The Confusing Role Of Programmers

I was surfing the Blogosphere tonight, catching up on some of Don Box's writings, when he led me to Chris Sells. Sells, it seems, was distressed that the Don Box / Mary Jo Foley interview was just plain boring, so he left a RFC post on his blog, soliciting questions to ask him in a later interview. What I found there was startling.

“With all the connection/transport technology, ease of use and rapid development in terms of creating applications, and easy of exposing of data that Microsoft are providing where do you see the role of a software developer going? Are we resigned to connecting pre built components together, relying on Microsoft to provide all our underlying architecture and frameworks?

While I appreciate what Microsoft are providng, and support the idea of a SOA underpinning their new OS and tools (and in fact have been harping on about it at our own seminars in 2003) it makes me wonder where a lot of Windows Developer jobs are going. As we make it easier and easier to create complex applications and systems how do we maintain our market worth and indeed our jobs as more and more of the magic that today we get paid to craft is provided for free by Microsoft?”

I was flabbergasted. It seems to me that this guy, who only listed his name as “Ian”, perceives the worth of a developer to be in creating problems to be solved. He doesn't want to be “resigned” to lacing pre-built systems together, and thinks he will be of lesser value when the work he currently does is provided for free by Microsoft.

 I cannot understand this mentality at all. I though the value in being a developer was in solving problems through code. So, right now one of the biggest problems in computing is getting information from one place to another. Out of Outlook and into AIM. Out of yoru aggregator and into your Outlook contacts... whatever. If these problems are solved, is that the end of software development? HELL NO. Cause what is the real problem here? People HATE using computers. I hate computers with a passion. Why? Because they're too hard to use, and I hate watching people put up with so much crap just to get it to do something.

So when Longhorn, indigo, and Whitehorse come out, do we all just go “Great, now we're gonna get fired because Microsoft solved most of the problems we're dealing with now?” NO. Go solve new problems. Make me enjoy using he my computer. Better yet, make my mom enjoy using my computer. Make it easier for me to get my information in to where I need it. Help reduce device clutter. Refine software production so that buying software is cheaper. But to be all Henny Penny about your job? Please, this stuff will only make you lose your job if you can't come up with new ways to use it by the time it comes out. You have TWO YEARS for pete's sake. If you can't come up with something by then, you missed your calling waiting tables or something.

1 Comment

  • I agree with you, Robert. Progress is good and no amount of wishing to keep carriages around are going to stop the car.



    However, I definately see the problem that you mention as left to be solved, i.e. making you and your mom love your computer instead of hate it, as more of a user experience issue and less of a classic software engineering issue.



    That being said, just as my brother-in-law spends a great deal of his time as a civil engineer for my city making sure the public is happy with what he's building, I see software engineering evolving into a much more user experience-centric role. In fact, while it's only the tiniest of steps, I'm spending my XMas vacation learning Adobe Illustrator so that I can conquer my fear of graphic design. I'm hoping that this will help to prepare me for the graphic-centric user experience in Longhorn.

Comments have been disabled for this content.