Being a Developer After 40 - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/@akosma/being-a-developer-after-40-3c5dd112210c <comment><USER3> I am based in Bulgaria and I recently had my first experience with a potential Swiss employer. It was rather unpleasant. After I went through 5 interviews we discussed my rates (as a remote consultant). I received a low ball counter offer which was about the half of what I usually charge. This quickly became a racist rant and a senior manager at the company tried to persuade me by saying that with the money they offered I'll "live like a king" in Bulgaria. Needless to say I politely declined because I would much rather work with people that value my work. I was really surprised that such unprofessional attitude came from Swiss company, but apparently it's not so uncommon judging by the blog post.

<comment><USER4> Saying 'you will live like a king' is not the smartest thing. He should have said:

'Please consider that your local living costs are much lower than in Switzerland. We incorporate those differences in our offered rate like every other company does. Thanks for your understanding.'

So the tone was—yes—unprofessional, the attitude not. And even if this attitude is debatable, you have to allow the other party to express reasons for a lower offer in a negotiation.

<comment><USER5> I find it quite bizarre that remote workers living in a country with lower cost of living are expected to take lower pay than locals while doing the same work and offering the same value.

Otherwise yes, people are allowed to express silly things and one shouldn't prevent them from doing so, especially when they show their true colors.

Looks to me like they dodged a bullet.

<comment><USER6> It's essentially about power differentials and narcissism, not money.

When you call out someone trying to lowball you and they start ranting, they're really ranting about a narcissistic injury to their self-image.

Someone who does that will be a terrible client, because they're operating from a position of contempt for the people they employ. They do not see you as an equal, but as an inferior.

If the "inferior" challenges their default entitled one-up world view by expecting to be treated like a competent and well-compensated professional, they're absolutely going to have issues with that.

<comment><USER5> An apt description of disturbingly many workplaces. This type of "superior" person can hide themselves quite well and have a decent working relationship with their "inferiors", but when challenged will show their cards.

The difference here was that OP had the power to say no, and wasn't trapped by obligations.

I have the impression that some commenters resent them for having that level of self-determination and make excuses for the behavior of the employer.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> As a developer over 40, my biggest challenge is actually that the management has come to expect weekend work and late nights as the norm. As someone with a family , I can't put in those hours every day and every weekend. Single programmers who can put in those kind of hours are rewarded and those who cant are singled out for ridicule or "performance concern chats with manager". Projects have gone agile and they have not accounted for the unexpected shit that happens, low level functional designs seem to have fallen out of fashion and the deliverable deadlines have become ultra aggressive.

And the mangers' attitude is that "they can shake any tree and it rains qualified programmer resumes". Here in Toronto, there is a company called Allegis and all major employers post their developer job here. The headhunters are plugged into Allegis and they call you based on keyword match. Have you ever seen poor people huddled outside HomeDepot, hoping to be picked up? Thats what it like to be a developer searching for a job in my town. Most enterprise dev jobs are focused on a very narrow set of skills; so it doesn't matter how good you are with designing solutions or algorithms you know -- what matters is do you know java/c#/angular(new) ? And thats all that matters for Allegis keyword match. You are probably thinking I can learn more technologies ; what I am pointing out is that enterprise s/w development process is based on the fundamental principle of getting barely skilled people who can put in the hours and keep their mouth shut. But these jobs pay a lot more than startup jobs and have a lot more security.

<comment><USER8> This is probably an unpopular opinion here, but only a very small subset of developers need to design algorithms or even know any of them by heart.

Disregarding a few years that was mostly WordPress consulting, my experience is largely enterprise C#. Lots of line of business applications, glorified CRUD apps, and some client work. Zero need for any ability to write a BST or radix sort.

If you're working for SpaceX, or Twitter, or a Big 4, of course you should know those things. But most developers _don 't_ work for one of those companies. The vast majority of programming is done to further a business other than programming.

<comment><USER9> I'd agree with that. My impression is that the profession is bifurcating into two categories:

1) Programmers, who have solid coding skills that primarily work on building systems using existing modules and libraries. 2) Software engineers, who have algorithmic and systems level expertise along with advanced coding skills, and are capable of working on complex software such as operating systems, compilers, and other libraries / components used by others.

Let me hasten to add that that isn't to say one is better than the other. Both are needed, just like both regular doctors (in greater quantity) and neurosurgeons are needed (in lesser quantity) are also needed and all are highly skilled professionals.

<comment><USER10> >and all are highly skilled professionals

Apparently (and unfairly), our society thinks otherwise - family doctors make $150K/year and neurosurgeons make $750K/year :-)

<comment><USER11> I'm pretty sure there are more distinguished engineers and other senior engineering roles paying $750/year in total comp at Google/Microsoft/Apple etc. than there are neurosurgeons.

Not to mention tens of thousands of average developers that got lucky with stock options and became millionaires where a doctor of same age is still slaving away as a resident with 24-hour shifts and abysmal pay ($50-$60k year for surgical residents, according to google).

The market (not society) is treating us developers pretty well.

<comment><USER10> >The market (not society) is treating us developers pretty >well.

I am on the East Coast (outside of NYC, though), have been in the software business for 20+ years and know a lot of smart /accomplished people.

I don't know _a single software engineer_ who makes more than $200K/year in a senior engineering role, as an employee. (We are comparing salaries, not consulting income or stock options here, which can disappear very quickly).

It would be nice for you to step outside of the bubble you live in SV, every now and then :-)

<comment><USER12> Please include stock _grants_ , because otherwise it's a silly comparison. With that included, I know a _lot_ of people in SV, NYC, and even Pittsburgh who meet that bar. Google, Facebook, Dropbox, Microsoft -- all of these places pay over $200k total compensation for senior engineers. A grant of shares of GOOG or MSFT every year isn't likely to completely disappear within the vesting period...

<comment><USER10> Stock _grants_ for non-executive employees are rather rare (at least on the East Coast).

And even then, once the bubble pops, if you don't sell (there is usually a vesting period), they could be worth much, much less than today. Remember 2000-2001?

<comment><USER12> I'm confused about this "east coast" thing. Many of the major tech companies that compensate in cash+RSUs operate on the east coast at some scale or another. Heck, in Pittsburgh alone, you can pick from Uber, Google, Facebook (Oculus), and Apple, of the "really big tech companies that give their employees RSUs". You'll find similar options, no pun intended, in NYC and Boston, at minimum.

As I said: The rolling vesting offered by most companies means that you're selling stock every year after your first. So if you ignore the first year (or pretend that it's poorly compensated), it's not that shockingly bad.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I'm 41 and a dev (and manager and bunch of other roles when needed, but most my days are spent with software/hardware dev) and sure, it's all true what this article says, but there is no real personal advice there besides, as others said, just 'don't do everything, but do everything'.

So some unasked advice from a 40+ then which I wish I was told when I was 17 or something: a) believe in yourself; learn from others, but if you have strong opinions or think something is wrong then voice it even though others (are supposed to) have more experience b) fast typing and making long hours are irrelevant c) get out there and mingle with non coders a _lot_.

All of these 3 points (I learned them at different stages, in order of appearance above; c I only started doing 3 years ago) made me never having to need a job as such, always worked where/when I wanted, always made enough money and usually have enough spare time to do whatever while still performing.

<comment><USER14> It may be obvious (i.e. general networking effects), but what dynamic let c) give you work and freedom? Please elaborate.

As a coder who really dread interacting with people (especially non-technical people) in the context of work, I'd like to know how this advice would change my life.

<comment><USER15> I can't emphasise enough how important (c) is. Personally, I find programming to be emotionally challenging in that you have to put emotion, and your own thoughts aside when cutting your code. Add in to the mix the social dynamic of the workplace and the emotional workload doubles.

I always had a feeling this was important. I remember reading about NEDs (New Economy Depression syndrome) and identifying with that, but it wasn't until I went and did a diploma in psychology that the rationality behind it all crystalised.

Across all fields that study wellbeing it's fairly conclusive that social support is one of the most powerful mediating factors. In summary the more friends you have the happier and healthier you will be.

How does this relate to "non technical people"? As a friend once said to me once, when I was going through a particularly kafkaesque work episode, "you need to get outside of your head". You need to engage with people on a plane other than the one you work upon every day - to give those parts of your brain a rest and to help you to develop others.

People are hard though. In many ways more difficult than computers but the key thing to remember is that unlike with computers there isn't a right or wrong thing to do at all times. People have empathy, they can be sympathetic, they can meet you half way and they can help you to figure out what you're thinking.

Start off with something small, where you don't have to have too many interactions, but where you can be around people. I don't know why but for some reason communal drumming classes comes to mind. The key is to be around people where they will get to know your face and you theirs.

<comment><USER14> I guess my current strategy for handling social dynamics (as an introvert) is not doing me any favours. I usually get quite close (in a professional context) to 1-3 co-workers and have most of my interaction at work with them. All others I keep at a distance. Then again, social interactions with people I don't know very well is really draining for me, and I can't spend that kind of energy at work.

I've always done this, though. I have a few friends that are very close, that I can count on for life, even if I don't "nurture" the relationships continuously. But making new friends is really hard.

Thanks for the advice, though.

<comment><USER15> All I can say is, I used to be like that. Your approach to professional relationships is healthy as far as I can make out ("1-3 co-workers ... All others I keep at a distance"). The only thing I'd suggest you develop upon is the relationships outside of work, keeping things lightweight (superficial, even) if you find people draining. What's important is to just be there. Socialising is like a muscle the more you use it the stronger, more enjoyable, and easier it will be to use it.

