judged on how many of the acronyms I've been near lately
and not whether I've gained any deep experience in anything.

Frankly, I'm getting too old to play this stupid game anymore. No-one
wants to hire a software engineer with a decade of experience to start
work in C#. They'll train 2 year experienced people to use C#, but if
you've got more experience than that, you better show up with
experience in C# because any other experience you have is irrelevant.

I'm tired of my entire experience being torn up and thrown away every
couple of years because agents and HR departments can't figure out
that a developer who can write C++ can also write C# and Java with
very little training -- but what can you expect? These are guys who
think Visual C++ isn't the same language as C++.


I looked at being a tech writer. I quite like writing -- I've got a
background in creative writing, it's something I quite like, and I've
done tech writing around IT projects before. Unfortunately, although
I've written stuff and studied writing and so on, I'm not qualified to
be a tech writer because the version of PageMaker I last used is too
old... I suddenly have these visions of people saying to a
re-incarnated Dickens "Look, you've only used quills. What the hell
kind of writer are you? We're only considering people with experience
with Biros version 4 or above."

I've noticed that things like "Project manager" experience doesn't get
thrown away in the same way. No-one says "Oh, but that was a year
ago. We manage projects COMPLETELY differently now. That experience
doesn't count", whereas they do with, say, SQL. It's like SQL is a
whole new language with each version of Oracle.

Apparently, being a successful software engineer currently means that
you pick a tech, ram some experience on your CV and then bail after a
couple of years before that becomes "old tech". Every couple of years
you need to pick a technology (which probably hasn't actually shipped
at that stage) and bet on it. And you must bet right every time.

You never gain deep experience because that would mean missing an
acronym off your CV and who knows when you'd need the acronym.

I've been offered two jobs; one will get me a PM background. One will
get me a bundle of technologies. The latter is a good role, but how
can I tell if those technologies will leave me employable in two years
time? They might be completely outdated by then and useless and
irrelevant like my experience with SQL on Oracle 8.

It'll get me a couple of years of Java, for example. But how can I
tell if Java will still be an employable skill in 2007? I mean, I've
got Java at the moment, but no hope of a job using it, because I don't
also have J2EE and anyway the Java I did was 1.1 and everyone's after
people with experience in newer versions...

Apparently I have no worthwhile experience to show for 10 years in the
business because everything's the wrong version or doesn't have the
right condiments or is just a tool no-one uses anymore. Any actual
background I've got in things

like "being an engineer who gets software written" is irrelevant. It's
like assessing a builder on whether they've used Black and Decker
tools and not on whether their houses are still standing. Or like
assessing Dickens' writing skills by the fact he used quills and not
biros.


Soft skills like PM don't get outdated by FUD from Microsoft. They
don't come with version numbers which can drift out of date.

Really, they're the only alternative if you're the sort of person who
can't assume you'll bet on the "right" technology every two years for
the rest of your life.

So this developer is becoming a manager just so that I can start
building an experience history to remain employable with, because I'm
fed up of fighting hard to keep even a couple of years of "relevant"
background on my CV.