<comment><USER13> Well put. It gets better when you do it more often, really! And it gets (in my experience ofcourse) very enjoyable.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> "you were, are and will be a software developer, that is, a relatively expensive factory worker, whose tasks your managers would be happy to offshore no matter what they tell you."

this is exactly my experience. writing software really doesn't require any great creative mind or cleverness. i'm a pretty mediocre programmer. i got roped into programming as a kid by, first of all because i wanted to make video games, but then once i'd dipped my toe in i found learning new, exotic (seeming) ideas and making clever solutions to problems was a lot of fun in and of itself. but i can think of only one time i got paid to do anything that felt like that: working on a tetris game with bombliss, without the official tetris rules. the rules of tetris are surprisingly deep and refined, in case you didn't know, so that endeavor was utterly insane and disastrous, which was the general character of the company i was working for. but still, it was a lot of fun playing physicist from the tetris universe, trying to infer the rules through experimentation.

to write software, once you have the skill down, is really just about doing the work. it doesn't require any insight, unless you intend to write good software, but no one cares about good software. no cares about the software at all. they have things they want to do, and the software, the making of it, is, if anything an impediment. so is the person making it.

<comment><USER17> While it probably confirms a lot of fears around here, this comment is pretty hyperbolic. That is to say, it captures the lowest lows (replaceable cog) and some of the highest highs (experimental physicist in Tetris universe). But most of us are not really suffering under those conditions, except (critically!) in an imagined way.

> it doesn't require any insight, unless you intend to write good software, > but no one cares about good software.

This last statement is demonstrably false. Many people care about good software. Just like they care about good cars, good vacations, good hot dogs.

But still, grumpy developers will upvote this and believe in it. They then become a self-fulfilling prophecy. They see threats that don't exist, then at some point they call out those threats and in doing so cash in their chips.

I've seen many smart developers miss great opportunities in doing this. They could be learning to make their own terms and push back, taking advantage of high demand. Instead they become a plumber, landscaper, or Ph.D., thinking the grass really is greener over there. Well, maybe so. But that mentality has not changed, so what are the real chances?

<comment><USER16> "This last statement is demonstrably false. Many people care about good software. Just like they care about good cars, good vacations, good hot dogs."

 _i_ care about good software. i know plenty of people that do as well, so you're right that my statement was demonstrably false, but the point is people who pay don't care about quality software. that shouldn't be a controversial thing. obviously they care about their costs and the value they get out of the software, not the invisible quality of it. this is my experience, at least. like i said, i'm a mediocre developer. maybe my customers aren't as discerning, or they don't have very interesting problems to solve.

also, it's interesting that you characterize being a replaceable cog as the lowest of lows. let's be honest, that's life. of course i'm replaceable no matter what my position in a company. if i own a company, that company's replaceable. it's not a lowly thing to be replaceable, it's the nature of things. like they say, the cemetery's filled with indispensable men. that's not to make every living human being feel lowly, but to help keep perspective.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> I grow weary of hearing about "white privilege". I likewise grow weary of any of today's politically correct messages: women in combat, bathroom bills, work quotas, transvestite rights. It's all BS.

I grew up a military brat. We didn't have a lot of money. I wore hand-me- downs, had iron-on patches on my knees. My family could not afford to send me to college, so I served in the military to get the GI Bill and worked my own way through college.

I'm over 40, in IT and no one ever gave me hand out in relation to any job or education.

Like an earlier poster said, I'm under no obligation to do anything. I believe in hard work. No one should be given a free ride because they are black, homosexual, female, whatever. Work your ass off to get where you want to be. Full stop. No one is under a moral or other obligation to get you in the door or ensure fair play. I'm not an asshole to people, but everyone has the same opportunities. I realize the military is not for everyone, but young men especially can really benefit. You can do a four-year hitch and have your college paid for. If you like it, you could re-up as an officer and the sky is the limit.

The problem with people today is they have a sense of entitlement that is misplaced. No one owes anyone anything other than moral decency: please, thank you, that kind of thing. Work hard, play hard. Life is better without handouts. You have a sense of fulfillment when you pull yourself up by your bootstraps.

<comment> magni- Your whole argument is a strawman. "I didn't grow up a millionaire" doesn't mean that your life would have been the same had you been black, all else equal.

Take a step back and don't be so defensive: "white privilege" isn't a personal attack. It's only meant to raise awareness, awareness that you clearly need, based on your post.

<comment><USER18> I don't need awareness. I'm keenly aware of what's happening here in America and abroad. I got where I am because I worked hard. I've received no handouts. I paid for my education through my military service. I earned my 3.98 GPA in CompSci because I put forth the effort. I currently work with some blacks who have done the same thing, and they were poorer than me growing up. It's about attitude and what you want. Real men don't want handouts. They don't want a check given to them for doing nothing.

Hell, now there are people talking about a basic income for doing nothing. I agree with scripture, work or don't eat. Granted, society has people who cannot work through no fault of their own. Take care of our less fortunate brothers and sisters, by all means. If you are an able-bodied adult, get off your ass and work for a living. Start of down low like everyone else and make something of yourself. This is where the military shines. A poor guy can rise to the top in the military. Get his college paid for. Make something of himself. Nothing stops these people. There is no such thing as will power. It's want power. How bad do you want to be better, different, not poor, educated. How bad do you want to work to ensure your children live a better life than you? My parents were not perfect, but damn if they didn't raise me right. I work for what's mine and want no handouts from others.

<comment><USER19> >Hell, now there are people talking about a basic income for doing nothing

Yes, there are. And you know why? Because jobs are being more automated as we speak. What will people do? Where will they be employed? Instead of being happy for introducing driverless vehicles, automated machinery to maintain and harvest our food, we grow scared for our jobs and turn into Luddites. We should be thinking about improving humanity as a whole, not just going "me me me me!".

And I feel you are a bit blinded from your American standpoint. You know who paid for your GI bill and your ability to be in the military? The state - <USER2> working people. You most likely didn't produce anything of value in the military, nor did you likely protect anybody. Jose worked his ass off for the tomatoes on your tables, while you most likely stood around with a gun, if that.

>I agree with scripture, work or don't eat

There are many, many people on this planet, and in the US who DO work, but still can't find enough food to eat. Think about that.

<comment><USER20> Furthermore, basic income would likely get people out of unemployment benefits and food stamps and into jobs because they no longer have a DISINCENTIVE to work! I expect this effect would be about as large as the number of people who quit their jobs to pursue their passions / hedonism.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> I liked the post, and empathized with some truths in it. I saved up and bought a used Commodore PET in 1977 at age 13. I taught myself assembler, c, basic, and went on to buy a Vic-20, C-64, Amiga 1000, Amiga 500, Mac PowerPC, NCR 3125 (386 pen-based tablet in 1995 or 1996!), and then read up on AI in the 1980s - Neural Networks, GAs, GP, Expert systems, Fuzzy Systems, Chaos, Complexity, etc... I was using Minix on my Amiga before Linux on my PowerPC, and I have dual-booted since, but Windows is also in my repertoire. THEN, I gave it all up and became a welder at an animatronics company that made window displays, stayed in the entertainment field designing stage machinery, special effects, and so on. My last job was at a water show diving and fixing hydraulic and electrical systems as a senior manager and show manager (not in the US, since a senior manager would not be caught dead in the water!). I have now aged 51 years 11 months, getting heavily back into neural nets, livecoding graphics and music while living in East Java, Indonesia. I was born and raised in Brooklyn, NY as a contrast. All I can say, and what I bestow on my older two children (I just fathered a baby girl a year ago), is that I left the fast track to the huge salary to do what I wanted, and that always kept me happy, and busy in a good way. I read books until I don't understand them, and then go back and forth to others until I do, and I stayed physical, and avoided 'desk job' ailments of most people my age. I have grown to know it is time, time with family and friends that money buys you. And if you have food, a roof over your head and some toys, you don't need the other $25K to $100K per year, or what have you. No, there is nothing new under the sun, but I have miles to go before I sleep...

<comment><USER22> I have miles to go before I sleep.. I like the reference to Stopping by woods on a snowy evening..

Great to see u made yourself a good life in east java.

My grandpa lived in Solo and my dad in Jakarta.

I tried so much to move there. But couldnt make it.

I am still stuck at the hamsters wheel in London. Hopefully i can get a fully remote job and then move to Indonesia. I can only dream !

/dream

<comment><USER21> The Robert Frost reference I played because I always feel like I can keep learning som much more, do so much more, as I think he tries to convey in his article. And I played it off the English translation of his Latin quote, 'Nil nove sul sole' ('Nothing new under the sun') to convey that too. You're never stuck; it's in your head. I grew up poor in Brooklyn, and I have taken lower paying jobs after higher paying ones for the experience and fun of it. You learn to live within your means. You don't need a remote job to move to Indonesia. I live on very little here. I spend more on luxuries like books and credit for Internet. I am far from any big stores or town, so the temptation to just spend is gone too. I am sure you can manage to save $10K USD in a year. I am spending the time studying, exercising, sleeping (I have slept an average of 6 hours or less per night for the past 30 years or so, and now I try and get 8 to 9 hours, sometimes more!). The old cliche 'Life is short' rings more loudly as you get older, and peers start dying around you. In our youth we rally to 'Seize the day', but we don't own it. As Joseph Campbell said and wrote, 'Follow your bliss'. The rest will take care of itself just like the feet and hands wash themselves in the process of showering or bathing. Semoga berhasil!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> "That means that you she or he gets 100 KCHF per year, but she or he are actually creating a value worth over a million francs. And of course, they get the bonuses at the end of the fiscal year, because, you know, capitalism. Know your worth. Read Karl Marx and Thomas Piketty. Enough said."

While neither Karl Marx nor Thomas Piketty have a great track record when it comes to economic policy prescriptions (Dean Baker's opinion on this might be interesting for people who share much of their world view with all three of these economists), will they teach me to better negotiate based on my "knowledge of my worth"? I rather doubt that they will, given that the punchline of much of their writing is that worker compensation necessarily trends towards the subsistence level over time, r>g, etc. etc. Certainly if the point is to "know your worth" in the sense of being able to negotiate a better compensation, a better source ought to be available.

Separately, it's an interesting turn of events that fairly politicized economists' writings are now recommended reading for computer programmers. The next logical step is a recommendation to join a political party (certainly joing _the_ political party would help one's career in the USSR where Marx was required reading for people entering the professions.)

<comment><USER24> a nice piece on understanding self and the pursuit of a rewarding life in tech or code or whatever (with real examples from said life) diverged in a wood of political lecturing garbage.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> I think that misses one big point here; and a point that I live by: Don't waste your neurons and time.

Time is the most precious thing you have, so don't waste it learning stuff you won't need. Even if it's shinny. Resist, and for the things you do need, don't become an 'expert' \-- pick the things you NEED and scope it well. Then hop along on the new tech that came around...

I always see any new thing I take on as an investment, and I try to make it pay down the line...

I didn't use to do that, and I'm an expert in a few tech that I had fun learning, but have absolutely zero relevance today. See, I can write Altivec code without the scalar version for example. That was useful for about 2 years...

<comment><USER26> This is where luck comes in. If you wait until something is super popular then you lose the advantage of being one of the first people that understand the technology when it goes into production. Also sometimes you may learn something that never pays off but later it feeds into something that does. I spent a lot of time learning Common Lisp and could never apply that knowledge at work until functional programming became more mainstream and Scala/Clojure became acceptable languages for production.

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> This had nothing to do with being a developer after 40.

tldr: Banal, overconfident advice on the subject of a software career, devolving into political rants at times.

</comment><comment><USER28> _I have seen developers threatened to have their work visas not renewed if they did not work faster_

That was an eye-opener. For some reason I thought Switzerland was a worker's utopia with the relatively higher salaries.

<comment><USER29> I had the same initial reaction but if you think it through not having your visa renewed effectively comes down to being fired, i.e. the company terminating their dealings with you.

Doesn't make it better (at all), but it's essentially just the threat of firing albeit with more weight behind it for the visa workers. Not the company calling the visa office about you or holding on to your passport, etc...

<comment><USER30> I have seen people threatened to have their work visas not renewed in Sweden.

<comment> bbv-if Well, this risk is the price you have pay to work in a better country. And anyway, most probably they would have some time (in my case, up to 45 days) after the contract termination to find a new job, so it's not that tragic.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> Did I just stumble on slashdot? I much prefer the discourse on HN but the reaction to "PC culture" and "White privilege" is basically the same everywhere.

It has never been supposed to mean anything about an individual, and yet that is ALWAYS how it seems to be taken. We (as white and or males) can't help but see things from our individual perspective and take offense at the implication we ever had anything easier than anyone else.

I agree with others in the thread, we just need to throw away the word white privilege and come up with something else because it has been totally poisoned. I'm not saying there aren't overzealous "social justice warriors" that haven't contributed to the misunderstanding of the word.

Just remember, when people use the word white privilege, THEY ARE NOT REFERRING TO YOU AS AN INDIVIDUAL FOR THE LOVE OF GOD.

<comment><USER32> _yet that is ALWAYS how it seems to be taken_

This is a clue that perhaps your terminology is loaded, inflammatory, and should be changed.

I find that there's very little value in reasoning about race as a collective, since it's usually just a (overly) reductive variable for socioeconomic status, upbringing, or environment. If you mean those things, say those things. Attaching a racial modifier to a term and then expecting members of that race to not feel described or targeted by it makes no sense.

(And that goes double when that term _is_ used, _often_ , _as an attack_ , not in the thoughtful way you describe, but that is a rant for another time.)

<comment><USER31> You've actually hit on the exact point, there is no point in reasoning about race, but as much as we wish that people didn't see race, the fact is they do.

That is the entire point of the term. Because of your race, people do reason about your race, and do make assumptions about your socioeconomic status, upbringing, and environment. I'll grant you that there are (probably a very few) people who do get some satisfaction out of feeling like a victim but otherwise, nobody is more tired of reasoning about race in america than black americans (who are of course not the only discriminated against minority).

You seem to be implying that america is post racial and some of just won't let it go.

<comment><USER32> _You seem to be implying that america is post racial and some of just won 't let it go._

And you seem to have read your own biases into a very objective and clear point. That point being, stop banging on about how terrible it is people get defensive when you use offensive terms.

If your response to that is "but it's not", followed by yet another academic definition of "privilege" is.. stop. You've missed the point.

Offense is taken, not given. If your goal is to have a frank and honest discussion with someone rather than attack them, you _do not_ lead off by using terminology that is racially charged (as if anyone can choose their race), minimizes someone's struggles in life (of which you necessarily know _nothing_ ), implies guilt (however slight), and which is frequently used in bad faith to shut down discussions anyways.

That may not be what you personally intend, but that is what the audience hears. Act accordingly.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> \---Disobey authority. Say "fuck you, I won't do what you tell me" and change jobs.

Challenge authority, but don't be an ass about it. Simply try to help them understand that you are doing them a favor by challenging them. Perhaps say, "Do you mind if I weigh in on that?" If they aren't interested in your opinion still follow up with "I understand you've thought about this, but I've also given this a lot of thought and I also have a lot of experience around this and I've seen it be a problem before."

</comment><comment><USER34> "forget the hype, make sure to learn node and start building bots"

That aside, a lot of the more generic points make sense.

</comment><comment><USER35> > "Ok, let's make a rails app" > "Oh, I need rails first" > "Oh, I need rbenv > first" > "Oh I need brew" > "Oh I need xcode tools"

As a Rails dev, this made me chuckle, yes, I've put a lot of hours into troubleshooting dev setups. But this is the wrong example. All of these are installed with one line on the terminal. And really, there are far simpler web stacks to pick up without even having to leave Ruby. Sinatra on system Ruby works just fine. All you do is 'gem install sinatra', open up a text editor and go.

Really, the complexity you have to watch out for is the complexity you impose yourself. Choosing the wrong tools for the job or the wrong abstractions. For many applications, Rails is overkill.

<comment><USER36> That involves knowing the one line on the terminal, and when you google "rails set up" you will get a bunch of out-of-date tutorials, and not knowing rails you won't know which is out-of-date.

On the other hand, 30 year old C code will often compile right out of the box, because the people maintaining them weren't chasing the New Flashy every year.

The modern systems suck in terms of maintainability.

</comment></comment><comment><USER37> This was a good read - I'm a dev over 40 and much of this rang true. I think there's a lot of great advice in there. One standout for me was "Be prepared to change your mind at any time through learning. " \- something that I think we should all aspire to.

</comment><comment><USER38> Mentioning income gap at the end were very random. I wish author would mention it in the beginning, so I wouldn't waste time reading the whole thing.

</comment><comment><USER39> In an email exchange I had with C.A.R. Hoare a couple of years back he said:

 _Paradoxically, I have been working on shared variable concurrency, using a partially ordered trace semantics. Until I retired, I was too frightened to tackle anything so difficult._

Definitely life after 40, 50, 60, 70, ...

</comment><comment><USER40> Slightly disappointed about the post _not_ being about how they became a developer at age 40, which was what I initially thought it was.

 _I started my career as a software developer at precisely 10am, on Monday October 6th, 1997... I had recently celebrated my 24th birthday._

<comment><USER21> I initially drew the same conclusion, but was nonetheless entertained by it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER41> I found the advice to be quite a mixed bag, but um, having just turned 42, the OP knows very little about being a developer after 40. The article is about what he learned as an under-40 developer.

</comment><comment><USER42> Warm fuzzy nostalgia aside, this article seems to amount to "Learn everything, read everything, do everything, don't bandwagon, Apple is pretty cool. The other stuff is OK too, if you like that sort of thing. Learn Node. PS. Don't harrass people".

It's an amalgamation of every Medium tech-post ever.

<comment><USER43> I guess the real message is: believe whatever the mainstream audience believes at the time. You can't really go wrong with always agreeing with whatever the current thought bubble agrees with - and be quick to change your opinions if the herd is moving. When the author saw the derision against Steve Ballmer, and the favor Apple was getting, he made the clear choice to jump ship. And because he was part of that popular herd jumping ship, it worked very well. Follow the wind.

It's actually a pretty good point and is a decent way to always remain relevant. You can't be left behind if you're always on top of the latest thought trends.

EDIT: A missing piece the author points out too: don't be an early adopter of a thought trend (Point 1: Forget the hype). Only jump in when it becomes mainstream. If you adopt something before it becomes mainstream, there's a chance it can fail. If you wait until it is mainstream, but get in just as it becomes mainstream, you get the benefit of being an early adopter and the benefit of never being on the unpopular viewpoint.

<comment><USER44> So your always going to be playing catch up - back in 94 when i had been playing with the www I volunteered to go to Edinburgh for a month to work on a cutting edge RAD/DSDM Project.

Basically I told my then boss see you after Christmas - If I have followed that advice I would have stuck with Oracle and Java or spent my career in Mainframes

<comment><USER45> > I would have stuck with Oracle and Java or spent my career in Mainframes

And last I heard, there are tons of job openings asking for experts in Oracle and Java.

So how exactly would that have been terrible in terms of getting a steady income?

<comment><USER44> Well enough if you want a traditional 9-5 job (which is fine if it suits you) - pity Java is such a PITA to work with though and Oracle do charge a lot! for there product.

Trouble is if your company pivots and you have been doing Mainframe COBOL for 20 years - you might find transitioning to a new language hard.

<comment><USER18> I would happily go back to mainframes if given the opportunity. I miss the days of the "priesthood of the computer". I sorely miss linear languages like COBOL and PL. Yes, yes, I'm old fashioned, but man, were those the days. I miss programming on my 8-bit Commodore 64, praying I wouldn't run out of space on my floppy drive. Anyone remember Creative Computing magazine. I wrote every program in every issue for quite some time.

Now? I'm stuck working for a salary in a job that pays the bills. I live in Texas (I know, I know) where IT salaries are already low. Texas has that "right to work" mentality. My bosses are not real IT guys in the sense that they love IT. They're in it for the salary, whereas I'm in it because I still love it after a span of pushing bits over three decades. I would retire only if I won the lottery, but if I did that, I would likely buy a Z-Series mainframe and spend my days playing.

<comment><USER46> I get some of that "praying I [won't] run out of space" with programming microcontrollers for home projects.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER47> "Say 'I won't do what you tell me' and change jobs. There are fantastic workplaces out there; not a lot, but they exist. [...] Do not let a bad job kill your enthusiasm. It is not worth it. Disobey and move on."

Especially Europeans have problems thinking like this. I always advise engineers to keep on looking for better offers / jobs the moment they take a new job. Instead many hibernate in a job for 3-5 years without thinking of their careers and hence miss opportunities.

Disclaimer: To help engineers finding jobs / working on their careers and support IT-firms to find people, I recently started a small headhunting agency.

So mail me, if you look for a tech-job in Zurich. Salaries here after [!] taxes start at 7000 CHF / month. Find my e-mail address in my hn-handle or check out my story "8 reasons why I moved to Switzerland to work in IT" [https://medium.com/@iwaninzurich/eight-reasons-why-i- moved-t...](https://medium.com/@iwaninzurich/eight-reasons-why-i-moved-to- switzerland-to-work-in-it-c7ac18af4f90)

<comment><USER48> Why is it a thing to change jobs every 3-5 years. Seems like only a software developer thing

<comment><USER49> Yes, it is a software development thing. Labour market is crazy.

Employers are obsessed with "acquiring talent". If you can show "growth potential" (as in, being able and willing to learn and extend your expertise), they will overpay you for the first 2 years or so. After that, they will feel entitled to recover their investment in you, so you will continue to grow, but your salary will stagnate.

Meaning, 3-5 years is the sweet spot for getting another income boost from the next talent acquirer willing to pay you to learn even more.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER50> If it is really possible to _learn_ one language each year, and read six books, I'm going to be very impressed with that. Especially considering side projects you actually start in some language, frameworks (which are not the same as languages, obviously), and conceptual things which are language- agnostic. And then comes family, home maintenance and, just sometimes, rest :-) .

<comment><USER51> Reading six books a year is really nothing, and I'm not even sure why the author makes a big deal about it. Especially those books he suggested, are very short, often lots of pictures and examples. Agreed on the new language though, your best course is to just start a fresh project with something new. That's how I learn new things. Just jump in head first.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> In 1997 I was finishing high school, and about to commence undergraduate studies. I was "interested" in computing and Linux had passed 2.0 and was well on its way to entering the main stream. I remember obtaining a copy of redhat from my local library and a few very significant threads of my career to date commenced.

Java is also a child of the nineties and 1.1 I believe was the first arguably "finished" implementation. I remember the computer magazines were going off on about it at the time and I got a free Java IDE off a cover disk and wrote my first 2D canvas app.

These were the two main "galaxies" I inhabited for the last 20 years with various holidays here and there. The benefit of inhabiting such relatively "open" galaxies is that they provide easily accessible conduits to other galaxies too.

Thanks for the 90s nostalgia - very nearly brought a tear to my eye.

</comment><comment> magni- It's sad that the majority of the discussion from this post is people misunderstanding the term "white privilege" and getting so defensive about it.

Changing topics: that was a great read. The links were also great reads and rereads. What do people think of Joel's six mistakes from the "great software takes ten years", sixteen years later? [http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000017.html](http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000017.html)

</comment><comment><USER52> > Companies want you to shut up about that, so that women are paid 70% of what > men are paid.

Stopped reading here because I assumed the rest would be equally as well informed. Shame too, I was enjoying the perspective.

Edit: Decided to give the author the benefit of the doubt and continued reading for the opportunity to have my perspective changed. With that said, I'm also not very fond of the anti-white male narrative quoted below, and I'll elaborate on why

> If you are a white male remember all the privilege you have enjoyed since > birth just because you were born that way. It is your responsibility to > change the industry and its bias towards more inclusion.

I don't think the real problem here is with being white, male or privileged. (Though, _obviously_ our industry has a problem with diversity.) Programmers, for better or worse, typically aren't very sociable people, and thus become abrasive to dissenting opinions. (I'll be the first to admit that I do this, and will continue to do it as I try to improve and reduce this behaviour.) Whether that opinion comes from a transexual black 10x-er or a straight white female who recently graduated from college, or even a seasoned veteran with 25 years experience. Quite often, a difference of opinion for programmers defaults to "they're wrong because they don't think like me." I experience this daily, and I'm a straight white 21 year old male from an affluent community. So to the authors point, yes if we could stop being assholes to each other that would be great. However I absolutely disagree that the behaviour of my peers is racially motivated, and I resent the implication.

And I'm supposed to "send the elevator down" just to those who I assume to be the most slighted minority? How do you suppose that works? Should I just assume that all women need my help and support because they're women? What indicators would one even use to determine such a qualification, other than being systematically sexist and racist? Here's a thought: help everyone, as often as possible! Don't motivate your behaviour based on peoples' identities!

But yes, I do agree with the underlying sentiment that follows, I just wish it wasn't prefaced with unnecessary garbage.

> Do not critisize or make fun of the technology choices of your peers; for > other people will have their own reasons to choose them, and they must be > respected. Be prepared to change your mind at any time through learning.

Perfect. Why did we need the intro?

</comment><comment><USER53> I just want to say thanks for introducing me to ponysay. My terminal was dull until you all shared its magic with me.

</comment><comment><USER54> Thanks for this! A super interesting and well written look into what a career in software development can look like!

</comment><comment><USER55> My new todo list: 1) Invent time machine 2) Go back in time and make my 24-year-old self read this article.

</comment><comment><USER56> Nice post. A bit nostalgic but we all need a meme to get readers interested. In the OP's case its "I'm getting older, but I still love what I'm doing. Come join me!".

What I do when a new tech hype comes along, is allocate myself some time to it. Ok, Webpack? Let me give myself three days (around 20 hours) to check it out. If I don't understand it at first, keep pushing. If after 20 hours, I still don't get it, abandon it and move on.

Of course, 20 hours is just an estimate. If after a day, I feel like some magic has taken place (like what Backbone.js did to me), I'm hooked.

And yes, definitely gravitate towards a galaxy. Sometimes galaxies do merge and you will reap the benefits :)

I'm 38, programming for 15 years. And I still love coding and doing systems stuff.

</comment><comment><USER57> > 3\. Learn About Software History

I was reading about zeromq. From zeromq, I linked to iMatrix, OpenAMQP, GSL, and then Pieter Hintjens and Protocol of Dying. Indeed, history of software, including the people behind it, is no less interesting than the software itself.

</comment><comment><USER58> >The reason for this lies in the fact that, as the Romans said in the past, Nil nove sul sole

This is from the Old Testament.

[http://biblehub.com/ecclesiastes/1-9.htm](http://biblehub.com/ecclesiastes/1-9.htm)

</comment><comment><USER59> > A British roundabout with 6 intersections...

There's one of those in Hemel Hempstead. And surprisingly it works really well...

On a related note, if you have the chance to go to Hemel Hempstead, don't.

<comment><USER60> I think its only 5 now - and the fun thing about the magic roundabout is you can go either way round.

I must admit I used to when riding a bike round there chicken out and use the under pass.

</comment></comment><comment><USER61> It is not our duty to do anything. If you want to do something fine. But honestly, I work my butt off to get what I've got and I'm perfectly happy to help others that do the same.

I refuse to help someone just because they are female or a minority just because they are female or a minority. I also refuse to help people who won't help themselves.

Those who want to be great, I will help them every way I can. It doesn't matter gender or ethnicity. It's about work ethic.

</comment><comment><USER62> Ignore the hype - but learn everything. Think for yourself - but go with the crowd. And don't forget the sunscreen.

Oh, and XML was _totally_ a buzzword in '97.

<comment><USER63> Came here to post "And don't forget the sunscreen", but did a quick command-f to see if anyone else had already. :)

Which, in fact, was released in 1997!

</comment></comment><comment><USER64> >Software companies have become sweatshops where you are supposed to justify your absurdly high salary with insane hours and unreasonable expectations.

Sadly, I've felt this way for the past two months since I took my new job. I had to take a pay cut for it. Sadly, I think the new company thinks I'm being overpaid and the demands are crazy. All of a sudden, I understand so many of the WTFs on TDWTF!

</comment><comment><USER65> I'd only add one more point to this otherwise excellent list of advice for programmers doing it for the long haul:

13\. Strive to become as proficient as you can in the business domain in which you ply your programming.

Such proficiency can be a crucial asset if you have plans to start your own consultancy or to produce specialised products and solutions for niche markets.

</comment><comment><USER66> >help a younger developer by becoming their mentor (do not do this before the age of 30, though.)

Why the age of 30? Just curious.

<comment><USER67> Because before then, you don't know enough to be an effective mentor. ("30" here is a proxy for a level of experience.)

</comment></comment><comment><USER68> I remember the AVR hype. It was supposed to "change everything" but is became a big nothing burger.

</comment><comment><USER69> you know what? f... you people. I was hoping to know your opinions about technological choices and things you think would be relevant 20 years from now. And what do I get? 40 f...ing pages of gender and race inequality crap. The article is not about that, damn it!

<comment><USER70> Don't put things into articles people are going to talk about that you don't want people to talk about. There are two topics in the article and the discussion here broaches both.

</comment></comment><comment><USER71> Most of this seems very negative.

</comment><comment><USER72> Excellent tips; However in globalization you need to be a highly skilled wage slave

</comment><comment><USER73> > Do not worry about hype. Keep doing your thing, keep learning what you were > learning, and move on.

Thanks, Adrian. Now I have an official excuse for not writing a single app with Angular/React in 2016.

</comment><comment><USER72> Within in the context of H1B it's a different game altogether.

</comment><comment><USER74> "Nil nove sul sole" means nothing new under the sun.

</comment><comment><USER75> I enjoyed this. Could have just as easily been called "Being an experienced developer" because age doesn't factor in to his message that much.

</comment><comment><USER76> > The reason for this lies in the fact that, as the Romans said in the past, > Nil nove sul sole.

This is actually originally from Ecclesiastes, not the Romans.

</comment><comment><USER77> Absolutely love this guy!

Somehow I feel lonely when I say open-offices are an absolute evil. Thanks for raising that point!

</comment><comment><USER78> >Learn all you can about LLVM

While I'm sure LLVM is an important technology, I don't feel it's everyone's job to learn and know everything there is to know about it. There will perhaps be a niche group of developers making cool things with LLVM, most developers can get along just fine without knowing anything about it.

<comment><USER79> "Forget the Hype" followed by LLVM hype.

</comment></comment><comment><USER80> Being a 40+ developer myself, I find myself largely agreeing with this post. I guess I could quibble over some small details, but by and large, I think the author is spot on.

The one thing I'll add to this, is to say that, for devs like us, things like Coursera, Udacity, EdX, etc. are _really_ valuable. When you're a mid-career professional who already has strong technical chops in at least one area, "on demand education" like this is super valuable in multiple regards:

1\. It's much more accessible since you don't have to go sit in class, on campus, every day, etc. You can fit it around your existing life much more easily.

2\. It can serve as a nice way to start "bridging" to a new area. For example, if you're already, say, a skilled Java developer and you want to start moving into Data Science, MOOCs offer a nice way to pick up some additional credentials to help that transition. People argue about the value of certificates from Coursera and the like, and that's fair. I think you don't want something like that to be the _only_ credential you have, if possible. But taken as a _complement_ to your existing credentials, experience and skills, I believe these things can be very useful.

3\. Related to (2) above, but MOOCs can be a nice way to add complementary education outside of tech altogether. If you're a developer who aspires to eventually move into management or whatever, consider taking business classes from Coursera/EdX/Udacity as well. There are some really nice offerings out there, including a complete (accredited) MBA program that you can do (partly) through Coursera in conjunction with the University of Illinois. Or maybe you're a Java developer (just an example, I don't mean to pick on Java people, as "I is one") who thinks that something to do with synthetic biology is going to be "the next big thing", but doesn't want to go back to school for a biology degree... great, there's a ton of life sciences / biology / chemistry /etc. stuff that you can take online if you want to start positioning yourself for something like that.

Let me also add this: I totally agree that you don't need to go "all in" on every new tech that comes out, and try to ride the hype wave for everything new. But, I think it's smart to at least explore (many|most|some|??) of the trendy new stuff, to a limited depth... at least dip your toes in the water, do the "Hello world of XXXX" where XXXX is Swift, or R, or Rust, or Scala, or Node, or Go or whatever. At least give yourself a fair chance to evaluate the new stuff, decide if you feel like it's worth investing more in based on direct experience, and at least get a feel for the toolchain and what-not. From there, you can kind of monitor what's going on around you and decide if/when to go deeper with new technology XXXX. Yes, doing all this requires an investment of some time, but that's part of the cost of keeping your value up.

Of course, the truth is, most of this goes equally for the "under 40" crowd as well. But the whole "keep learning new stuff" thing probably becomes a little more important as you get older. There might be exceptions like the whole "COBOL programmer who gets paid big bucks because nobody new is learning COBOL anymore" but I'd consider those situations to be exceptions.

<comment><USER81> For tech things I would say that just reading the documentation (or source if there isn't any useful documentation) is preferable to any online courses.

On my first meaningfully paid job, first actually useful thing I did was that I went into corporate archives and found documentation for Oracle 7i and Microstation 95 which I was supposed to be using. Somehow nobody else there even thought of reading the docs. (the fact that I somehow automated myself away in this job is another thing)

<comment><USER80> _For tech things I would say that just reading the documentation (or source if there isn 't any useful documentation) is preferable to any online courses._

I'm a big fan of the "teach yourself by reading the docs" thing and I've done a lot of that in my career. But since I started doing a lot of these online courses, I've found that they can be very beneficial. Having a little bit of structure around the learning process, having "classmates" to discuss with, etc. have helped me as I've been (for example) learning R. Now, _could_ I learn R by just reading books, tutorials, and experimenting on my own? Sure, of course. But the courses are pretty cheap, add a little bit of rigor to the process, and come with a minor credential from a well known / highly regarded university (Johns Hopkins, specifically). All in all, I've found that this approach works really well.

Just to share an example of one regard in which the online classes have had value above and beyond me simply doing it entirely on my own... The "R ecosystem" has a LOT of stuff in it. If I just started playing around with R, I'd have little clue which libraries and other tools to try out. But the courses I've done so far have guided me towards learning things like ggplot, dplyr, knitr, etc. Knitr in particular turns out to be really cool, and I'm glad I discovered it... but I don't think it's something I would have gone looking for on my own. Maybe I would still have found it eventually anyway, but as it stands, I feel like the course approach guided me in some useful directions early on.

YMMV, of course.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER82> > as the Romans said in the past, Nil nove sul sole

They didn't say that.

</comment><comment><USER83> > You could experience that right here in Switzerland.

lol

</comment><comment><USER84> Seems a bit bitter about the shit working conditions. And he's right. It's funny how the whole trade is shit.

<comment><USER85> There certainly seems to be a lot of young 'genius' and '*10' types who are willing to sacrifice their youth on the altar of a unicorn in return for a 1 in 100 chance of getting rich, if it's taking you more than 8 hours a day to make a living, you're poor :(

<comment><USER84> Even if the unicorns win it really depends on where you entered for you to actually make out rich. These days even the employees of the winner are getting shafted. There seems to be no ideas of human dignity or work life balance in this trade. It's not a profession, it's a trade. It should probably be unionized, and it would be if not for the high wage.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER86> The article was pretty good until this part.

>If you are a white male remember all the privilege you have enjoyed since birth just because you were born that way. It is your responsibility to change the industry and its bias towards more inclusion.

I'm from an Eastern Europe and my family never was rich, I had to put in a tremendous effort to even get into the industry. Assuming I got an easy ride simply because I'm white is a pretty racist statement and I find myself surprised that no one is calling out the author on it.

>It is your duty to send the elevator down.

No, it's not. Just like women don't have any duty to ensure that there's an arbitrary number of men working as models and just like black NBA players have no obligation to ensure that there's enough white guys on the team I have no obligation to worry about some arbitrary quotas.

<comment><USER87>
        I'm from an Eastern Europe and my family never was
        rich, I had to put in a tremendous effort to even get
        into the industry. Assuming I got an easy ride simply
        because I'm white is a pretty racist statement

I was about to patiently type out another "hey, you did work hard and you did earn your success - 'white privilege' doesn't mean things were handed to you easily; it means that even though your life has been hard you still got to avoid certain challenges that non-whites face" response.

But you know what? This just isn't working.

We need better language.

I'm a firm believer in the existence of this thing we currently call "white privilege." I understand the meaning and intent of this concept and it's 100% correct; it's absolutely vital that we understand that _basic rights we take for granted_ (for example, walking into a store and not being treated as a potential thief, or having prospective interviewers assume we're professional/literate/presentable) are actually privileges that many people or color don't have.

But if the people we're trying to reach hear the term "white privilege" and _immediately_ misunderstand the term in such spectacular ways... you know what? We're doing it wrong.

<comment><USER88> > basic rights we take for granted (for example, walking into a store and not > being treated as a potential thief, or having prospective interviewers > assume we're professional/literate/presentable) are actually privileges that > many people or color don't have.

You are aware that Irish and Eastern Europeans, and on and off through history Greek and Italian, have had all those same problems right? You know that 'White Privilege' you talk about is really just for those of Germanic origin, right?

Because I'd hate for you to look like an idiot telling someone who could have faced all those issues when they moved to Western Europe, the US or Canada that it's all wine and roses for them.

White Privilege should just be called White Devil. It jsut paints such a simplistic view of the world, not a real one, but one that is useful for rhetoric.

<comment><USER87> I'll keep this polite and assume you're intelligent and informed, a courtesy you did not extend to me.

         You are aware that Irish and Eastern Europeans, and on and off through history Greek and Italian, have had all those same problems right?

I'm very, very aware of that fact. Hey, for the record, I'm partly Welsh. The Welsh have been oppressed by everybody! They're pretty damn white.

Literally nobody is denying that Italians, Irish, Eastern Europeans, or people from unfashionable parts of Brussels, or your mother's uncle's cousin from Estonia, have faced discrimination at various points in time, and perhaps still do today.

         White Privilege should just be called White Devil.

I won't try and change your opinion, but you should at least understand what the concept of "white privilege" means.

It absolutely _does not_ imply that white people are bad, or that white people are devils, or _anything_ of the sort.

The concept of white privilege is a way of viewing things that challenges us to observe freedoms that we as white people have that others don't always enjoy.

For example: as a white person, if a cop pulls me over, I may be treated unfairly. But whatever happens, I generally know that I won't be treated badly _because of my race._ He certainly didn't pull me over because I'm fucking part Welsh, I can tell you that! Black people don't have that privilege. Now, 99% of the time, maybe their race doesn't have anything to do with their interactions with the police. Most cops are good people. But wouldn't it suck to be black and never really _know_ if a cop was going to treat you badly simply because you're black? And that at least once or twice in your life, it probably _will_ happen? That's some bullshit I don't really ever have to deal with in my life. A _privilege_ I have, if you will.

Now, like I said above, I can't help but wonder if we do need some new terminology here.

I am certain that I have not changed your mind. Again, I'm just defining the concept for you. You can agree with it or disagree with it at this point. That's cool. But your post made it very clear that you had no understanding of the concept. Probably because the term "white privilege" itself was a turn- off. You probably thought it was an attack on white people. It's not.

<comment><USER5> The privilege you enjoy you do not enjoy because of being a white male, but rather because you're part of one of the dominant social groups. If you go to another country you'll see that people do treat you differently and might discriminate against you depending on your sex/looks/ancestry/etc.

Those that are different always have some disadvantages. We should be working towards fair societies, not replacing one type of discrimination with another.

<comment><USER87> I don't understand how recognizing my privilege as a white male in America equates to discrimination.

Can you explain in detail?

<comment><USER89> It's simply intractable to add up everyone's advantages and disadvantages; it's the wrong path to focus on group attributes/trends when you start talking about individuals.

I could clamor for tall rich sportsmen to "send the elevator down for me". That it's their responsibility and so on. What you should do is reflect on exactly why you'd think I should feel silly for saying that, and the other guy to not. Would you tell Michael Jordan to check his privilege if he told a group of average white male nerds to reflect on theirs?

<comment><USER87>
        It's simply intractable to add up everyone's advantages and disadvantages

Sure.

        it's the wrong path to focus on group attributes/trends when you start talking about individuals.

Absolute nonsense. If a particular school had a 30% graduation rate while every other school in the state averaged 80%, would you say, "Wait a minute! It's the wrong path to talk about _this school in particular._ These are individual kids..."

As you say, every individual human being certainly is _more_ than the some of their labels. But when gross inequalities between groups emerge, it's lunacy to suggest there are no greater group-wide forces at work on scales greater than the individual.

        Would you tell Michael Jordan to check his privilege if he told a group of average white male nerds to reflect on theirs?

Is Michael Jordan a group of people? Unless there's a clone army of Michael Jordans out there that I don't know about, this theoretical question is bizarre and irrelevant to anything anybody is talking about.

I'm not even sure what you're getting at here. He is a part of some privileged groups (rich people, people with one-in-a-million athletic ability, men) and not others.

        I could clamor for tall rich sportsmen to "send the
        elevator down for me". That it's their responsibility
        and so on.

Michael Jordan can't make you a rich, tall sportsman. That's not... physically possible. However, the author of the original article suggested that we help others achieve careers in our industry. Now that certainly does seem possible, doesn't it? Hardly even seems controversial, if you ask me.

<comment><USER89> I'm not sure what you are getting at with your school example. 20% of students from school B aren't graduating; 70% of students from school A aren't graduating. If you institute some program that leads to one new kid graduating, who cares if it's in school A or B?

Gross inequalities between groups _can_ exist, but that tells us _nothing_ about any particular individual within the group, only that individual's chances _when no other information is available_. But other information _is_ available when looking at an individual.

You seem to be suggesting we somehow theoretically add up all one's advantages and disadvantages- But that means... Considering the individual. Great, I agree. Since we are doing that, phrases such as "recognize your male privilege" mean nothing to an individual male, because it is very possible that individual male has severe disadvantages that make singling out the maleness aspect ridiculous- It would be like telling a minority male shot by a cop to reflect on his privilege of not generally facing sexism like a woman does (setting aside that a "male" privilege here is actually a disadvantage, but you get the idea).

In general people have an obligation to help the less fortunate, I agree.

<comment><USER87>
        I'm not sure what you are getting at with your school example.

It's quite simple. Clearly there are times to consider the individual and clearly there are times when we should consider larger groups.

If Town A had a cancer rate 5 times higher than the national average surely you wouldn't say, "Well, look, those people are individuals, and an individual's cancer risk is affected by lots of things -- diet, exercise, genetic predisposition... to heck with looking for differences between Town A and Town B."

 _Clearly_ you'd want to start investigating things that affect Town A on a town-wide basis.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Why do apps from the same company look worse on Android than on iPhone? - <AUTHOR> http://android-gripes.tumblr.com/post/4409289546/why-do-apps-from-the-same-company-look-worse-on-android

<comment><USER2> I think it's the standard that is set by the original creator of the UI widgets available on the platform, in this case, Apple vs. Google.

I'm an iPhone UI designer/developer and you can make a really nice looking app without doing any custom design work just by using the widgets that Apple provides. A good example of an app that was nearly all stock is Tweetie 1 for iPhone and it won an Apple Design Award. Apple has put an incredible amount of polish (single-pixel highlights and shadows, consistent sheen/gloss across elements, built-in animations for common interactions) into the widgets as part of UIKit, and then the apps that are included on the iPhone are also incredibly polished. This sets the bar very high and also gives a quality of UI design that developers can look up to and try to emulate.

The apps that Google built for Android (Maps in particular) are very clean and elegant but I would hesitate to call them beautiful or extremely polished. Google's design aesthetic typically eschews gradients, sheen, highlights and shadows in favor of a flatter, cleaner look and feel. Although Google's Android apps are well-designed, they don't look like a team of visual designers hand-crafted each and every corner like Apple's apps and UIKit widgets seem to be. Because of this cleaner, simpler aesthetic, the bar for "good-looking" on Android is a lot lower than for iPhone and it seems companies will cut corners on Android app UI design & visual polish because of it.

Another theory is that companies might feel that Android phone owners are more technical, more geeky, and thus "don't need" a really polished interface so they spend fewer resources on it. Once a few big companies release Android apps with a sub-par design, other companies see this and follow suit, continuing the trend forwards. Obviously this is a difficult stigma to get out of, but some companies are putting out great Android apps -- Gowalla comes to mind -- so there is hope.

<comment><USER3> Android has more market share than iOS, which would seem to suggest it's moved far beyond the "technical, geeky" crowd.

My hunch is that we're starting to see a Windows/Mac differentiation here, with Android emerging as the clear winner of mobile and iOS being reserved for the trendy/artistic/quality crowd. That carries over into the apps themselves, with Android apps (like their windows counterparts) being clean and utilitarian, whereas iOS developers are devoting more time to making sure their app looks good.

Edit: The "quality" comment was not intended to suggest that Android lacks it, but rather that those who buy based upon perceived quality would be more likely to be drawn to the iPhone.

<comment><USER4> That's a fairly optimistic view.

My take is that most purchasers of Android phones are probably quite disappointed with the experience. Whether it's because of battery life, lousy app selection, annoying add-ons by the carrier, or clunky app design.

Sure, slimy salespeople hired by the carriers are pushing Android phones and probably lying about features and quality just as they lie about plan details, etc. Yes they're selling a lot of (mediocre) phones to a lot of naive (or optimistic) people who trust the Google name based on their experience with search or gmail.

I predict a huge backlash as more and more consumers realize they were hoodwinked and should have just gone with an iPhone. Take the Evo 4G for example... the phone shipped unable to even last a whole day on a full charge (with moderate use). This is unconscionable. Clearly nobody who was in a postion to do something about this test drove one of the phones for a few days before moving forward with all the hype and marketing.

I think this will all bite Google when few people decide to upgrade to a new Android phone. The experience is so mediocre that even a few minutes playing with an iPhone, browsing the app store, or talking to the owner about battery life will cause tremendous buyers remorse.

<comment><USER5> I'm not sure they're disappointed, per se. The non-nerds I know who bought Android phones are generally pretty pleased to be able to make calls and use the web a bit.

They're not app consumers to the slightest degree. Android represents a small value-add over the dumbphones they had before, which is fine, but they're not part of the vast army that Android partisans seem to think is coming over the next hill.

<comment><USER6> This. A lot of people are coming to Android as a step up from feature phones. In fact a lot of Android phones ship without any way to install third party apps and act as essentially glorified feature phones. I'd love to see the statistics of Android phones sold with the Android store versus iOS device sales to get a better idea of where the two platforms stand in relation to each other.

<comment><USER7> A friend of mine bought a HTC Desire Z (of which the G2 is a variant) but while it is supposed to be in the powerhouse department (at the opposite end of the spectrum of a Galaxy Spica) its UI feels jerky, laggy and generally unwilling to respond to some user actions. My friend, despite being on the geeky side, seems not to notice it and because he seems to enjoy the phone I'm reluctant to make him notice and ruin its experience. Certainly this has to come from the fact he comes from a feature phone, so that phone is definitely an improvement.

<comment><USER8> I don't disagree with your observations about a pre-Gingerbread device, however it is remarkable how much 2.3 has improved. It is very competitive with the iPhone now from a spit and polish perspective, even on older hardware. So imagine the shine on a device like an upcoming Galaxy S II.

This segues to arguments that have a freshness dating. Android used to have crap hardware (the G1 was junk). Now it has amazing hardware. Android used to have no apps. Now it has an unbelievable number of apps, and almost all of the top tier apps. Android used to be a duct-tape clunky mess. Now (Gingerbread) it's a completely different beast: It is actually a loveable operating system.

So if Android made most of its gains when it was a shadow of what it is now, what are the detractors left with?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> In my experience, the main reason is that you only need to design for one screen resolution on the iPhone (retina artwork doesn't really affect the screen layout). This makes it a lot easier to statically position elements and create pixel perfect effects.

On the other hand, when you're dealing with dynamic layouts, you have to jump through a lot more hoops to make sure the app still looks good as the resolution is scaled up and down (e.g. creating a stretchable images and such and so forth).

I also think that Helvetica is a much nicer looking default font.

<comment><USER10> I don't buy it. As an Android dev you normally just worry about one resolution, Android provides you with the tools (device independent pixels) to make other screens look the same. Just like the iphone, designers are encouraged to provide 2 sets of art assets, for medium and high resolution screens.

The real reasons that apps looks worse on Android is that companies don't want to spend the time and money to get the apps polished. As an Android consultant I've come across the attitude from companies over and over again that the Android app should cost less money than the iPhone counterpart. The Android app is always an afterthought and treated as "let's just do a quick port of the iPhone app".

<comment><USER11> With respect to only having to "worry about one resolution", I disagree. Android does give you a set of tools for working with multiple screen types, but it's a bit more complicated than "2 sets of art assets". This only addresses one aspect of different screens: pixel density. This still leaves out different screen sizes. Even then, a "normal hdpi" screen can still be different from another "normal hdpi" screen.

It certainly does not help that Google's dashboard for screen and density figures has not been updated in over half a year.

As far as your second point goes, I think that companies' attitudes to Android development will change to reflect the evolving marketplace. A year or two ago, Android just did not have the market share to justify a lot of work. Now that Android is commanding significant market share, I think Android development will begin to be seen to be as important as iOS development.

<comment><USER10> There might be slight differences between "normal hdpi" screens but those differences won't affect a good design and the developer won't have to worry about it. And it definitely has nothing to do with why the meebo app looks like crap. It looks like crap because meebo didn't put the effort into it.

<comment><USER12> Where is that? I've been looking at this:

[http://developer.android.com/resources/dashboard/screens.htm...](http://developer.android.com/resources/dashboard/screens.html)

<comment><USER10> oops, you're right, that one hasn't been updated in a while.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Interesting blog, every entry appears to be a substantial jab at the platform itself... not really just "gripes" as I see them. I am impressed with how dedicated he is to the pursuit, not only does he have a blog solely for his android gripes, but he's also made an androidgripes gmail account as well as a twitter account and a facebook page to promote the blog. It doesn't seem to be possible to find the blogger's name, however, though as an anonymous figure he certainly is quite prolific [1].

I also note that the HN account that submitted this link was created immediately before submitting it, and that's their only activity.

I was considering responding to the flame bait in his closing paragraph ("Is it because iPhone developers are better at user interface design?" etc.) until I realized what I was looking seemed to have about a 99% chance of being corporate sponsored astroturfing. FTC disclosure, Apple?

[1] "Want to install "open" apps on Android? Think twice", "Is Samsung's New Galaxy Tab Fibbing About Its Figure?", "J-P Teti: The iPad is 99% more open than any other computer", "'openness' considered harmful, said by Google on Honeycomb source code", "Everything that can go wrong with Motorola Android tablet does", "Android is sure a Wi-Fi connection dropper", etc.

<comment><USER14> Gruber's just picked it up with no comment other than a strange piece of snide: [http://daringfireball.net/linked/2011/04/07/android-apps- loo...](http://daringfireball.net/linked/2011/04/07/android-apps-look-worse)

(What is he implying? Assuming sarcasm - he is saying that it's not a coincidence but that some unnamed other parties claim it is. I don't really get it but it seems like he's getting too lazy to actually offer an extended argument these days)

<comment><USER15> His column is barely readable nowadays. He picks all the stories and "small" snippets that try to position android and google as a failure. No explanation. No argument. Nothing at all.

And since there are no comments, he totally paints a one-sided story.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> As an Android and iOS developer, I would like to point out that one of the contributing factors to the lack of well-designed applications for Android is due to the lack of polish in the Android tools and the available IDE (ADT for Android, and XCode for iOS).

XCode on Mac OS X is a delightful experience, with the right tools and the right amount of control to make good applications, supported by excellent tools to optimize the look/performance. The interface builder and the simulator are quite polished and greatly reduce the effort in tweaking the UI.

However, with ADT, I spend most of my time struggling with XML layout files, and heap dumps attempting to improve the application. The interface builder became usable only with the latest version of ADT, and even-so, I often find myself dropping down into the XML often. The simulator takes a long time to load and is quite sluggish. I find it far more convenient to have the application run on the device each time. However, this implies that code- compile-run cycle takes more time on ADT than on XCode.

In conclusion, the iOS development tools help me in finishing the application quicker, leaving me enough time (and providing me better tools) to polish the interface further.

<comment><USER17> But you run emulator only first time (granted, that takes some time). Subsequently you deploy your app to already running emulator. That's pretty fast.

<comment><USER18> I don't, my computer can't run Eclipse and the emulator at the same time without stalling out.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Am I crazy or does the Android speedtest seem much more pleasant and usable? I've not used either, but from the single screenshot I can much more easily get a handle on the info from the Android one. The iPhone one seems a bit riced up to the detriment of usability (which is the important thing that Apple does well, not just looking pretty, right?).

e.g.

1) big down and up icons next to the down and up speeds, to reinforce the text at a glance. 2) The text "kilobits / sec" is a readable white, rather than mid-grey and isn't obscured by the indicator hand. 3) Though the text on the Apple one has been corrected to match the dial which now shows K or M, the currently measured speed is given without units. I had trouble differentiating between the "1.18" and the "58" immediately below it which appears to be an advertisement.

Also, isn't the Android one just the old iPhone interface. So is the argument that Android is so fundamentally flawed, that it makes apps magically look exactly like an iPhone app from 6 months ago?

Here's an iPhone 3GS and 4 screenshot showing it being basically indistinguishable from the Android one (except buttons were moved to the top):

[http://itracki.com/wp- content/uploads/2010/06/181941-speedte...](http://itracki.com/wp- content/uploads/2010/06/181941-speedtest1.jpg)

</comment><comment><USER20> iOS comes with a handy set of UI controls that look decent even without customization. You can use the default UITableView, for instance (looking at the Meebo screenshot) and get the nice look-and-feel out of the box. This especially helps a low-budget dev like myself.

Apple showcase of the controls that come out-of-the box and various ways to tweak them: [http://developer.apple.com/library/ios/#documentation/userex...](http://developer.apple.com/library/ios/#documentation/userexperience/conceptual/mobilehig/UIElementGuidelines/UIElementGuidelines.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP40006556-CH13-SW1)

Default Android controls for some reason sport a more "circa-1990 MS DOS" look. The developers need to actually invest time to re-skin the components or make their own to get a modern look. This is made slightly more difficult if you want to support multiple screen sizes/resolutions. As such, many Android apps sadly seem to end up with the default look.

(I have written apps for both platforms.)

<comment><USER21> Do you think there would be a niche for creating good looking high quality UI controls for Android? Or will it still be a too big hassle to implement them?

<comment><USER20> I'm sure devs would love a snazzy UI framework that "just works" on popular screen sizes. I, for one, would use it. If it was open-source and distributed under a permissive enough license, even better.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> The thing is Android apps or UI controls in general don't look bad on their own - they are quite ok - elegant, minimalistic and understated by choice. Focusing on getting the work done becomes more easy when you have less UI jazz to get distracted with.

This really shows in the Android App Market review comments - people who rate low mostly do so because of force closes, missing functions etc. (<https://market.android.com/details?id=com.facebook.katana> is a good case study.)

The other part is that iPhone has one resolution UI - Androids come in lots of different resolutions. So I think the amount of blank/white space and font sizes vary between different handsets and that makes some apps designed for low res UIs look a bit off on high res screens.

And frankly, I can't find anything worse looking in the examples the fanboi^W author presented and he doesn't seem to be making any real points as to why he thinks one was worse than other - apart from him just not liking anything other than iPhone UI.

</comment><comment><USER23> He doesn't make a very convincing case. The iPhone Meebo emoticon screen looks a lot better, but all the others aren't as simple.

I prefer the look of the Android Meebo contact list, but I prefer the iPhone chat interface.

Note that his Android Facebook app needs updating. The missing Chat & Places icons fill it up. I think I prefer the Android version - the white background makes it look more lighter and more spacious than the iPhone version.

I don't like either Speedtest app much at all. I prefer the tabs at the bottom from the iPhone version, but hate (hate!) that purple (!!) ad bar above it. OTOH, I hate the "Test Again" button on the Android version.

<comment><USER7> _"I prefer the look of the Android Meebo contact list, but I prefer the iPhone chat interface"_

To me, from the apparent size of it, the Android one looks like hard to manipulate by touch. I don't want to feel like aiming each time I navigate. Also, probably the john@xyz filler with no user picture is part of the unsettlement. That point is valid of the Android one too, as it shows the user both offline, in buddies and in conversations. Weird.

That said, no developer in their right mind would ship such an emoticon picker. It's simply outrageous and just shows disdain to the user.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> Because Android users don't care. To make the app look nice, you would need to pay for 100 hours of a designer and 400 hours of programming. If it looks like crap, you only have to pay for 400 hours of programming. Android users don't care, so you make more return on your investment by neglecting design.

Apple users all have blogs about the virtues of serif fonts versus sans-serif fonts, so you are not going to sell your apps (or get ad views) if your app looks like crap. Therefore, paying the designer is worth the cost.

Also, Java programmers are a different demographic than Objective-C/Cocoa programmers. Java programmers mostly use Windows, which doesn't have a UI or "user experience". (The experience is mostly in removing spyware.) iPhone developers, by definition, can only use Apple products, thus self-selecting for people that care a little about UI.

Additionally, the finance doesn't really make sense for Android apps. Why would I waste 6 months of my time (which is around $100k) on an app that nobody will pay for when I could write bullshit software for an investment bank and get a guaranteed paycheck no matter what my UI looks like?

Android users get what they want: cheap. iPhone users get what they want: eye candy.

(Just to be clear, I love Android. But "user experience" doesn't mean much to me. As long as I can see my calendar and ssh to my machine at home over OpenVPN, I don't really care about anything else.)

<comment><USER25> This really hits on a key point: there is practically no money to be made B2C on Android. _And this is normal._ Historically there has rarely been a software business made rich by B2C. It's much easier to sell large-volume to businesses than it is to deal with fickle individual users.

Adobe doesn't sell most Photoshop licenses to individual users, they sell to businesses for whom the cost of pirating is not worth it. Windows licenses sold to individual users are dwarfed by Windows licenses sold to manufacturers, who buy it because that's what _their_ customers expect. Opera gives away its various browsers, then uses the expertise and the satisfied customer base as arguments when licensing preloaded versions to manufacturers. Swype isn't selling its product to individual users in the app store for $4.99, they're selling to manufacturers whose customers appreciate or demand this software out of the box. Facebook isn't selling its apps or website access because it's so much easier to just sell eyeballs to advertisers.

Games are the major exception, but they only account for so much.

In the physical world, it's by and large the intermediaries that sell to individual users. Most companies producing physical stuff — especially non- premium products that are supposed to sell at scale — don't open their own stores and often outsource issues like individual warranty handling to third parties.

I heavily suspect the iPhone B2C model is an anomaly that may soon be corrected.

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> Economics? (investing more design/dev time in the [currently, at least] more profitable platform)

Laziness/incompetence? (I don't know how many times I've downloaded an Android equivalent to an iOS app only to find re-purposed, screen captured iOS graphics with a non-native UI)

Device fragmentation, no IB, perception that Android users don't appreciate polished UI/design - take your pick.

Regardless of which excuse is chosen, the blame lies with the designer/developer/manager, not the OS.

EDIT: I'm speaking of custom interfaces rather than stock OS controls and views. Those elements are obviously controlled by the OS.

<comment><USER27> I wouldn't say the blame lies with Android since at the end of the day, the responsibility lies with the designer, but I would say credit goes to iOS for making more aesthetically pleasing UI's easier to make than on Android.

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> A counterexample is Wunderlist, which is built with Titanium Appcelerator, and looks and works really well on both platforms. It is also identical where it should but not where it mustn't: it follows the conventions of each platform in details such as where to put tabs, how to access the settings, etcetera.

* For Android - [https://market.android.com/details?id=com.wunderkinder.wunde...](https://market.android.com/details?id=com.wunderkinder.wunderlistandroid)

* For iOS - [http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/wunderlist-task-manager/id406...](http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/wunderlist-task-manager/id406644151?mt=8#)

Btw, I am interested if you know of other good multiplatform apps (not games) built using third-party middleware.

</comment><comment><USER29> I agree with the sentiment... somewhat. For example, I prefer the Android Facebook to the iPhone. But the entire blog is about pointing out anecdotal instances where the author doesn't like Android? I would much rather hear from a developer than the author of this blog.

</comment><comment><USER30> Although it seems that most apps on Android seem to get the short end of the stick, I would like to point out that there are some apps that do get a high quality treatment on Android.

The Official Major League soccer app, MatchDay 2011, is quite gorgeous on both iOS and Android.

As a developer for both platforms, they each have their positives and negatives.

iOS feels like you're plugging together some pretty good looking (default) stuff and then layering on polish.

Android feels as though you're building from scratch... more like web development, where you need to create most/all of your assets from scratch.

</comment><comment><USER31> From my experience developing for both iOS and Android, it's because iOS users _expect_ your app to look good, or they won't use it.

Apple just sets a higher bar, both because of Apple's own apps and the approval process, and developers code to the users' expectations.

Plus, with the nice looking built-in UI widgets and Interface Builder, it actually takes some effort to make an app look _bad_.

</comment><comment><USER32> Am I the only one who prefers the Android interface for Meebo (first time seeing it)? I often dread using the iOS version as I feel it's extremely cramped.

</comment><comment><USER33> While I can't speak for Android, I think the simple answer is that Apple provides sample code and applications that are examples in great UI design on iOS.

I'm not seeing the same level of detail or commitment from Google or its partners at this time. It is much easier to copy off of a good design than to create a new one from scratch

<comment><USER33> (Replying to myself here) On the other hand.. maybe it boils down to what the users will put up with. If you come to iOS with a real crappy interface 9 times out of 10 you will be massacred in the user comments and reviews.

Maybe Android users have a lower tolerance for crappy UIs? I ask not trying to pick a fight or start a flamewar, but out of genuine curiosity.

If iOS users are more apt to pay for applications, I suspect for the most part that they have little to no tolerance for substandard UX.

So if it is free no one really cares, but if you are paying for something you now have a vested interest in the product.

</comment></comment><comment><USER34> This is largely a comparison between the management styles of the two platforms. (FWIW: I've owned by iPhones and Androids.) On iOS, the UX guidelines are well defined and Apple forces apps to stick to them; Android is the Wild West. On iOS, nearly every app is straightforward but limited; on Android, apps can do whatever the hell they want. These two constraints lead to different outcomes. Two examples: NYTimes is much simpler on iOS but richer and more confusing on Android; Flikie HD isn't possible on iOS but works on Android and has an incredibly confusing interface. Reminds me of Mac vs PC all over again...

</comment><comment><USER35> Because far far more people on iOS are on hardware of the latest, standard hardware that the software is aimed at.

As I understand, the Nexus is the one Android is putting forward as an example, it is the highest quality of all phones. The whole of the current generation of iOS devices are the same, perfected examples of the hardware and software working together.

There are probably Android phones of better hardware than an iPhone, but do you know any apps that demand these phones, that are too slow on anything with a slower processor?

</comment><comment><USER36> Apple has crafted a development environment that is more conducive to producing high-quality polished apps with relatively little effort. The iOS SDK is a refined version of the Mac Cocoa SDK, which they have been developing for 10 years. They were able to keep the best qualities of standard Cocoa while further refining the framework for a mobile device. The end result is an SDK that not only has attracted tons of developers, but is also really enjoyable to work with.

</comment><comment><USER25> Wow, the Android ones look much nicer. Oversized icons? Garish blue? Gimmicky graphics? Just focus on the content, please.

<comment><USER37> What oversized icons? You need these to work reliably on a 3.5" touchscreen with a finger. It's good design to be "generous" in target area.

</comment></comment><comment><USER38> I wouldn't be particularly surprised if they outsource the non-iOS development. Many multi-platform shops I know build only one flavor and then to save on full-time developer costs send out the work on other platforms elsewhere. I know of a few startups doing mobile apps who are now hiring Android devs, but did those apps as a purely out-of-house thing when they were small.

And it wouldn't be new for the industry. I had a buddy at Midway Chicago for many years, where they used to do many of their sports games on XBox and outsource the PS3/Wii ports.

</comment><comment><USER39> For another great example, have a look at the CNBC free app. iPhone app is sharp and almost all self contained. Want to see details on a symbol? Click the quote and it'll show you within the app. Want to see a graph? Just turn the phone sideways and it'll show you a nice chart. It's got many other nice features that make it an excellent app.

The Android app is just garbage. It's basically just a watch list with links out to their mobile site. The end.

</comment><comment><USER40> Admittedly more familiar w/ the iOS SDK but I've build a few Android apps. I find iOS controls easier to use and customize.

</comment><comment><USER41> I think it also has to do with the fact that the iPhones have a fixed set of specs. With android you never know what kind of specs your users phone has (screen height/width e.d.). But with the iPhone you're always sure what controls your user has (touch screen instead of controller).

</comment><comment><USER42> If you get invited to a party for fashion designers, you'd better spend some time picking the right thing to wear.

If you get invited to a geek party, remembering to shave alone would put you above the 90th percentile.

</comment><comment><USER43> Why do VOIP apps on both platforms lack bluetooth support? I think that's a more interesting question to ask for mobile "phone" OSes.

</comment><comment><USER7> one of the most appalling part (ignoring that record-breaking emoticon picker) is not the selected apps themselves but the left-aligned icons in the top status bar. Their lack of quality shows even more when contrasted with the carefully designed right-aligned part (I suppose that one is OS-tied and therefore from Google).

</comment><comment><USER44> The WakeMate app is superior on the iPhone compared to it's android version.

</comment><comment><USER45> Same reason John Carmac began focusing dev efforts on consoles - when hardware specs are consistent it's much easier to build highly optimized software / UI rather than trying to support endless configurations.

<http://techreport.com/articles.x/8665/1>

</comment><comment><USER46> From the apps I've worked on, iOS is a much more profitable platform and thus gets the majority of the focus and the initial app releases. Then apps get ported to Android (where they get heavily pirated and generate a fraction of the sales - regardless if time is spent making the app as good or better than its iOS counterpart.)

<comment><USER47> All apps shown are free.

</comment></comment><comment><USER48> laziness, different developer teams... I don't think it's Android's fault at all.

With enough time and assets you can build pretty amazing UIs on Android. Everything is there for you to create custom components and override styles.</comment>


Why Progressive Web Apps Are the Future of Web Development – ARC - <AUTHOR> http://apl.as/i0ds4#.WEQjHSU59po.hackernews <comment><USER2> Wanted to read this, but there's way too much JS on this page just to serve up an article. It freezes my phone, scrolling is janky, and the header takes up half the page.</comment>